autoVino's bat projects

[autoVino 26]

yup, I replaced the mr-sky with a simple ies sky, and set the color and brightness accordingly.  I haven't tested it out with how it adds into the game, but I'm pretty sure that this is about right.

Here is some work on towers A, B, and C detailing, (it's a whole lot of glass)

of course it has been adjusted with contrast, here is the original in high quality:

that is the general shape of the towers, and the general height.  They have some more "artsy" parts here and there, and on the roof that need to be added.  THe tower base itself needs to be added as well, as of right now they look like they are floating.  But that's next weeks work.

[bixel 1,228]

OOOOOhhh looking good!

[Gn_leugim 858]

very original looking tower!!! great!!!

[jacqulina 162]

very nice

[autoVino 26]

I did some renders, but nothing new so far.

[Ferrariguy1000 43]

awesome. I can't wait till this one is out.

[Gn_leugim 858]

truly beautiful =D

[autoVino 26]

here is a zoom four preview (I think )

I'm having a few issues with lighting:

1. it feels dark, but that should be a fairly easy fix.

2. caustics caustics caustics.  This is a pain in the arse.  I'm getting artifacts (as you can see).  I've been testing and researching a fix for most of the day, and I believe that it is either the mi arch&design materials having a glitch or some geometry issues or both.

In a seperate scene I have been trying to recreate the glitch with similar materials and setup:

Making sure it's not a materials issue, I tested all my materials plus a few extra metrials that were "problem materials" in the past:

seems fine to me.

Next I'm testing geometry issues with materials, I was guessing that it would be overlapping normals or faces:

although both cause some visual glitches, artifacts are not one of them.

Next I guess that it may be multiple reflections and refractions that cause this problem:

which work fine, maybe it's with multiple reflections/reflactions over different materials:

which it's not.  After about an hour or so of reading up the problem in the internet (my problem isn't unique as far as I undertand.  I've read it's a hardware issue) I assumed that it is overlapping faces of mia materials:

which seem to be working fine.

A problem that I do have, which is what I think may be the culprit, is that there are many instances where a glass material touches a solid black material.  This occures at the balconies, where the artifacts are to be found (except for one instance, but I think that is a reflectio off of the glass entrance to the clubhouse roof.).  The sliding doors may be the issues here, but that needs to be tested later as I'm out of time.

Anyone have any other speculations?  Any fixes? 

[autoVino 26]

I haven't found the root of the caustics problem, it may be just a random error that arises with speed optimization with the increasing complexity of geometry.  It seems that this error cannot be replicated with simpe scenes and arises with complex scenes.

I have found a half-fix to it:  But lowering the decay rate (as a result caustic shadows and reflections are more intense) the artifacts aren't as large, but they are still there.  By increasing the sample size, density, and number of samples (to about 12mil, with 120 samples per .25msquared) the render seems fine.  It has very sharp caustics (something that can probably be changed by changeing the filter) and very intense caustics.  There is some noise visible, but this can be hidden by addition of more detail.  My only worry is that with more geomtry and on different rotations caustics may react in an unexpected way.

Here are the renders (normal)

current (physically incorrect)

Is it an improvement?

Are the caustics too bright?

Is the noise too distracting?

Are the caustics too sharp?

Are the caustics too distracting against the detail?

How is the lighting now?

My answer would be yes; yes; yes; maybe; yes; it is better, could be brighter.

What do you all thik and what are you all's sugestions?

[bixel 1,228]

this 1st one is a better - more realistic type it is a little distracting but maybe cause we are not used to such things in the game so much

[mcarch 15]

Agree with bixel, except on one point... if the reflections are from the windowns, then once the sun lights hits a spot and is not direct, the light normally fades and seperates. So the first one I find to be more realistic.

[jacqulina 162]

great progress the building is looking great so far

[Gn_leugim 858]

the second one is realy wierd OO better the first one

[autoVino 26]

Originally posted by: mcarch Agree with bixel, except on one point... if the reflections are from the windowns, then once the sun lights hits a spot and is not direct, the light normally fades and seperates. So the first one I find to be more realistic.quote>

 

Yup you're exactly right.  There is a mix of realism between the two actually.  The first one is physically correct, but the sample count is fairly low so it's blurry.  It has a iinverse square decay rate for light (whith a photometric sun therfore it is almost perfectly accurate).

The second one has a invers d^1.9 decay rate, so naturally the reflections are bright.  That can be fixed by just lowering the cauastic intensity.  The cost here will be physical corectness, but with some fine tunning it should barely be noticeble.

The problem with the first method, physical corecntess, is that there seems to be some sort of error with the caustic photons that causes overwahsed artifacts to appear.  The second method is too bright, and has what looks like a few artifacts, but may actually be undecayed reflections or refractions.  So the second method shows no errors.  

But what about the sharpness of the caustics?  Should the be crisp or should they be blurry?  I should be able to apply a stress normal map to all the glass to give a little bit of caustic variaty.

[Jasoncw 11,949]

hmmm, I think that you should just completely redo the glass material, maybe even just using a bitmap. What you have now is realistic and happens in RL all the time, but it doesn't look good.

[mcarch 15]

I think it should be blurry when it hits the ground. Light is normally spread when it travels. I'd still say your first one is the most realistic.

[autoVino 26]

no reason to be persistant with caustics, since they don't really add much gamewise.

I've redone the towers a bit so that they would match the renders better than the original floor plans:

 

suggestions?

[bixel 1,228]

amazing work I am so ready for this style of residential complex. Not since the Liberte has SC4 seen anything quite like it

[SimHoTToDDy 2,939]

Indeed. I just it will stop giving you so much headache so we can get it in game!

Best of luck,

-Todd

[autoVino 26]

 

too bright?  first image is gamma +1.7 and second is gamma +1.8

[SimHoTToDDy 2,939]

First one is a little bright, but passable (would have to see finished to say yes or no on that one). The second one is too bright, the ramps look like they are glowing!

I think 1.6 would be good given 1.7 is a tad much, but then I don't have the incite into the finished product.

Well, there's my 2 cents,

-Todd

[autoVino 26]

I think 1.6 is perfect.  lower makes the shadows too dark, while higher is just too bright.  Here is a current preview with a couple of texture adjustments for the gamma correction:

I'm calling a night so hopefully I'll be able to get to it tomorrow or in the next few days.  These next few weeks shouldn't be as cut throat for me.

Suggestions?

[SimHoTToDDy 2,939]

Yay! I feel helpful now!!! (lol)

Anyway, the grass got a little washed out (looks kinda dead for such a nice place eh?) but other than that, it looks great.

-Todd

[autoVino 26]

Here's an oldie that I dusted off recently (a render that I did when I didn't have time to do any major detailing on the Heratige Building):

I'm just polaying with textures here.

I did a south view render, and actually gamma = 1.4 balences out better for the shadows inbetween the buidlings than 1.6.  1.6 looks great but it's too washed out.  1.4 works better actually:

(my bad I posted the wrong image, now fixed...)

 

[SimHoTToDDy 2,939]

I agree, I would not have noticed if I didn't look at the older shots though. You went high and are working your way back down =P What was it originally set at, 1?

I remember that factory! I think I wanted it to look disgusting too... Anyway, Glad you actually dusted it off, but there is something I don't like about that dark texture you used. Maybe it will look better when there isn't so much contrast between it and the blank roof.

Best of luck,

-Todd

[Jasoncw 11,949]

I would do a quick photoshop edit to put it in the game, and tweak it based on how it looks there. I also think that in general right now, for progressing your skills, it would be better for you to work on texturing.

[ilikehotdogsalot 311]

Wow, that looks great! I hope to see it in the STEX soon

[autoVino 26]

from order of increasing gamma from 1.0 by 0.2 ingame:

 

 

I like gamma 1.6 the best for shadows, but I don't like the overall brightness of the buidling, should be much brighter, almost white (like some of the EURO styled buildings maxis has).

I will do some retextureing and testing on this psd template that I have made later.

I have to agree that I need to work on texturing.  I can get procedurals and uvw mapping with ease, but when it comes to photoshop I'm a bit lost

[SimHoTToDDy 2,939]

I have to agree about the shadows there, anything darker obscures the courtyard too much.

Photoshop? My old friend! What exactly did you need to change? if you just wanted to lighten it you could do something like image > adjustments > Brightness/contrast which will edit just that. Play with it in there then file > save as... and just rename the texture as "[texture name]_lighter" or something on that order so you can easily compare them when you are scrolling through your materials.

If you want to do something more complicated, just let me ( or one of the other photoshop pros around ST) know and it shouldn't be a problem. Not nearly as complicated as BATing!

-Todd

[autoVino 26]

no I mean I've been looking through some photoshop tutorials on 3dm3.com and 3dtotal.com and I have to say some of those are way beyond me.  I have the basics mastered, I know what each tool does and how to use it, it's just actually creating textures from scratch and getting it "just right" is what I'm not an expert at (or at least the few times I have taken the time to completely texture a building through photoshop it took longer than I would have liked).