Complete quality sci-fi vehicle-design. You're welcome. ; )

@Carl Foxmarten thank you for sharing your experience.

@Terrance my friend you are right but the GPU was considerably faster in the end… : )

– Seriousness-mode offline–
"Do not rejoice over me, O Suzanne Though I fall I will rise;
Though I dwell in darkness, Suzanne is a light for me.
I will bear the indignation of the Blender Because I have spoken false words against my GPU,
Before Blender reveals enlightenment for me, Suzanne will bring me out to the light,
And I will see her righteousness.

The people who walk with GPU Will see a great light;
Those who live in GPU land, The light will shine on them." ; )

(I really hope this isn’t offensive to anyone… If so, tell me and I shall remove it. ( : )

Here is the magic (It’s actually in the tile-size):


I don’t really understand why the previous viewport-comparison was so similar though…

Also be aware that the Tile Size has an effect on GPU performance. For my card, 256x256 gets me the best performance during rendering than other sizes, though you’ll want to compare performances for yours.

I used the viewport first and the tile-goodness does not really work there. But then I saw your post in the future and tried that.
Undeniable evidence for time-travel right here. ; )

For the optimal tile size, you should check out the auto tile size addon (it’s bundled with Blender 2.74). It will automatically set your tile size to the one that works best with a GPU (or CPU if that’s what your using). It automatically goes to a size similar to 256, but it can be customized. It’s a really important addon, and if you guys haven’t used it, go check it out right now.

Glad you got it! Adding on to what TARDIS Maker said, check out this blog post by Greg Zaal: http://adaptivesamples.com/2013/09/11/auto-tile-size-addon/ It’s about the auto tile size addon, and he talks about the tiles and what size will get the bets performance.:slight_smile:

May I take this opportunity to complain, Mr SteadyHand.
Quite frankly I am disgusted. Absolutely appalled. Your node setups are immensely huge and detailed and you have achieved a level of realism I have hitherto not seen. This, simply, will not do.
Henceforth you shall return to simple 3-node setups and refrain from cycles jiggery-pokery.

Seriously, dude, you are insane. But your images of the node setup are so small I cannot read what you are doing (in order to steal it and learn how to create this stuff) :frowning:

I can’t wait to see some more images! WE NEED A TUTORIAL!

yes, these materials you create look great! i would appreciate to see the node set ups too, in a size that we can read it :slight_smile:

oh, yes, nvidiacards render quite fast… but, the downside to gpu rendering is, that all your ram does not help when the scene does not fit into videoram, you get a cuda out-of-memory error, and are sent back to cpu rendering … and, to my experience the 2 gig videoram i have are often not enough… so frustrating, when the final renders have to be done on cpu :frowning:

Great Caeser’s ghost! Some of these renders are shockingly good. My best guess is that they are octane, and the node setups are just for fun.

Great stuff steadyhand

@TARDIS Maker
I actually stumbled across this add-on not long ago and it is indeed very handy, adjusting the aspect ratio of the tiles to fit the render and switching automatically to your desired GPU- /CPU- settings depending on which option you chose for your render.

@Terrance8D
I’ll check it out, thanks. I found the tile-size of 512 to work best on my HD radeon 7870.

Now I have to confess that I went off topic there because for this project I have to stick to my trusty CPU for two reasons.
First, the new kernel is not 100% polished yet and most importantly lacks some features (like volumetrics) I need.
Another thing Is, that I didn’t bother dealing with the memory usage jet, making the GPU limitation Doris mentioned a problem. When I use my CPU I don’t care as long as blender’s memory usage doesn’t exceed 10GB (so I can do other things while rendering).

@BiggR
I have acknowledged your complaint and sincerely apologize for my rude attempt of achieving realism. This is really a disgusting habit to fool poor peasants into not knowing how to distinguish reality from fiction. Not to mention my mess of a node-tree dominating my work like a bad hand-writing. But I must assure you, these irresponsible actions do not originate from my humble intentions. As you suggested, I always start with a 3-node-setup, but then the node-tree simply grows out of control. I’d truly make a bad gardener. : (
I allowed myself to take your request for a tutorial as a compliment, since you make it seem like the sheer endless pool of tutorials on on every possible place on the internet turned out to be not sufficient for your needs, which is truly something to think about. ; )
Such a tutorial is in consideration and will depend on my disposable time and ability to try such a thing after this project is finished. Not everyone is a good teacher you know…
I’m glad you liked the images so far and I’ll try my best to keep them coming.

@doris
Good to see you on this thread again. I’m happy you appreciated not only the nodes, but also the materials. Regarding your (and the others) request for a readable node-tree, I’d of of course share some but first you’d have to tell my how I could capture one with my 1080p setup. Maybe you guys should approach the devs requesting a node-tree renderer. ; )
If your memory-problem is caused caused by textures and you use mostly gray-scale ones, you can combine three of them in the RGB channels of an image-texture and split the RGB channels in the node editor. I don’t remember where I found this trick but it actually helps.

@Photox
Thank you, interesting theory you got there. ; ) I don’t know much about Octane other than it being an unbiased ray-tracer just like cycles. Why shouldn’t cycles be able to render realistic images when it uses common physically correct(-ish) shader models?
I don’t know why I would turn to another ray-tracer because cycles is very well integrated in blender.

And now finally the project can continue. My current task is to make the headlights actually work. First I textured the Lens, which has no particular shape at all to make the light travel through it in a predictable way. My plan was to make the light work using a spotlight. I hope the dirt on the glass will cast some sick shadows, since texturing the spotlight is kind of a hassle.
Here is a tiny render of the glass.


As soon as I tried to make the spotlight and volumetrics work I realized, that the glass itself wasn’t the hardest part to get to work in cycles. I’ve spend a lot of time solving compatibility issues between my logic and blenders logic, turning and twisting my braincells in a painful way. The most annoying part was the “cast shadow” function of the spotlight. Either it is turned off, and the spotlight turns into an unstoppable beam of uhm… light-samples, or I turn it on and it doesn’t even get through the glass. As I already said, I want a headlight and not a laser-sword… -_-
This might be the strangest thing I’ve come across in cycles so far.


My plan for now is to play a bit with the shadow-rays in the light-path-node to make it work. I don’t get the reason why shadow-rays are a thing in cycles, where shadows use to be the plain absence of light-rays but whatever…^^
The positive thing is, that the spotlight probably won’t be refracted and I can give the glass a more interesting shape. : ) Once I got it working I’ll tweak the materials where I see fit and call the lamp done for now. After that, the progress should be a lot smoother, just dealing with the rest of the “normal” materials.
See you around. : )

I’m somewhat close to rendering and gonna wish to see how you get the glass working…

Could you not composite the light beam effect afterwards using the sun beams node? might save you some painfull time figuring this out…

@SuperChango
I’m not entirely sure what you meant, but I’ll post a closeup of the shadow-ray-hack.

@Jamie B
Yes I could but It’s always difficult to composite such things in post. I don’t even know yet how the light-beam-node works. I’d rather hack my my way through the scene as much as I can to assure that everything can interact with everything in a realistic way when I’m using a ray-tracer. If this does not work out I’ll try my luck with mesh-based fake volumetrics first. That would be comparable to a 3D-matte-painting approach, doing the composite in the scene to a certain degree. Luckily I had it already figured out and it just had to be tested.

Aand voila I present to you… with all the samples (>3500)… and all the fireflies…


Here is my solution for the problem. The only downside is that the spot-lamp won’t be refracted.


The next step is to check the lighting and tweak the materials just a little bit if something very obvious can be found.

Check out this program for getting rid of “fireflies” It works really well and its free, i stand by it for removing those ridiculously visible pixels. One click fix lol :slight_smile: - http://www.mediachance.com/digicam/hotpixels.htm

The sun beam node is really easy to use, you just put in the co-ordinates of where the beams are coming through, and the length of the rays (You would need a pass to isolate the light beam). Not sure how well it would work for your lamps though… But i’m glad to see you have solved the problem :slight_smile:

Looks pretty cool, but doesn’t look very practical, if it’s more than 3500 samples. You’ll probably want to find ways to cheat it a bit more. imo, you’ll want it to look fairly clean at 500 samples.

This will probably help with your 3500 sample fireflies: https://sinmantyx.wordpress.com/2015/03/18/perfect-clamp-1/ A node renderer would be a really cool feature, it actually seems strange that nobody has mentioned it before.:stuck_out_tongue:

@Jamie B
Thanks I’ll check the program out once I’ve trouble getting rid of the hotpixels.

@TARDIS Maker
You’re right, after 1000 samples the Image doesn’t clean up very much.
I really hope to see an adaptive metropolis sampler soon, because I think the noise is coming from the complex lighting setup (small very bright lights, hidden behind a fairly complex glass-shader…).

@Terrance8D
Very interesting article, thanks. I did not know that ray-tracers and path-tracers were completely different things…
I’ll try the clamping in the final scene.

Yesterday, I was partying/ celebrating two occasions so my project came up short in this equation.
I abandoned the lights in the lamp as well as the volumetrics after getting sick and tired of the noise and slow sampling.
The good thing is, it worked and I’ll just have to do some black magic trickery to get cleaner results. One option for example would be to bypass the glass completely to make the sampling of the lights easier. So here is the status and my plan is to move on from this forsaken lamp.


One thing you could try, is making it invisible to basically everything exept glossy (for reflections). That way the light would pass right through it, but it would show up in reflections. I would try to turn it off in the ray visibility settings, and if that doesn’t work, use the light path node.

Then, if you needed some of the light blocked, you could use fake meshes and stuff to block it (although these could get expensive because of the shape of your mesh).

@TARDIS Maker
I’m sure I can try many things and this is is also sort-of what I had in mind. Some light-path experimentation along with layer-magic should do the trick hopefully.

But as most of you guys sure wanted as well, I moved on and did the foot step-on thing. I guess I could have kept it simpler but hey, whatever. ; )


Yo, I got you guys a sweet and tasty camera angle. ; )
Just for fun…


One question SteadyHand…although the textures are really, really nice, how much of this are you actually going to see in the final render?
Since it looks like the vehicle itself is quite big, I am just wondering whether you are spending too much time getting (admittedly brilliant) textures which nobody will ever be able to see properly, or will you be giving multiple closeups?
What will the final image look like (background, etc)?