PDA

View Full Version : Render window vs Batch render - different result issue


Gloor
05-26-2010, 12:03 AM
Hi all,

I'm having a problem with test render of my scene. Picture on the top is from batch render whereas picture on the bottom is from render view.
Both in Maya 2011 and MR.

Is that a bug or am I doing something wrong? I set the output file to be targa.

Gloor
05-26-2010, 05:30 PM
I'm using physical sun & sky and I noticed that the sky is actually transparent when batch render is used but its ok for normal render. Anyone knows how to fix that?

Gloor
05-26-2010, 07:40 PM
nobody has an idea for a fix?

Gloor
05-27-2010, 07:38 PM
Ok, found another thing whilst trying to fix it. Before I used targa as a format but now when I use tiff it produces slightly better result (not so transparent) but the sun is way exposed compared to render view.

See pictures.

What am I doing wrong?

rasamaya
05-28-2010, 01:20 AM
Are you working in a linear workflow? Render out to jpg and look at the results.
Remember the render view settings to view in linear workflow, are as a preview; they will not propagate to batch.

Gloor
05-28-2010, 07:30 AM
What is linear workflow?

I set up my scene, did some basic shading and hit render. I keep hearing about this linear thing but I never know what it is and and I also don't know if I should know about it or not :))))

I was taught that you do this: model,rig,texture,light,render (if no animation)

Gloor
05-28-2010, 03:22 PM
ok, I've found this tutorial and wanted to ask. Do the steps apply even now when I have some shaders applied? I was adviced to use mia_material_x so I have pretty much everything on that one.

I still don't understand why does one need linear workflow. Also, how come that render view is not the same as batch render and it serves as "preview" only? Isn't the whole point of render view to set it up before you render the scene?

If someone has great tutorial or article that explains why are these things happening then I would appreciate that.

It's strange that up to this point I've been using either maya software render or mental ray render and everything always worked and now it doesn't. Could it be because before I was using maya shaders like lambert, blinn etc and now I am using mia?

ouch, this is going to be hard to get :)))

Gloor
05-28-2010, 04:31 PM
OK, I've tried it render it in jpeg as you suggested and it works as it should. The only problem is the loss of quality you get from jpeg. How do I avoid it? the jpeg is around 25kb whereas tiff or tga is almost 1mb.

Gloor
06-10-2010, 03:55 PM
I've tried to follow the steps of linear workflow in the other thread and still failed.
I don't know what else to do so if there is someone who has few minutes to have a look at the scene then that would help a lot.
Only jpeg render is close to the render view but the quality is not so good. Any suggestion how to make the render view the same as batch render with output file with the best quality would really help.

Thank you very much

www.tomanimate.com/wip/beach set.mb.zip

InfernalDarkness
06-10-2010, 11:51 PM
Rendering to .bmp will produce an image without any compression, which should look identical to your .jpg, but only cleaner of course. You should never render to .jpg unless you're just testing the scene.

Linear workflow is a bitch to learn; I still struggle with proper gamma across my various passes. Keep at it, don't give up. You'll know when it looks right, and if in doubt, show your render here and we can help more too!

TaKIKO
06-11-2010, 02:03 AM
Watch this.
(http://vimeo.com/8119194)

Gloor
06-12-2010, 10:19 AM
Ok, I rendered in .bmp and the result is the same as render view which is good. The only problem is that when I open the image sequence in Quicktime to export it as animation then it has some weird lines so where else can I put it together as animation and export it?

The linear workflow - do I have to work that way? It's completely new to me and it look so complicated. It kinda makes me wonder why this whole thing was even introduced. I know that I don't understand it but it seems to be that this whole linear, rgb etc was introduced to make people suffer and make them work harder :))

Anyway, I'll watch all the videos (watched the first one so far) and will try to tweak my scenes then. Hope it will work fine then :)
Thanks for help and if you have more suggestions then feel free to let me know :)

Gloor
06-13-2010, 01:30 PM
What software do you use to put rendered images in the animation? I used Quicktime Pro until now but this .bmp is causing some artefacts so what is another good application to use?

Anybody knows?
Thank you

rasamaya
06-14-2010, 07:56 AM
Oh, I'm sorry to miss lead you. Rendering as jpeg was only as a test.
Framecycler works well for viewing sequences etc

in regards to a lwf, just keep doing tutorials, it will click soon. Good luck.

rasamaya
06-14-2010, 08:16 AM
Oh, I'm sorry to miss lead you. Rendering as jpeg was only as a test.
Framecycler works well for viewing sequences etc

in regards to a lwf, just keep doing tutorials, it will click soon. Good luck.

Gloor
06-14-2010, 02:39 PM
thank you. will try the framecycler :)

lwf is tough. i'm considering going to V-ray as everyone says its really easy and headache free so would you agree?

RagingBull
08-19-2010, 08:13 PM
Gloor, not sure how you got on with this but thought I'd bring it back up anyway.


The linear workflow - do I have to work that way?


Yes.
The end.
:p


Essentially any other way isn't mathematically correct and usually resorts to it not being physically accurate - IF that is the desired look you are seeking (physically accurate).
But even in saying that, light fall off and mixing of colours etc won't be correct if you were doing some kind of cartoony type of stuff.

This is largely applicable if you are using Mental Ray, and if you are, make sure you are using the mia_material's (usually X_passes as you want to render out passes normally).


It's completely new to me and it look so complicated. It kinda makes me wonder why this whole thing was even introduced. I know that I don't understand it but it seems to be that this whole linear, rgb etc was introduced to make people suffer and make them work harder :))

In Max it's extremely simple to set up and get going, it works as it should do, you set it and off ye go.
In Maya, they have definitely made it more complicated as you have to bugger around with gamma nodes in textures and 'colour management' etc. They haven't quite got it sorted out yet in 2011 but I think it will be as simple as the way it's done in Max in a future version of Maya 2012 (well, I bloody hope so). :deal:

It's only complicated because it was wrong not using LWF in the first place, so many 'tricks/hacks' stepped in to correct technically inaccurate images.
A classic case of not doing it right to start with = pain later on.

The link to the videos look very good in explaining it.
So watch them and ask questions if needs be.

Or fxphd.com has MasterZaps 'MRY201 - Production Rendering Techniques with Mental Ray' class repeated class at the moment, it's worth signing up to learn about MR from him, trust me. You'll learn a HELL of a lot from that class.
If you cannot do it now, I'm sure it'll be in the 'vault' to purchase next term.

Vray is good but I've not used it in Maya, only Max.

But in all honesty, you don't have to do it at all.
Loads of things that are in feature films don't/haven't done this but it's certainly worth learning how to do it, just as much as it's useful knowing how to 'fake' certain looks (GI for ex).

grimepoch
11-24-2010, 12:13 AM
Wow, Glad I am not alone here. I was going crazy trying to figure out why this wasn't working right in the batch renders. I can understand moving to a more proper method, but clearly, some consistency in operation would be good as well. Why when I go from png to bmp, just changing a file format, creates such a MASSIVE difference in my image.

I spent a good 2 hours searching online till I found this thread. But, at least it makes sense now. Off to watch the videos and begin my path to enlightenment on new ways.

Maya 2011 seems to be the nightmare version :( Guess I should have bought last year so I'd at least have 2010 which everyone says is more stable.

InfernalDarkness
11-24-2010, 12:19 AM
Maya 2011 seems to be the nightmare version :( Guess I should have bought last year so I'd at least have 2010 which everyone says is more stable.

This has been true of all Maya versions, depending on your needs and usage. There are drawbacks to being the most complex creation humanity has ever made! Especially since it's still managed by humans!

People cry and whine about every new version of almost any software, though. Just take it in stride. I myself still use Maya 2009 and will continue doing so until they release a new feature (painless linear lighting, for example) that will help me, save me time and energy, or just plain work properly, thus justifying the massive cost. After 15 years in the CG industry, I still can only rarely get a decent z-depth render out of Maya. This "feature" was a one-click feature in my first 3D package (Bryce 3D), which was only $99. Doesn't mean Maya's retarded or that I'm an imbecile (both may be true), but it sure is ridiculous from my perspective that a $99 toy outperforms Maya in this fashion.

grimepoch
11-24-2010, 01:05 AM
True, although I can say having it crash so often is a huge detriment to productivity in my eyes. I definitely like Maya, and for MOST things it has been a huge upgrade from Blender that I was using before.

Interesting thing is I watched the videos and I seem to be having the opposite problem. However, what i did was go into the Color/Compositing and set my gamma correction for 0.440 and now the output looks as I expect.

CGTalk Moderation
11-24-2010, 01:05 AM
This thread has been automatically closed as it remained inactive for 12 months. If you wish to continue the discussion, please create a new thread in the appropriate forum.