HOME | DD
AS-Dimension-Z β DAZ3D Native Sharpness
#daz3d #iray #tips #tutorial
Published: 2016-10-25 10:34:08 +0000 UTC; Views: 8153; Favourites: 68; Downloads: 192
Redirect to original
Description
A small Tip for Everyone
You can set any minor value you want, but not 0 (zero)
Related content
Comments: 37
I don't know what edition this started at, but negative amounts no longer work for the radius filter. You can remove the limits and SET it to negative, and even render, but I've tried this on two different machines, an old one with Daz 4.9 on Windows 7, and a much newer and more powerful version running Daz 4.10 on Windows 10, and the logs show that negative numbers get set to 1.
"2018-06-04 19:31:05.452 WARNING: dzneuraymgr.cpp(307): Iray WARNING - module:category(TRAV
Β If I set it to -50 then it says "illegal trace radius -50, using 1.0" and so forth.Β
I think ANYTHING less than 1 gets set to 1, but I don't remember for certain, so there may be some wiggle room between 0 and 1.
π: 0 β©: 0
On an extreme close up of M8 face, I have been testing every possible setting variation using the default values of Daz Iray on a 600X1080 pixel image.
I have not used any fancy settings or other HDR images, just plain Daz defaults.
-------------------------
Graphics card GTX 1080 - 2560 Cuda cores, 8GB Ram, CPU i7 4790kΒ RAM 32 GB.
All of the renders took a bit over 9 minutes each and around 1500 iterations.
The purpose of my test is to test the effect on the skin and hair of small variations of the standard settings.
Render Mode - Photoreal
Progressive Render - Default values
Optimization - Speed
Tone Mapping - Defaults
Environment - Defaults with Dome & Scene and finite sphere. Dome rotation 90.00 because it looked better than default 0
----------------
Filtering - Gaussian 1.5 as default.Β Then, I did several renders changing to Mitchell 1.5, Mitchel 1, Mitchel 0.7, Lanczos 1.5, Lanczos 0.7Β and now to Gaussian -100.
On various forums, I read that Mitchel 1.5, 1, or 0.7 worked best. I tested it, and in my opinion, they look better and crisper than Gaussian 1.5.
I also tried Lanczos 0.7 and I think there is a very, very small and slight improvement in contrast over all of the other settings above. But It looked almost identical to Mitchel 0.7
Then I read this and rendered with Gaussian - 100. The result is almost identical to the Mitchel 0.7 and much better than the Gaussian default of 1.5
Gaussian - 100 rendered a few seconds longer than the standard 9 minutes of other renders and took 1600 iterations, which was slightly higher than usingΒ Mitchel.
----------------
My conclusion:
When you want a crisper image and some improvement on the small details. Any setting will be better than the default Gaussian 1.5.
Which settings work best. Depends solely on the specifics of the image.Β
----------------
The most common choices are:
Gaussian - Default gives the blurriest results. If that is not what you want. Try lower Gaussian settings or negative values ( -100 in this case) or switch to Mitchell Β
Michell - Any value of 1.5 or lower will increase sharpness. The specific value required will depend on your taste and the specifics of your project.
Lanczos - Less common alternative, but might be worth a test. results were very similar to Mitchel in this case.
Render 1 - Gaussian 1.5
Β
Β
Render 2 - Mitchel 0.7
Β Β
Β
Render 3 - Gaussian -100
Β
Β
π: 0 β©: 0
Changed pixel filter radius to -100. Fingers crossed.
π: 0 β©: 0
I tried it. Four different settings (-100, -50, +0,01, +1)Β
(that's the original render-size, no touching of it, except for copying the four shots into one)
I can't see differences between -100, -50, +1 and didn't had significantly different render times.Β
There's quite a decrease in quality from the +0,01 radius setting, which I find surprising. I thought the smaller the radius of a filter, the higher the resolution should be?Β
Anyway.Β
I guess my default +1 setting will do it for me.Β
π: 0 β©: 1
OK, But you can't see differences in such e render-size though! 
π: 0 β©: 1
ahaa.....Β
that I didn't know.Β
Does it need to be at least 2001x2001, or could it also be 1200x2001 (for instance)?
π: 0 β©: 1
Just a good resolution that you can distinguish some differences! Maybe 2x and an half from your previous.
π: 0 β©: 1
That would mean a Height of 3350px!Β
I guess I'll never going to render anything in that size
So I can keep my fingers away from that dial
π: 0 β©: 1
So you dont need to play with Radius Pixel, because you dont have big resolution pics.
π: 0 β©: 1
that's what I learned now.Β
And it took me only 24 hours!
π: 0 β©: 0
that's interesting!Β
Please don't laugh, but my default setting is 1.0....Β
what is your setting do to the rendertimes? It. is exploding, right?
π: 0 β©: 1
minor values have native sharpness! React different than +1, +0.4 etc.
π: 0 β©: 1
no idea what that means
I'm just going to try out what it makes to a render
π: 0 β©: 0
In the 4.9 version of DAZ it isn't possible to push it under 0?!Β Β
π: 0 β©: 1
Uncheck Limits in Parameter Settings!
π: 0 β©: 1
I found it .. thank you so much
π: 0 β©: 1
Never try to put the Pixel Filter at -100. Sound interesting
π: 0 β©: 2
-100
audioslave74.deviantart.com/arβ¦
π: 0 β©: 1
Gives Native Sharp. No Pixel Edges!
π: 0 β©: 0
thanks I never went that far
but I find it is relative to the size of your render
like if u render at 2500x1000 example maybe -1
or smaller a deferent pixal rad.
I rendered two images one with pix render at .6 and one at 1
and the .6 was sharper than the pix rad at 1
so its experimental more than a science in iray
i will try your -100 and deferent image sizes to see if this will work better than my experimental approaches lol
π: 0 β©: 1
It has -100
audioslave74.deviantart.com/arβ¦
π: 0 β©: 0
Is the purpose of the negative value to turn it off for faster rendering? I've heard rendering at 4x the size (2xH and 2xW) without the pixel filter is faster than rendering at 1x with it on, but haven't really tried it.
π: 0 β©: 0
So...any news from Daz3d about the release date?!
π: 0 β©: 2
Thanks man, Sorry for asking but I really want your shaders!!
π: 0 β©: 0
Not yet! I dont know what they do!
π: 0 β©: 0
This is great! I'd love to see some more render setting tricks. I'd also like to see some screen shots from the tone mapping video you put up.Β I had difficulty seeing the numbers in the video. Can't wait for the new Anagenesis. I keep checking DAZ to see if it's popped up in the store.
π: 0 β©: 0
