Spherically Mapped Sphere? Please!
-
So the renderer you use requires you to create a mapped sphere in order to use an HDRI? That seems rather unpractical.
-
@ecuadorian said:
So the renderer you use requires you to create a mapped sphere in order to use an HDRI? That seems rather unpractical.
No mate - like most they require offset or rotational values! So all required some trial and error! I'm trying to take that out, if I open the chosen HDRI in PS I can drop my grid over the top and position the yellow dot where the main light source is on the HDRI then export just the grid/dot image as PNG, reload it into my model and then rotate the sphere to where I want the sun (dot) to be then read the offset or rotation values of the grid at the red indicator!
No renderer app has a simple way to do this now and this way it is rather easy! I can just save the grid/dot image for each HDRI I ever use so I don't need to do it again! Just drag in the globe component, reload the correct PNG file, rotate, read the values and delete all!
I also work out a moment ago how I can match the dot location to suit exactly the SU sun location so I can use that as a guide for shadow cast.
-
@edson said:
where did you find alan's globe?
Mate in the UVTools thread!
Here is what I'm trying to do! Create a tool for positioning HDRI illumination images!
-
This looks like very useful tool. It could be adopted across the board. Looking forward.
-
@richard said:
No renderer app has a simple way to do this now
I guess you are referring to integrated render plug-ins only, because in Kerkythea this is done interactively with a rotate tool, so it's dead easy to match the light source with the sun in the background. I used it to match the sun in this video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h3cwW2xkloA -
Richard,
I'm trying to wrap my head around the benefits of your method here. So the advantage is that now you will be able to place your HDRI visually in SU before exporting? Are there any other advantages? I tend to do a decent amount of work within maxwell studio (lighting, hdr, even placing trees and cars), so it sounds like this isn't really something that I would use, right? Or am I missing anything?
-Brodie
-
@unknownuser said:
Richard,
I'm trying to wrap my head around the benefits of your method here. So the advantage is that now you will be able to place your HDRI visually in SU before exporting? Are there any other advantages? I tend to do a decent amount of work within maxwell studio (lighting, hdr, even placing trees and cars), so it sounds like this isn't really something that I would use, right? Or am I missing anything?
-Brodie
Not sure how things work in Maxwell, but if you use V-Ray for Sketchup, which runs from within SU and doesn't export anything this is a good aid to set the HDRI position as there are no visual aid provided. VfSU simply asks for offset values.
-
@thomthom said:
@unknownuser said:
Richard,
I'm trying to wrap my head around the benefits of your method here. So the advantage is that now you will be able to place your HDRI visually in SU before exporting? Are there any other advantages? I tend to do a decent amount of work within maxwell studio (lighting, hdr, even placing trees and cars), so it sounds like this isn't really something that I would use, right? Or am I missing anything?
-Brodie
Not sure how things work in Maxwell, but if you use V-Ray for Sketchup, which runs from within SU and doesn't export anything this is a good aid to set the HDRI position as there are no visual aid provided. VfSU simply asks for offset values.
Yeah, sounds pretty much like Maxwell. However, there's also the option to make a Maxwell Scene file which allows you to open up the model in Maxwell's "studio" program and make adjustments. You can't really do any serious modeling there but you can visually adjust the HDRI, camera location, textures and such. Skipping that step would be nice but I haven't found it easy enough to make it worth it. Beyond HDRI work arounds there are also lighting issues, polycount issues, camera view issues etc. There are work arounds for most of the problems, as I say, but taking into account the extra time/work required and the extra issues they sometimes bring up, I just do all of that in the Studio. That's not perfect either but I've found it more reliable in my own work.
-Brodie
-
@ecuadorian said:
@richard said:
No renderer app has a simple way to do this now
I guess you are referring to integrated render plug-ins only, because in Kerkythea this is done interactively with a rotate tool, so it's dead easy to match the light source with the sun in the background. I used it to match the sun in this video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h3cwW2xkloAKerthy may allow you to rotate it but then still requires testing to ensure yu get the shadow cast your after! Testing with kerthy possibly isn't to expensive on time but Maxwell and other high end apps really are!
-
@unknownuser said:
Richard,
I'm trying to wrap my head around the benefits of your method here. So the advantage is that now you will be able to place your HDRI visually in SU before exporting? Are there any other advantages? I tend to do a decent amount of work within maxwell studio (lighting, hdr, even placing trees and cars), so it sounds like this isn't really something that I would use, right? Or am I missing anything?
-Brodie
Mate I will often use studio if placing trees cars etc. but when I don't need to I find direct export saves me that step.
I'm pretty anal about shadow cast, I think the right angle for the light source can add a great deal of depth, mood and contrast to a facade render so I'm trying to develop a way to know exactly the result I will get or that I'm after.
90% of the time I use clipped trees in the foreground hidden from the camera so that I get there shadow cast, but no the tree - this gives the illusion of a well landscaped context but allows for minimal obscurity of the building! But I like to know I wont over drench the building in shadow! So light source location can be crucial - I think it is for a good shot anyway.
In studio although you can test quickly in the preview it doesn't support HDRI so any tests and it will often mean many (remember I'm anal), but this way I should get direct precise export first go and with very little additional steps!
Part of what I'm doing will be to generate a few HDRI maps of my own for different lighting hues and whilst generating make the light source in the same location as my default grid map on the sphere so that it cuts out many of the steps and the hue varient map selection through the plugin will be the only step besides positioning.
Just thinking about it this would also allow the positioning of the reflection channel also!
-
@thomthom said:
Not sure how things work in Maxwell, but if you use V-Ray for Sketchup, which runs from within SU and doesn't export anything this is a good aid to set the HDRI position as there are no visual aid provided. VfSU simply asks for offset values.
Mate maxwell is the same, studio (the standalone app) will allow you to position your background visually, though reflection, refraction and illuminaton channels are all by trial and error and lots of both!
For many the best way to avoid the excessive testing is to use a chrome sphere in the scene to replace the subject, run a test to see on the reflections where the location is and then adjust to correct, delete the sphere and unhide all other for the render, to get the reflections good enough to see this can take some lengthy render times!
I'm just reversing this process to speed it up and get accurate results first go!
Advertisement