LuxRender v0.7RC1 released

[Lord Crc]

I don't have a lot experience with windows, but I think that the installation process is a bit more standardised in OS X. There is this general information window, and later on, you can choose what exactly you want to install. In case of LuxRender I can choose if I want LuxBlend installed. That's where you have to pay attention.

Ah, on Windows it can be very bad, with random pages inbetween with by-default checked boxes for installing all sort of unrelated crap.

In any case, thanks for the feedback... now to figure out a way to force you to read it

[xray]

Don't we get SSS in 0.7, is it planed now for 0.8 ??

[jensverwiebe]

Don't we get SSS in 0.7, is it planed now for 0.8 ??

You can nearly perfectly fake SSS with new absorbtion(-depth)- feature in mediasettings ( LordCRC-testrender ):



Jens

[pinko]

Pinko, Linux-version has boost linked statically, it doesn't relies on system boost installation. What particular binary has the problem: luxconsole or luxrender? What about luxrender with Qt-static? Can you try to run Lux from console and post here any error messages it spits out?

Ok SATtva tnx i try in this way and now Lux works.....
ciao
Luca.

[jeanphi]

The "inconsistent shading normals" message is triggered by "bad" vertex normals (ie pointing in when they should be pointing out). There was a slight bug in the detection code however for most meshes it's a genuine warning.

The warning can be genuine and wrongly trigger with the RC1 build (this is already fixed in the development version), but it can also mean that there is a face where some normals are pointing upward while the others are pointing downward. If such a face happens to be visible it can completely ruin the shading, so better check your normals if you see this message in upcoming releases.

However since some commercial meshes do trigger this warning, there's an ongoing discussion so that this warning isn't too intrusive in case you can't do anything about it.

Jeanphi

[ayanematrix]

The "inconsistent shading normals" message is triggered by "bad" vertex normals (ie pointing in when they should be pointing out). There was a slight bug in the detection code however for most meshes it's a genuine warning.

The warning can be genuine and wrongly trigger with the RC1 build (this is already fixed in the development version), but it can also mean that there is a face where some normals are pointing upward while the others are pointing downward. If such a face happens to be visible it can completely ruin the shading, so better check your normals if you see this message in upcoming releases.

However since some commercial meshes do trigger this warning, there's an ongoing discussion so that this warning isn't too intrusive in case you can't do anything about it.

Jeanphi

Well, I'm at a loss on what's happening over on my end. As it can be seen in the attached image, using the clay material setting (the one that's next to run/def/etc in the Blender Exporter) I can render the scene without much of a problem; though, without the textures, I can't tell if it's my low system memory along with new features in LuxRender or a problem within the program itself. Like I said before, if there's nothing wrong with LuxRender, then I'm just out of luck. That's all there is to it. And I haven't even tried network rendering yet!

As for the normals occasionally popping up with commercial meshes, I'd have to say that is a possibility since they were exported from Poser. I managed to edit the some of the meshes in the scene so that everything fit together and used only one texture map per major area (skin body and face, clothes, plants), yet I'm not sure if one of them has inverted verticies somewhere. Though, 0.6.1 didn't complain.

Anyway, I have no idea what I need to do anymore. I'll probably give up at some point until I can afford to get a new computer.

[jeanphi]

Hi,

With v0.7RC1 don't worry too much about this warning, it will unfortunately wrongly trigger in lots of cases. Starting from RC2 or the next weekly build it will be accurate though. However from what we've seen so far, with commercial models it tends to happen mostly on unseen faces, that's why we're looking at a way to make the warning less intrusive.

Jeanphi

[xray]

You can nearly perfectly fake SSS with new absorbtion(-depth)- feature in mediasettings ( LordCRC-testrender ):

Should I imagine the SSS/absorption in the image you posted, or is there a real one ?

So I can produce SSS effects with this new absorption feature, but how does the other engines do it, the same way? Is this absorption feature faster ?

[SATtva]

xray, see this thread for details. Faking SSS with mattetranslucent material has been possible before (see that FAQ entry), however without depth-dependent absorption it was too much fake.

Is this absorption feature faster ?

It should be much faster compared to fully physically correct absorption+scattering. Scattering is planned for 0.8.

[kuvapuisto]

Works really fine, clean pictures with low s/px. On Ubuntu: "copy image to clipboard" -button doesn't work. At least Gimp is giving message: no image data in the clipboard to paste. Or is it Gimp that doesn't understand data? Well, I tried with Krita, and it works. From other applications to Gimp copy/paste image is working.