Hi Mário,
Hope that you got the images.
No, they was created from Eagle using Eagle3D [1
<https://web.archive.org/web/20120315140956/http://www.matwei.de/doku.php?id=en:eagle3d:eagle3d>]
which I tweaked a little and some models I created (for instance LEDs
with refractive index).
Yes, it was my goal, to get realistic results. So I tweaked materials
(mainly PCB solder mask) for realistic appearance. Then I got results
near to reality almost same I've got from OSHpark.
I don't remember exact rendering times. But now I tried it and for
instance render of 01.png took at 1600x1200 px with AA 0.3 about 30
seconds. And rendering at 3200x2400 px took about 90 seconds, both tests
utilizing all my four threads of i5-M520 (2C, 4T 2.4 GHz). Rendering has
been processed only on CPU (according to MS Sysinternals Process
Explorer). Finally I made a test with same machine and AA settings at
resolution 1024x768 and it took about 15 seconds.
I'm not an expert in POV-Ray format. I not learned it systematically,
only when I needed to tweak something or make a new model. So in many
cases I used trial and error method :)
I hope that I will contibute to KiCad, but do not know when, because I
have only little free time now - how do you do it? ;)
Jakub
[1]
https://web.archive.org/web/20120315140956/http://www.matwei.de/doku.php?id=en:eagle3d:eagle3d
Dne 20.6.2016 v 21:11 Mário Luzeiro napsal(a):
Hi Jakub,
Thanks for sharing it.
Were they created with KiCad? How are you creating the POV-ray file and what
manual operations do you need ?
Not taking in account the anti-aliasing and the image resolution, IMO you can
get already similar or better (depends on personal preferences) renders than
your examples.
But AFAIK POV-ray have another rendering engines (as options) that can produce
more realist results.
How long your examples took to render?
If you are an expert in POV-ray format, maybe you can in future implement a
POV-ray exporter for KiCad ;)
Regards,
Mario Luzeiro
________________________________________
From: Jakub Kozdon [[email protected]]
Sent: 20 June 2016 19:27
To: Mário Luzeiro
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [Kicad-developers] 3D-Viewer - Request for merge evaluation
Hi Mário,
I think that setup should be simple. So maybe something as Antialiasing: none,
low, medium, high; Shadows: checkbox; Reflections: checkbox. All with simple
hover help which explain that setting right this value will make render to take
longer/shorter time.
Yes. Examples are attached. Sorry for huge size.
No, flyes, but I used it only for detailed inspection after render (because moving of
board in POV-Ray is not WYSIWYG and need to edit "source code" before rendering
to move board).
Jakub
Dne 19.6.2016 v 20:41 Mário Luzeiro napsal(a):
Hi Jakub, Cirilo,
I made some (little) improvements of the anti-aliasing. (== slower render)
Would you like to try it?
My approach was been try to give the best apparent quality result without
compromise much the render time.
Depending on the feedback of future users and how would like more to setup more
parameters, a different dialogue (eg: as it was suggested by Cirilo) can be
developed.
However, I believe most of users will not understand that parameters, that is why there
is already a "back to defaults" button.
At moment the anti-aliasing is made on two stages (with different passes) but they are
all adaptive. For instance, it will only "smooth" the edges of the image and
not all pixels. That means in some cases it will miss tiny lines (missed by initial ray
shooting)
More options can be added latter for more quality or different render results,
but they will all mean more time to render!
Jakub: Do you have any examples to share rendered with POV-ray?
And option for exporting bigger (or smaller) images than actual window
resolution?
This will need some work and I dont want to change things too much by now.
Are you planning printing outdoor flyers from KiCad ? :P
Cirilo: I found on your image, as you are using just grey colour models, that
the render does not look good to me. I made some changes that I believe it will
look better. Could you take a similar shot and send it to me so compare? (using
latest updates from my branch)
Mario
________________________________________
From: Cirilo Bernardo
[[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>]
Sent: 16 June 2016 00:05
To: Mário Luzeiro
Cc: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>;
[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [Kicad-developers] 3D-Viewer - Request for merge evaluation
Would it be possible to put in a quality setting (more rendering passes)?
For me there are many artefacts in the rendered image compared to OpenGL.
These include:
+ broken silk lines
+ staircase effect on lines
________________________________________
From: Jakub Kozdon [[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>]
Sent: 18 June 2016 20:33
To: Mário Luzeiro
Cc:
[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [Kicad-developers] 3D-Viewer - Request for merge evaluation
About visual results, can you add settings similar to POV-Ray, especially for antaliasing
[2]? And option for exporting bigger (or smaller) images than actual window resolution? I
used POV-Ray only to render, so if similar renders will be possible in KiCad so it will
be sufficient for me. Only one "advanced" feature I used in POV-Ray was
possibility to render more images in row with slightly different coordinates, I used this
for making videos. So I think that POV-Ray exporter will be unnecessary for now.
_______________________________________________
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
Post to : [email protected]
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
