Hi Christopher, do you have indirect illumination as your main source of light in the scene?
Technically, your composite comp seems correct, you multiply raw diffuse by it´s diffuse level (wheight). If there is hardly any direct light contribution, your result will be pretty much black. You would need to add that indirect illumination contribution to get your illumination/brightness back. I´m not sure about the gamma 2.2 node you´ve put in, it could as well need be for a 0.4545 value gamma node instead and even obsolete if you output to *.exr. I don´t know how Composite handles the display of linear files, e.g. if you can set a display gamma for the viewer but leave the files linear as in nuke? A quite reliabe way to check raw renderelements is using the xsi flipbook, it´ll show you *.exr with a (preview!)gamma for the display of 2.2 by default but leaves the files unmodified, where Photoshop wants you to assign a colorprofile on import (which is not helping in verifying a file, yes). That is similar to nuke displaying linear files (if the viewer is set to 2.2/sRGB). AfterEffects is not bad in general for working in linear space but it would be cumbersome to daisychain your various multiply and add operations on your layers due to the "stacking layers" approach to compositing of AE. That said, here´s a few tutorials I find helpful whenever I have to remember the proper workflows or figure out what I did, they are for VRay but easy enough to transfer in terms of concept. I hope this helps, it can be hard to get working in linear space right, which is the foundation to be able to properly composite raw outputs into a beauty that looks like it was supposed to. -- My favourite (I always have to get back to that one when I set up renderlayers for compositing): http://vray.info/tutorials/basiccomping/ -- Similar approach, some extra info: http://www.jlynson.com/basic-renderpass-compositing-in-vray/ -- Compositing things in Photoshop: http://www.timsportfolio.co.uk/tutorials/renderelements/ http://www.3dtotal.com/tutorial/3d_studio_max/compositing_vray_render_elements/vray_render_elements_01.php http://cg.tutsplus.com/tutorials/chaos-group-vray/compositing-v-ray-render-layers-in-photoshop/ -- Cheers, tim On 05.06.2013 08:19, Jens Lindgren wrote:
And those files are EXRs right? On Wed, Jun 5, 2013 at 4:13 AM, Christopher <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: I did the composite in composite (no pun intended) The result is the same as photoshop, doesn't make sense. The Gamma 2.2 node is a sRGB node, the blend & comp settings are above the composite tree. Can anyone clarify if this is correct and I need to proceed with the other layers for it to look like the render or is something not flowing correctly ? ::Christopher:: Christopher wrote:Thanks for the suggestions and tips, very helpful :) I have composite installed, I wonder if I should even use After Effects if working in linear is so much problem, rather go between FXTree and/or composite, composite for 2013 is probably the most stable, I can't speak for 2014. (did this message go though, lately having server problems --- delay ?) ::Christopher:: Rob Wuijster wrote:You could use AE, but it's still a pain in the behind. Adobe just doesn't get linear workflow. And PS might be better in CS4,5,whatever, it's no compositor. You can try the FXTree, or install Composite, it comes with Softimage. Other than that you can try Blender, it has a pretty decent compositor for a free app. Nuke, or Fusion are too expensive for most people, despite being the better apps for compositing. Rob \/-------------\/----------------\/ On 3-6-2013 18:50, [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> wrote:changing the image/look radically. Adding a ton of technical passes together in a “correct” way – creating the look in compositing and then heavily modifying/manipulating it is a minefield. I would only recommend Nuke for that. If you just put the layers together – with a few small changes perhaps – than FXtree is just fine. *From:* Christopher <mailto:[email protected]> *Sent:* Monday, June 03, 2013 6:30 PM *To:* [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> *Subject:* Re: Compositing Levels I have never touched the FXTree, I will start now with this comp :) What do you mean transform the image ? ::Christopher:: [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> wrote:better not ask my opinion on any adobe product – at least I can see some use for Photoshop – but compositing it aint. I whish I could recommend FXtree without caveats – as you have it right there in XSI and to a degree it will work - quite well even. But there are some pitfalls. Clipping is one of them – and it doesn’t have display gamma afaik – so you’ll have to resort to adding a 2.2 gamma in the end of the comp (not on the luma but on R G B each!) Last I did a multi-channel-comp in FXtree compared to beauty render – I got it almost perfect. For a simple case that is. If you don’t intend totally transform the image it’s probably fine – and by any means, much less of a headache than Photoshop. *From:* Christopher <mailto:[email protected]> *Sent:* Monday, June 03, 2013 6:07 PM *To:* [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> *Subject:* Re: Compositing Levels For a program that cost $1K such as Ps it's quite restricted for this type of work, I still wonder why I have a zillion color profiles in Photoshop. I imported the levels as linear gamma, but upon import in photoshop I let photoshop apply sRGB (2.2 gamma), I suppose I shouldn't. You make it sound as though I will fight will Ps to get things right, although you probably are right :) I'm going to do the comp all in linear, see what results I get. I need to find an alternative to Photoshop, Nuke I don't use here. Is AE more better then Ps, or more of the same ? ::Christopher:: [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> wrote:> If the above is correct, what is ticking me off is it is so dark, when I render in the renderer, it's nice,... are you looking at it with proper gamma correction? oh right it’s photoshop... well, in XSI you are probably seeing the linear image with a gamma correction added (which is the desired way to work) – but most other software will show it without gamma - So if you add a gamma of 2.2, chances are it will look like what you expected. But here’s the twist: you should not be using that gamma – first do the comp and add it in the end. Or actually – better not add the gamma at all and rather export the image to the correct target color space. > Photoshop 'add' blend mode doesn't work in 32-bit color space, what is the correct alternative ? Nuke. Really – you can’t expect to use Photoshop for a comp like that and have the same result as in the renderer – it has the maths all wrong and doesn’t even know how to handle an alpha. What you’re trying to do will work correctly the first time around you try it in nuke (ok – perhaps that’s wishful thinking) Add (or Plus in Nuke terms) is the one and only proper blend mode to use - it’s called linear dodge or something senseless like that in Photoshop I think. Screen is not correct - though handy at times, it will never give you the same result as in the renderer. (except for the speculars in the mr skin shader – but that’s another story) Seriously – photoshop isn’t worth all the pain for this kind of thing. I know it might sound harsh but that’s just how it is – photoshop will not work the same way as the renderer. If you just want to mess around with some layers and make something whatever – I guess you can use photoshop – but if you want to get the same, correct result, as in the renderer – don’t use photoshop. If your client wants to receive a layered photoshop comp... then though luck.No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com <http://www.avg.com> Version: 2013.0.3343 / Virus Database: 3184/6379 - Release Date: 06/03/13-- Jens Lindgren -------------------------- Lead Technical Director Magoo 3D Studios <http://www.magoo3dstudios.com/>
