An unfinished lab room

[WHD]

Hi All,

Here is my little addition to the art pages. This is unfinished so be kind. The room is modeled in Silo. it is really just a test to see how real I could get the it to look with the new Photon Maps and Area Lights.

I was going for the run of the mill drab un-color corrected light. Like the light you would get from real ceiling florescent lights. I also added the ugly linoleum floor tiles and typical fixtures you find in real labs. In effect nothing flashy just how these places look before you'd dress them up to make them look better if you were a photographer. It is badly in need of further set dressing like bottles and beakers and some of those machines they typically have in the labs but I have not taken the time yet. The computers are the only flashy looking stuff. See what you think.

PS...When I get some time I hope to finish it.

Bill

[Tomas Egger]

Hey Bill,

Really cool illumination...

Thanksss

Tom

[Mark Johnston]

Hi BILL

looks really good to me from modeling to illumination Thanks for posting , still wish more people would get in here and show their work. It gets the energy flowing.

Mark

[monday1313]

Looks good, I shoot a lot of labs, I can almost hear the Mass Spec's humming away...if you are looking for reference images of objects, but don't know what they are called, go to thermo fisher's website and go through the catalog.

[WHD]

Thanks all,

Monday, I'll do that because at some stage I'll need to add cool looking stuff.

Bill

[RichardJoly]

Bill, according to your description, I think you really nailed it. Cool lighting. (Pun intended...)

[Igors]

Hi, Bill

If possible please post the image statistics/info

1) How AreaLight was made? Is it a set of luminance opbjects?

2) How many photons were emitted? Baked in database? Would be interested to see baked map render.

3) Rays counts for GI and Light

4) Render time and photon map time

Thanks

[WHD]

Hi Igors,

Sorry for the delay in my response but things have been a bit busy over the last week or so. In answer to your questions :

1.) 5 area lights were created. 3 in the ceiling roughly color balanced to fluorescent and 2 over the counters roughly color balanced to tungsten. These are standard area lights with their dimensions matching those of the light sources that were modeled. All 5 lights had an intensity of .5 . All lights have quadratic falloff . The under counter lights were angled out slightly for better effect. I chose not to use light objects to keep it simple.

A slight glow was added in the render to the diffusers of the lights.

2.) Photons were baked in database. Each ceiling light had about 100k photons. The under counter lights each had about 50k so aprox total of 400k total photons. I'll see what I can do about that map.

3.) GI setting was 500 rays primary and 0 secondary. color tolerance of 2. Area light ray count was set to 200 for primary and 50 for secondary. No block distance was used since the Area Lights were positioned just under the fixtures.

4.) I rendered tests in a variety of sizes and render times varied based on resolution.

I just rendered a test for time and got 16 min 51 seconds but I seem to recall times of 11 to 14 minutes depending upon the angle. This render time was for a 1280 X 720 HD frame. I'll need to trash the baked map to get a time on that but I recall it being under 10 minutes and possibly under 5.

Additionally at this time the project has the following stats.

5 lights

1023 groups

16 materials

3 shaders

21 textures

425,343 vertex

286,011 polygons.

During render in camera the following stats read.

6 shadows

47 textures

38 reflections

965 groups

486,192 triangles

1,728 quads

Bill

[Igors]

Hello Bill

Thx for the detailed info. Generally all is quite expected, for our taste image looks interested. Ok, a discussion of art nuances is not our affair, so speaking technically:

- more photons. Although you can fill room very fast with relative small amount, it's not always a best. Millions and millions of photons = a normal practice in any app.

- sometimes it's helpful to use less radii value(s). Although it makes a more blotched map overview, edges/corners are more accurate - and it's better for final GI

- standard approach is to render several baked maps and compare/analyze these images