Auto-suggest helps you quickly narrow down your search results by suggesting possible matches as you type.
Showing results for
Show only
|
Search instead for
Did you mean:
This page has been translated for your convenience with an automatic translation service. This is not an official translation and may contain errors and inaccurate translations. Autodesk does not warrant, either expressly or implied, the accuracy, reliability or completeness of the information translated by the machine translation service and will not be liable for damages or losses caused by the trust placed in the translation service.Translate
It would be convenient to have a local rendering option. Instead of submitting to the cloud I've got twelve 3.0 GHz cores sitting idle here while the cloud is loaded.
After playing around wirh this option I really like the simplicity and the fastnessn at which you can get pretty images. I do have 2 requests, not sure if I should put them here, but here goes.
- Beside being able to rotate the sun around the z axis (up) it would be nice if it could also rotate around the x-axis. Right now it almost always looks like the sun just came up or is about to go down the horizon.
- As I would like to use renders for a webshop, a transparent background option for ray tracing would be really nice to have. The checkbox is there but gets disabled when ray tracing.
Currently when doing rendering in Fusion 360 with Ray Tracing enabled, it uses "number of instances" to let the user know how many render passes it has done, problem is this is a continuous processm, so for those who is not familiar with Ray Tracing they will not know when the render is "done".
My suggestion is probably for either Fusion to mention the recommended number of instances or actually give a % on the render progress.
I understand it's never actually "done" but perhaps they can have a percentage going on, that i'll increment till over 100% which means that the model has been rendered more then acceptable and letting it go on further will be pointless cause the changes will be very minor?
So what do you mean by never seem to converge to something that I'd consider final / publication quality? Just curious to know
I had this discussion a while back with our dev team. Like you, I thought it would be good to set or display a target that the real time renderer should be aiming for to get a good image. As it turns out, in Quick and Normal mode you really don't have to wait very long becuase both of these modes do approximations of the final image. (Quick ignores materials reflectance and direct and indirect lighting settings to get an image fast. In Normal the indirect lighting and material diffuse are approximated but the direct lighting is accurate). So for Quick and Normal mode we could put a limit on the render iterations. However Advanced mode is the most true to life setting and you have to wait to get a good result. How long you have to wait is really dependent on what kind of materials you have in the scene, the lighting, amount of geometry, etc. Really complex scenes could take 500 iterations or more (1500 - 2000) but the person runing the renderer is really the one who has to decide what is good enough for the image he/she is trying to create.
The three images below were rendered at 50, 500 and 5000 iterations on Advaced.
As you can see, 50 is not nearly enought, the image is still very noisy. 500 might be okay but it could be better.
5000 is a great image but probably overkill. Somewhere around 2000 should be fine.
I'm open to suggestions on how we address this. What would our Fusion 360 users like to see?
Not sure how typical I am, but I've never wanted to use anything but the Advanced rendering mode (the other two aren't enough of a leap beyond the normal near real time shaded view to justify the bother).
@Anonymous wrote:
So what do you mean by never seem to converge to something that I'd consider final / publication quality? Just curious to know
Even at the great 5k iterations above, there is a lot of noise in the shadows.
It's not horrible, and it's fine for the web, but if I was going to do something in print, I'd want something much better than that.
It seems to be using something like path tracing (unbiased / Monte Carlo sampling ?) for the rendering which is great for getting quick «good enough» images, but I think you could run it for 50k iterations and it'd still not visibly converge for most scenes.
You could quantitatively measure something like the correlation between two sequential images and use that to determine how far the renderer is from converging (if you plot that over time it should asymptotically approach 1 and it should do so in a way that’s consistent enough that with a bit of curve fitting you could predict how many iterations it’d take to get to say .99 or .999 correlation (maybe a few different options for different levels of «doneness») to give an estimate of how much time remains).
Only tangentially related but if it is a Monte Carlo path tracer, switching to VEGAS / importance sampling might actually speed things up a bit..
Okay, that is an example UI I figured out, cause I understand that it's up to the user to choose how long they want to render as there's really a huge difference in quality, but I felt the current way lacks some information.
Basically it is a timeline representing the quality from rough to detail. There's a line moving to the right depending on the number of iterations, the user is able to hover around the timeline and another line showing the number of iterations and estimated time (time is calculated from the current time selected, not from the beginning of render) will appear below it, this will give the user an idea on how long does it take to get the required render.
Red = Acceptable Yellow = Good Green = Best
The information about recommended number of iterations for models will vary according to the model (lighting, materials and etc etc) and to avoid clutter, I suggest this to be kept hidden in a (i) button, when a user hovers on this button, it'll display those information.
In the Ray Tracing rendering menu, maybe have a Render to 'x' Iterations or Render for 'x' Seconds. Once it reaches that level, pause rendering and prompt the user.
Nah, I don't think it should pause, it should just continue till the user paused it (I don't see any drawback for letting it run longer then I planned to), perhaps just notify the user? I'm not sure if Windows has it, but OSX has the notification center API, so maybe they can make use of that.
Btw, I have a similar request as yours, check it out
I see your point, but I like consistancy when doing renders. If I'm rendering 4 designs from 3 angles each, I would like them all to be roughly the same quality. Rather than checking every few minutes to see how far it's gotten and hoping to not miss, I'd like it to either notify me, pause it, or do both when it reaches a given iteration count.
And regarding the linked request, I disagree. A fixed iteration count is rather limiting, because sometimes you want higher or lower detail depending on the design. If you set a given iteration count to stop at, then this is useful because it doesn't limit you. You should have the freedom to render to as many iterations as you want if you so choose.
Hmm, I believe you've misread the link, it's not to fix the number of iteration but rather to give a guideline for users to know how many iteration is deemed "good" enough and how long do they have to wait for it. Perhaps I should construct my sentence better or something.
Hmm...good point regarding the consistency part. Didn't thought about it.
It would be nice to not have to worry about accidentally panning / zooming / or orbiting thus restarting the ray tracing. Also, would be nice to allow rendering with a component opacity at desired settings. Thanks!
I was told there was going to be a fix for that when the QA team visited me last august and yet here we are a full human gestation period later and nothing.
All it takes is an «are you sure you want to screw up the rendering you've been waiting on ?» dialog to pop up when someone moves.
Not nearly as critical but the alpha thing would be great (just being able to save with transparent backgrounds would be huge).
Hi @Anonymous, we will be adding the ability to do background local renders which will give you the ability to preset the resultion and quality like you can with cloud rendering. Aiming for the September release.
In the November release we will be introducing background rendering on the desktop which will do away with the need to worry about moving the window and disturbing the renderer.
