Has the renderingprosess been altered i 5.2?

[Ceciliabr]

My renderings no longer match the preview-window. Far-away objects appears to be shifted, and are not rendered in the right position.

Anyone else have the same experience?

[hansmex]

All old versions of SH3D are available on Sourceforge. It would be easy enough to make a comparison.
Personally I don't think anything has changed, because no changes were reported with the newest version.

H

[Ceciliabr]

Hi,

yes I changed back to 5.1, of course, so that's not the problem.
The reason I'm suspecting the rendering routine, is that it the render window seems to have changed slightly with 5.2, and that the problem does not exists in 5.1.
But, of course, there might be another explanation.


Here is what I mean:





If you look closely, you can see that the background has shifted quite a bit.

[mazoola]

You've probably already done this, but if not, make sure your camera (depth-of-field) and Virtual Visitor (angle of vision) settings are at the default. I've not poked around to see what defaults Emmanuel uses in rendering the 3D view window, but I'd assume a mismatch between them and the ones used to create the final 'photo' render might cause the apparent anomaly you demonstrate.

[Puybaret]

Strange... The small differences between 5.1 and 5.2 in the renderer source code shouldn't lead to these lighting differences.

[Ceciliabr]

There are no lighting differences. It's the placement of far away objects that shifts.
On the top picture, made in the lowest quality, the outside scenery is at the intended position. But in the bottom picture, you will notice that the outside scenery has shifted a lot to the left. The buildings that appears in the middle window in the top picture, is appearing in the left window after rendering.
This does not happen with 5.1.

Another thing:
When I opened the 5.2 file in 5.1, the far away buildings were not there at all.

[Ceciliabr]

@ mazoola:

What exactly is "the angle of vision"? I don't seem to have that option. I'm on Mac,so maybe angle of vision it's only an option in the Windows-version?

C

[mazoola]

@Ceciliabr

What exactly is "the angle of vision"?

I'm sorry; I had some sort of brain freeze while writing that comment. What I meant to say was "field of view," as this Virtual Visitor help page shows.

maz

[Ceciliabr]

I see.
The field of view was, if I remember correctly, set to 47, which equals a 50 mm lens on a full-frame camera, at least according to this table: http://kmp.bdimitrov.de/technology/fov.html, a link which Mr. Puybaret kindly gave me, and which I find most useful for matching perspectives with both my camera and with programs like Poser and Vue.

I really don't think this displacement has anything to do with the field of view settings.

[Ceciliabr]

@Puybaret

I see you have changed the bucket size to 64. Of course that should not make any diference in the way objects are being placed.

BTW, I did the opposite in Poser, changing the bucket size from 64 to 16, mainly because the program sometimes were stuck on very complex parts, like human hair, but also because with a lower bucket size I could reduce the time I had to wait for a "cancel" to take effect.

What is the gain of increasing the bucket size to 64?