Author Topic: [HD Remake] Sector 6 Slums (Read 64370 times)

Fischkopf · « **Reply #75 on:** 2015-04-02 20:47:56 »

Can we see it?

Mayo Master · « **Reply #76 on:** 2015-04-02 21:12:03 »

Quote from: Fischkopf on 2015-04-02 20:47:56

Can we see it?

It's on the gallery thread

Ragna · « **Reply #77 on:** 2015-04-02 22:53:58 »

Would it be possible if you update some .jpg images on the gallery with the original .png files?
There seems to be much quality loss on some such files. One would think those renders are of bad quality instead.

And can I ask why are some renders with noise? I'm not a big fan of that noise effect.

Anyway, do you people realize you are doing some amazing work?

KnifeTheSky77 · « **Reply #78 on:** 2015-04-02 23:18:24 »

That hand drawn look is very attractive, it's a real shame he hasn't done more. The Photoshop'd effects look great compared to the blender rendered ones, not that they don't look great in their own right

Mayo Master · « **Reply #79 on:** 2015-04-03 00:09:15 »

Quote from: Artema on 2015-04-02 22:53:58

Would it be possible if you update some .jpg images on the gallery with the original .png files?
There seems to be much quality loss on some such files. One would think those renders are of bad quality instead.

And can I ask why are some renders with noise? I'm not a big fan of that noise effect.

Anyway, do you people realize you are doing some amazing work?

Ehmm... to be sincere, I'm not sure what images you're referring to. The "Release gallery" only has .png images, high res, and as noise-free as it can get. If you're referring to other pictures from other threads, they're "work in progress" stuff, which may explain the presence of noise.
In case you don't know: when you want to render, in most 3d software you use a raytracing technique which has to back-calculate how objects are illuminated. Realistic illumination is achieved by accounting for indirect illumination (ie, light bouncing on neighboring objects before being reflected by the object of interest), in addition to direct lighting. Back-calculating the sources of indirect illumination can be viewed as an iterative process - in Blender they correspond to a number of Samples. At low Sample number, the image is very noisy, and the more Samples you have, the more the render will converge towards a "perfect" picture. However, the number of samples you decide on when launching the rendering process will be the main factor in your rendering time. My "release quality" pictures took more or less 20+ hours to render, based on the complexity of the scene and the picture size (mds5_1 took a lot more, for instance). So, when you just want to show an update or a "work in progress" picture, it makes sense to make faster render, which will display some amount of noise.

Quote from: KnifeTheSky77 on 2015-04-02 23:18:24

That hand drawn look is very attractive, it's a real shame he hasn't done more. The Photoshop'd effects look great compared to the blender rendered ones, not that they don't look great in their own right

Well, it would be awesome to see him back, I've sent him a message about the completion of the scene and hope it can reach him.

Ragna · « **Reply #80 on:** 2015-04-03 15:44:56 »

Really?

http://forums.qhimm.com/index.php?topic=15975.msg224827#msg224827

mds5_1
min51_1
eals_1
mds6_1

Those appear as bad .jpg files to me. I think the image server converts too heavy big sized images into .jpg?

Of course I know all that rendering stuff.
Maybe it's me but some seem to have some slight noise effect to them in some specific parts, or maybe it's the materials.
There's no image postprocessing applied after rendering, right?

PS: I've got some sources in the GPU field telling me that real-time raytracing is coming commercially available soon (I hope it is not Blizzard's "Soon™") near the time or some time after DX12 and Vulkan get released.
I hope they're not trolling me, lol, because I think that's the more groundbreaking advancement on the industry in decades. Said I should be looking at AMD & Samsung...

Mayo Master · « **Reply #81 on:** 2015-04-03 16:33:58 »

Quote from: Artema on 2015-04-03 15:44:56

Really?
http://forums.qhimm.com/index.php?topic=15975.msg224827#msg224827

mds5_1
min51_1
eals_1
mds6_1

Those appear as bad .jpg files to me. I think the image server converts too heavy big sized images into .jpg?

To be honest, I don't seem to find glaring issues on my end (or maybe I've been working with these images too long and I'm lacking perspective). For mds5_1, there is some level of noise (my render lasted 5 days on that one :S ) mostly because of a huge volumetric scattering shader which was meant to convey the feel of a dusty atmosphere. I wasn't minding the noise on this one because of that "dusty" effect. And yes, these images have very little in terms of post-processing - I didn't have any noise-removal method available which could satisfyingly remove noise without looking noticeably filtered.
That being said, if there's an image compression issue on your end, the problematic images correlate with image size, so there may be something there. Except for eals_1, the three others are the largest. Could you give me some details about where in these pictures you notice the biggest problems? I'm really having troubles to pinpoint that.

That being said, now that I recall, I did notice several artifacts like you described when viewing the images from my work place (c'mon, I can have a coffee break every now and then

). I don't know whether it's due to a server compression artifact or simply that my work monitors were not having the same display quality.

Ragna · « **Reply #82 on:** 2015-04-03 17:13:27 »

Quote from: Mayo Master on 2015-04-03 16:33:58

To be honest, I don't seem to find glaring issues on my end (or maybe I've been working with these images too long and I'm lacking perspective). For mds5_1, there is some level of noise (my render lasted 5 days on that one :S ) mostly because of a huge volumetric scattering shader which was meant to convey the feel of a dusty atmosphere. I wasn't minding the noise on this one because of that "dusty" effect. And yes, these images have very little in terms of post-processing - I didn't have any noise-removal method available which could satisfyingly remove noise without looking noticeably filtered.
That being said, if there's an image compression issue on your end, the problematic images correlate with image size, so there may be something there. Except for eals_1, the three others are the largest. Could you give me some details about where in these pictures you notice the biggest problems? I'm really having troubles to pinpoint that.

Look: http://i.imgur.com/s9yIomm.jpg
It is a badly re-encoded image (.jpg). That's the problem with those I listed on my ~~precious~~ previous (lol at mistake there) post.
Is there not an image server you could upload them to that doesn't convert heavy images into .jpgs?

Nevermind the noise thing. What I was talking about noise is not on those images, since I can't really see much detail in those compressed .jpg files.
I meant on the other .png images there seems to be some places where one can see some slight noise. Maybe slightly increasing the number of samples would fix it?

Anyway if you want to know it is:
The bed in mds5_dk.
The door-mat, fire-extinguisher, and japanese peace hand gesture drawing on the box in mds5_m.
The entrance mat and the top box near the dices and jars in mds5_i.
The bag and the dirt in the windows in mds5_w.
The reflection of those weird red lamps on the bed in min51_2.
The bottom part of the furniture near the window, the rug, and the sitting part of the right and bottom chairs in ealin_1.
The same parts and the books and lighting effect too in ealin_12.
Many weird dots in the bottom part and the wooden part in the beds of ealin_2.

Am I the only one who sees it?
But don't worry too much, I don't think it's a problem anyway.

Covarr · « **Reply #83 on:** 2015-04-03 17:36:05 »

Imgur converts PNGs to JPGs if you aren't logged in when you upload. The best solution to this is to make an account (or log in) before uploading, and they will keep the original image intact in most cases.

paul · « **Reply #84 on:** 2015-04-03 22:46:15 »

I must have bad eye sight cause I didn't even notice they where jpg's cause they look so good to me :s

Mayo Master · « **Reply #85 on:** 2015-04-04 16:27:25 »

Quote from: Covarr on 2015-04-03 17:36:05

Imgur converts PNGs to JPGs if you aren't logged in when you upload. The best solution to this is to make an account (or log in) before uploading, and they will keep the original image intact in most cases.

I was logged in when uploading these images. It looks like this image display problem doesn't affect everybody. I don't think it's a big deal, although I could upload the "Released" pictures on googledrive instead of imgur and see how that changes.

anaho · « **Reply #86 on:** 2015-04-06 13:49:14 »

I like what you have done to the scene I gave you.
I started on MDS7_IMa btw. I think it would be good if I concentrate on adjacent maps, so that it gives a more complete experience. I am in need of handdrawn textures though. Maybe I can get away with some filters as well. The better the renders look, the worse they blend into the game. And I really spend like 90% of the time on texturing and materials...
Another problem is that my scenes grow extremely huge in file size. The cave here is 500 MB ( without textures) and consumes 12GB to render. I want to upload every scene for preservation, but not like this! Sorry for the off-topic though.

Ragna · « **Reply #87 on:** 2015-04-06 15:10:19 »

Quote from: Mayo Master on 2015-04-04 16:27:25

I was logged in when uploading these images. It looks like this image display problem doesn't affect everybody. I don't think it's a big deal, although I could upload the "Released" pictures on googledrive instead of imgur and see how that changes.

It happens too if you're logged in if it surpasses an unknown (to me) limit. It happened to me too not so long ago...
I guess uploading them to your googledrive will be the solution, yes. Sorry to bother you with all this.

Mayo Master · « **Reply #88 on:** 2015-04-07 15:56:40 »

Quote from: Artema on 2015-04-06 15:10:19

It happens too if you're logged in if it surpasses an unknown (to me) limit. It happened to me too not so long ago...
I guess uploading them to your googledrive will be the solution, yes. Sorry to bother you with all this.

I'll do that job eventually. And don't worry, after all, the point of this project is a graphic upgrade, so if the gallery which is supposed to present that doesn't do it justice, it would be a shame.

Mayo Master · « **Reply #89 on:** 2015-04-08 23:38:00 »

Ehmmm.... quick question: I uploaded the high res renders on google drive, but it does not seem possible to link them as a viewable image directly (using the (img)(/img) codes with square brackets), only as a hyperlink. Any idea about how that can be worked around?

Ragna · « **Reply #90 on:** 2015-04-09 00:14:28 »

I got no idea but in case it is just not possible I don't think that's a huge problem since at least the page would load faster with just links.

EDIT: Or you could put the links along a small resized .png to show too?

Mayo Master · « **Reply #91 on:** 2015-04-09 00:19:46 »

That's what I did for colne_b1, so far. Shall I do the same for the other images?

Ragna · « **Reply #92 on:** 2015-04-09 00:24:16 »

Yeah probably. I've been trying to find a working url on the full sized images but nothing.
Unless someone knows better I think it's the best solution.

Mayo Master · « **Reply #93 on:** 2015-04-09 00:50:25 »

Ok, done

Ragna · « **Reply #94 on:** 2015-04-09 13:52:09 »

Nice, they all look great now.
Well, all except "mds6_1", as it somehow still has something wrong... Is it excess of dirt?
If you look closely it's like there's too much dirt saturation on some places.
But at least it doesn't look compressed and blocky/tiled now.

Still not as clear and crispy as the rest...

~~Is it really yours that field?~~ EDIT: Whoops! Clearly not, sorry.

Mayo Master · « **Reply #95 on:** 2015-04-09 15:23:56 »

mds6_1 was not done using the same tools: Ulpian made that one with Maya (not sure which render engine he used) and added a dose of Photoshop. Which was then re-photoshopped by Shampignon (from ff7.fr) and I because there were layering problems. Nevertheless, that's "release quality".
Different tools are bound to give different visual "feel", the plan is to have each artist working on a particular geographical zone to have local visual consistency. I also do not want to force the use of Blender on artists who are more proficient with other tools.

Ragna · « **Reply #96 on:** 2015-04-09 16:04:42 »

Yeah no problem, it's much better than nothing anyway.
I hope Ulpian returns with more fields work done or something...

---

Is there some place where one could find people to work on CG fields for FF7?

We should tell those about this hobby project, maybe?
I'd like this to grow... or else an official remake could be made and released meanwhile (lol).

Oh and sorry for my too much off-topic here by the way.

Mayo Master · « **Reply #97 on:** 2015-04-10 16:13:38 »

Searching for people who would be willing to participate has to be made along two paths:
- On the one hand we can check communities of 3D modelling hobbyists. For that matter, once someone makes an in-game HD video featuring the high res fields along with Kaldarasha's models, I think I'll go make some advertising on blenderartists.org. The downside: many people will be put off by the fact that it has to be a volunteer work which requires a lot of commitment.
- We could find people with enough drive in people from various FF7 fan sites. I've already gotten in touch with the French community of ff7.fr, where people showed a lot of interest and enthusiasm for the project. Two people from there already offered to participate. The downside: not much 3d modelling skills, however I believe that with enough commitment and desire to learn, many people could "level-up" enough to produce some good piece of work (reflecting on how I've gotten to my current level myself).

Ragna · « **Reply #98 on:** 2015-04-10 21:13:14 »

So it seems tricky to find people, huh?
I wish whoever joins the project has a level similar to yours, though.

Fischkopf · « **Reply #99 on:** 2015-04-12 16:35:53 »

Yes It's kind of hard, especially when this project is kind of hidden in these Forums...

To raise awareness and attract more modelers to the project I think there should be a website for the Team Avalanche project. Also official Facebook and Twitter and Youtube accounts that regularly post updates would help like, a lot.