WYG R40 - Rendering vs. png-Export - Problem with LED-Lamps

Could it be the are just above or underneath a ceiling? Or some other surface. This might block the fixture output in reality (the rendering) but not in any shaded views. Could be a matter of mills.

 

I just did a simple setup with the Sunbeam 100f (is this what you mean with FC100?)

Compared to the shaded view, and somewhat standard settings in the render setup, it looses a lot of footprint, but it is at least visible compared to your result.
The render did not change if I set the beam settings to 10x Footprint and turned the Beam Saturation to full... Maybe it's a library thing?

May I ask what you hope to achieve with using the renders vs a PNG of the shaded view. You can get some extra light bounces with the rendering, but I must admit I haven't used the render engine in years now. Time and effort vs result is never satisfying for me.

 

Remember that cheating is allowed in renders -- however it is annoying when fixtures doesn't work the way you expect.

Dany or Dino from CAST may see this -- otherwise you should write them an email

 

Okay - are you aware that you can have individual settings of beam properties from fixture to fixture?
It was introduced in R39 as far as I remember.

Your render looks very good, but I would think that the shaded view could look somewhat the same is the render with the fixture beam properties.
I may be wrong, it's not so much a negative critique on your work. Just asking if you know it

FYI I do a lot of WYGging in the conference branch, so I know most of the challenges these setups can give.

 

In my opinion, the rendering (cpu based) should be as ‘virtually real’ as possible. Ignoring all tweaks and as true to the actual light outputs as possible (when the slider is set to reflect real light output instead of the ‘normalised’ output). The shaded views (gpu based) could serve as a quick and dirty sketch for simulating the light and to make it possible to do previz and programming of the desk. The images that you could save here are impressions, also because every combination of graphic card and shaded view setting gives a different result. This is different from computer to computer, so if I send a file to my colleague the result might be different.

 

Have to remember as well the render engine is also based on Tungsten mathematics. and I always related this to the issues of rendering leds. Even in apps like ma3d. Leds are often shown as a glow rather than a beam.

I chatted with Cast guys a few times about this and it seems the shift was formed from the render engine when the shaded view exports was introduced. however they kept the render engine in place as the architectural and theater groups seem to have more success with the render engine. where as the concert folk have more success with the shaded view.

Me I tried the render engine several times, never liked the results or time to get results and just dealt with the shaded view exports. For me I valued my time producing something to show and give ideas rather than spend hours tweaking to show one look. I tend to respect that my clients can fill in the blanks.

Each their own though.

My suggestion is write the guys at cast and request, request, request and try to get others to do the same. Show them examples of what your after and how you work around the issue. The usual "why doesn't this do this" is not always the best approach. even if this may be the scenario in this case.

In some ways I find in my mind that the 32bit programming is the limitation of really looking at the render engine but I'm not a coder just a lighting designer. but to me I think 64bit could open the door on a wider scheme of lighting mathematics based on fixture type over a single fixture light source. I never been able to convey that into a way Cast could see it and look at. then again in ways I always viewed the render engine as part of outdated format within wyg. where pre pro was the focused and the graphics was still developing. remember the vector stick beam days.

So request and suggest , show , ask for way for them to tackle the issue.

Your first photo shows the same as the third photo minus the leds but then to me if your being that picky about the quality of output to your client. then I add on, chain's on the motors. safety cables on fixtures, span sets and the lack of detail to the room itself in terms of the flat roof, flat walls as most rooms I seen are often textured and wall sconces and such.

Just shows what one looks at and thinks is important. why I left it at the vision. can I get my vision out to the client. then I done my job. and started the next rather than wait for the render to print out.