Loading...
> >

Rendering is Grainy

chriswrcgchriswrcg Posts: 56
in New Users

I am trying to learn the differences between the render types and render qualities.  I have a model that I created and rendered striaght out of the box so to speak.  I created a new scene and built the model and rendered with IRAY.  This first image was the result.  It looks good.  I wanted to add it to a scene so I uploaded the Mountains of Altair environment and added the figure but the render I got was terrible.  It was very grainy. This one was rendered at 1000 x 800. That is the second image.  I decided to up the quality and rencered at 2880 x 1040 but it came out worse. my last attemp was to render at HD Ultra 16-9 3840 x 2160 using 3dlight. That is the third image and although it is not as grainy it is darker and worst of all it ignored the hair.  I thought that upoloading an envrionment meant i did have to add any extra lights or what ever and that everything was just load and go.  What Am I doing wrong?

 

56985.png
1920 x 2400 - 3M
56985563.jpg
1000 x 800 - 824K
56985563555.jpg
3840 x 2160 - 4M

Comments

  • arnonarnon Posts: 88
    edited December 2020

    Did you reboot the PC? It sometimes helps with my renders (Iray) when either the viewport or final render gets grainy or messed up. As you added scenery and pumped up the resolution it eats up large amount of memory and I don't know if Studio always cleans the memory like it should. This is just a newbie answer that might be helpful till the pros kick in :). Perhaps lower the quality / resolution or try the first basic image at UHD and check if it is wrecked too. IMHO it's a memory problem.

    Again, I am just trying to figure out Studio myself since August.

    Post edited by arnon on
  • Richard HaseltineRichard Haseltine Posts: 99,465

    Was it using the GPU for the first render and the CPU once the mountains were added? Did it stop, in the second and subsequent instacnes, after two hours? If it times out then that will leave noise.

  • chriswrcgchriswrcg Posts: 56

    Richard Haseltine said:

    Was it using the GPU for the first render and the CPU once the mountains were added? Did it stop, in the second and subsequent instacnes, after two hours? If it times out then that will leave noise.

     

    I didn't know that a render could time out.  I thought that it went untill it was finishedand it takes as long as it takes.  I have read some people say that they had renders that took 6 to 8 hours or longer to run.  How can I get it to not time out if that is what it is doing?

  • onixonix Posts: 282

    Renders take as much time as you are willing to wait the more you wait the better will be the quality.

    If your rendering defaulted to CPU then you probably run out of GPU memory  or something else happened and you may need to restart Daz (or even your GPU may have not enough memory)

     

  • HylasHylas Posts: 4,909

    In Render Settings -> Progressive Rendering, set Max Time to zero to remove the time limit.

    The 2nd render indeed just looks like it needs to render longer.

    To render in 3DL you need different materials and a whole different lighting set-up, but I'm not the guy to ask about that.

     

  • chriswrcgchriswrcg Posts: 56

    Hylas said:

    In Render Settings -> Progressive Rendering, set Max Time to zero to remove the time limit.

    The 2nd render indeed just looks like it needs to render longer.

    To render in 3DL you need different materials and a whole different lighting set-up, but I'm not the guy to ask about that.

     

    Thanks for all the help.  I changed the max time to zero last sunday night around 18:00. It just now finished rendering.  Really wasn't expecting it to take close to 5 days but it is what it is. Lol

  • NovicaNovica Posts: 23,874
    edited December 2020

    @chriswrcg
    I very rarely visit the new users threads, used to practically live here back in 2012 LOL. However, seeing as you posted your render took days, I wanted to share some experiments several of us tried over a year ago. When we upped the quality, there was negligible difference in results, certainly not enough to warrant the tons of time it took. I keep my quality at 1, never more than 2 and that is rare.

    Which seems to have more impact/better results (in our experiences) than upping the quality (which mostly just added a LONG time to the renders) try this-

    In the render settings pane:
    I use Mitchell (the default is blurry Gaussian) as the Pixel Filter (In Render Pane, go to Filtering) and while there, change Pixel Filter Radius from 1.50 to 1.35. The lower you go, the sharper the image.

    Noise Degrain Filtering, set that at 3, then other options will open up for you such as Noise Degrain Blur Difference, which I put at .15 to .22    

    Next, while still in render settings pane,  in Progressive Rendering pane, I set my max samples to around 12,000 and the max time to 100000 and that way it doesn't time out. The thing controlling my renders is the convergence, which I set to 99%.  As I said above, I don't change the quality from 1 very often. Everyone has different opinions,  see if changing these other items works for you.

    Some samples using these settings from my product review threads in Art Studio are below (and can't show any gallery ones at the moment)   Also, Luminar is fantastic for postwork, I used the sharpen feature for Chamani.

    These are ALL quality set to 1. 
    Hope this helps, at least gives you something to try.


    Cathie

    Chamani Luminar.jpg
    810 x 900 - 983K
    bedroom 2 small.jpg
    1000 x 721 - 178K
    Post edited by Novica on
  • KeenKareemArtKeenKareemArt Posts: 0

    Novica said:

    @chriswrcg
    I very rarely visit the new users threads, used to practically live here back in 2012 LOL. However, seeing as you posted your render took days, I wanted to share some experiments several of us tried over a year ago. When we upped the quality, there was negligible difference in results, certainly not enough to warrant the tons of time it took. I keep my quality at 1, never more than 2 and that is rare.

    Which seems to have more impact/better results (in our experiences) than upping the quality (which mostly just added a LONG time to the renders) try this-

    In the render settings pane:
    I use Mitchell (the default is blurry Gaussian) as the Pixel Filter (In Render Pane, go to Filtering) and while there, change Pixel Filter Radius from 1.50 to 1.35. The lower you go, the sharper the image.

    Noise Degrain Filtering, set that at 3, then other options will open up for you such as Noise Degrain Blur Difference, which I put at .15 to .22    

    Next, while still in render settings pane,  in Progressive Rendering pane, I set my max samples to around 12,000 and the max time to 100000 and that way it doesn't time out. The thing controlling my renders is the convergence, which I set to 99%.  As I said above, I don't change the quality from 1 very often. Everyone has different opinions,  see if changing these other items works for you.

    Some samples using these settings from my product review threads in Art Studio are below (and can't show any gallery ones at the moment)   Also, Luminar is fantastic for postwork, I used the sharpen feature for Chamani.

    These are ALL quality set to 1. 
    Hope this helps, at least gives you something to try.


    Cathie

    I just randomly came across this post with a somewhat similar issue and...

    MY GOODNESS THESE ARE SOME OF THE BEST RENDERING SETTINGS I HAVE EVER READ!
    Thank you so so much for sharing the knowledge, this cut a render of mine that took about an hour and a half down to 15 minutes!! heart 

Sign In or Register to comment.