[tom]

Isn't this effect caused by Specular Bloom?

Isn't specular bloom a game of camera aperture

[iandavis]

Actually the glow around bright objects can be a variety of things, from dust in the air, mist, the fact that our eye lenses are not perfect, etc. It's not the light itself.

Also, there are a whole gammut of other light 'issues' that lenses produce. We are used to reality being shown with such flaws in film, television and to a certain extent through our own eyes.

If we could see the world as the Maxwell camera does everything would appear perfect in these renders, however since the maxwell camera is bieng designed to emulate our real world and somewhat imperfect method of image capture, it also needs to simulate the light problems that real cameras produce.

- Light glows and blooms
- hilight/ reflection bloom
- spectral issues (rainbow like reflections)
- distortion (chromatic, barrel, etc.)

I'm sure NL has considered these issues, and frankly I think they would be remiss in not doing so. However, most of these effects can be simulated quite accurately in post. I've done it plenty. Since 90% of these optical effects are generated by the camera lense or the film technology they can be just as easily produced in post... but some, like glows caused by ice crystals or water vapour in the air are impossible to accurately add in post production... these are the ones I would hope NL would consider adding by time the final version of Maxwell arrives.

Any comments from the NL peanut gallery?

[Yadla]

Thats why i think my wish was a good idea, but nobody notices :

Instead of only a "virtual physical camera" we should also have a "Virtual Physical Eye" with its organic lenses and light distortion. This way we could have awesome and most photoreal glows'n flares ever.

And with some algorithms simulating the dynamical sensitivity of the eye retina (like some HDRI compression), we could reach perfect photorealism.

So, what is NL waiting for ?

[Aldaryn]

I think if you've got a virtual camera with virtual artifacts, you can set is up any way you like, for example to match the characteristics of the human eye.

Somewhere (I think in a thread about specular bloom) NL said, that a more complex camera model is beeing developed, which will be able to reproduce such artifacts. So, I think this issue is on their to-do list, but right now, its not the most important thing to solve.

Oh, and also,as soon as we have a HDRI output, this is easily done in post, except some extremities

[ludi]

I agree,
it´s time to simulate real lens flare. To let the old PS fake in past...
bye bye:


Im not shure how enhance maxwell will developed.
But for a realistic simulation of a photography dense ist a very important topic. e.g. taking a photo against the sun or a emitter. Its a fact that there will be dense, (ok latest digicams handles this happening very tolerant)
but we dont want be tutored´.
probably we need a function like "automaic" or manual