Make Your Renders Unnecessarily Complicated 

I did this years ago, just never made a video about it. Really cool but definitely not the first person to think of it. Edit: Ok... I didn't do THIS, but I did make a camera with a lens and got it to focus on something, i'll give myself points for that at least...

weirdest thing about this is, I've watched the video and i STILL don't know which side of that line we're on!

@@tiggerbiggo Cool, but that's kind of like saying you flew a rocket to the moon when you really just flew a plane.

@@tiggerbiggo🤓

@@lightswitch2622 Thanks

What if you’re viewing this video in a fake reality? This video

@@elck3This video🤯

but the impressive thing is that the photos looks like when film camera took pictures, that graininess is uncanny realistic! Im flabbergasted

Wait till I tell you the fake gallery that displays the fake real photos taken with the fake camera with a real fake camera inside it, likely was itself rendered using the fake real camera in the fake camera

now he just has to showcase this video in a real gallery

Literally same lol

Fail the assignment, get a PhD instead

I would hate to be this guys computers teacher. Go render a cube. He doesn't realize they are meant to do the simple assignment in blender so a week late he has a functional render all scratch built

@@monkey5266 it wouldn't take you a week tho pumping out a cube is pretty trivial, one could even figure it out themselves with some knowledge of linear algebra

@@zyeborm Flunking, successfully.

I did that once. Teacher took points off bc it was longer than what she asked for.

He broke his limiter at this point

​@@AblorsOne puuuuuuunch

I TOOK TWO LIMITLESS PILLS TO LIMIT MYSELF

They are limits

My photogenic ass is watching this as a science lesson 😂

" look son, a photographer trying to make believe he knows the math and formulas behind optic's physics "

I read this as Plankton's voice

exactly.... EASY!!!!

Oh yeah, easy as hell. As long as you have an intimite knowledge of film cameras, photographic emulsion, optics and a little math... A 5 year old could follow along!!! ;)

@@Quivex1its super easy

​@@RusticRonniebarely an inconvenience

@@chhayanksharma3926Wow wow wow, wow

imagine we could get the cad files for already existing lenses. then taking photos in vr lol 😂

There's actually huge ongoing development in light transport research and however incredible and just pure genius this is, it's far too cumbersome for actual lens design research. Light transport simulations are just so much more usable for that.

​@@gehteuchnichtsan7911Pixar are already doing this

@@adrianbergqvist8622citation needed evidence required.

This is like wanting to order a Big Mac so you decide to buy a plot of land and build a McDonald's by yourself, designing and building the proprietary tech used for cooking the food, setting up a supply chain for your restaurant, and training an entire staff. Then realising you're unsatisfied so you repeat the process to open a farm on which you will raise livestock, grow vegetables and grains and mill your own flour for buns. But you're still not satisfied so you build a time machine to go back to Germany to murder the inventor of Frikandellen and take his place.

The rgb grain looks extremely similar to that in RAW image files. That's because RAW files are almost exactly what the camera sees before they're processed into JPEG. So theoretically, if this has just a few more samples, and a higher resolution, and processed it into a JPEG you would have recreated the process that your phone does when taking pictures.

​@@cartler​​It is not quite true that RAW is exactly what the camera sees. Otherwise you would see so many imperfections from the camera sensor. Therefore there is still a bunch of software filtering before it. Now get an industrial camera however... 😅

@@rkan2 at least RAW files are the closest a normal person can get to the raw data from the sensor, but it still is fairly close and can contain many more artifacts than processed images.

@@cartler Some cameras allow you to export the literal raw sensor data, which ends up looking absolutely terrible and takes up a lot of storage, but it is useful for very specific use cases.

the faster solution: add some noise with a filter in paint or smth

Only partly😵‍💫

@@sirrandalot I'm guessing that the mind which finished this project is no worse off than the one which decided to undertake it in the first place. (It's always fun to come across a project where you think "Wow, that's impressive, I wish I'd done that… no… no, wait, it's far, far better that someone else did it.")

If I were to meet him irl, I would like it to be behind a glass... like Clarice and Hannibal.

​@@sirrandalotso is it basically a lense with filters with the digital cam capturing results? Really love this idea, reminds me of complicated redstone builds in minecraft

I guess you could say he just... re-developed photography 😎

I love how rapid fire his explanation/break down of this is lmao

Do you leave in space?

Pretty sure what Pixar does is just the lens. This man went fully operational camera

the most absurd thing i've ever seen done by anyone in blender

Somebody is absolutely going to do this again, and I look forward to it.

legit, I remember trying to make a telescope and a pinhole camera when 2.8 released, unfortunately my laptop wasn't fast enough for me to bother trying to make it work.

I actually did something similar but a lot less impressive not too long ago!

Every time I considered it, I just got a wave of randos yelling about caustics in cycles and telling you to use another engine like octane.

*you hope

I think at this point the only thing that would beat this would be a fake real projector to project the fake real photos taken by the fake real camera with a real fake camera inside, and then perhaps take a photo of it with the fake real camera and have the fake real projector project the fake real photo of itself

@@PercyPanleo "I'm thinking the quantum computed metaverse is looking to turn out just fine." he said, unironically.

@@PercyPanleo Create a fake youtube in blender to upload the video

@@PercyPanleo Make a render engine that simulates the physics of electrons being fired at phosphors

fake “real” film processing lab and process when???

In reality, he is amateur engineer, constructing basic device in 3D modeling software using documentation and principles known for 100 years. Still very cool tho.

@@NecumNaTo That he recreated entirely within a couple months with seemingly no prior knowledge

@@ValidT Yes, as would any amateur engineer with no prior knowledge of 100 years known well documented principles do. Still pretty cool tho

@@NecumNaTo In fairness,

@@chrishayes7771 "to be fair tho" to be fair though of what"

replying so he sees this

also replying so he sees this

Also replying

also replying

REPLYING A LITTLE LOUDER

If it makes you feel any better, I feel the same way every time anyone else does anything cool ;)

@@sirrandalot Haha yeah i guess that's how it is with such incredible people in the community. This is by far the most interesting project I've seen in a while, incredible work! Looking forward to you simulating physically accurate photons for more realistic light interactions.

@@sirrandalotso, when’s this .blend file gonna land on Blendermarket? I want to test the insanity myself. >=]

"all rendered useless" 😂

As someone who's learned Blender (and proper 3D modeling/rendering)on and off for a year, I can say anyone can learn if they're interested enough and willing to put in the time. It helped that, like drawing and painting, I try to approach it from a playful perspective. Every scene, render, and/or model is a learning experience. It builds up towards my overall knowledge and skills in that aspect. I don't have imposter syndrome, but during bouts of fatigue and procrastination, I kinda know how it feels.

I tried it. Clean, separated lines only :(

Only works on 32-bit hardware

and structured and edited to perfection

@@kickdowndoors ​absolutely! Mind-boggling. 🙌

actually, just a regular Bachelor lvl in optics, nothing on PhD level there

@@shulehr not really, as it's multidisciplinary to the extreme.

@@untitled6087 90% of it is optics, rest is blender. There is nothing multidisciplinary there. I do have master in optics and these topics were covered in first 2 years of bachelors. Not saying this didnt require effort and alot of time, but still, that is not worth even bachelors degree as far as im concerned. Unless he would write the raytracing code himself and not use blender at all. Then it could be considered as such.

Thats actually how pixar does its shots now. They did a cool breakdown of it for Toy Story 4

@@ItsActuallyTJ_You still have to buy/maintenance the pc and pay the electricity that powers it. Nothing is free.

@@yperokeanios Blender is free as in you can read and modify and recompile the source code, not just that it costs nothing to acquire.

@@niconull23 You need the tools to start working the materials.

@@yperokeanioshe didn’t say “with free materials” he said “with a free program”. Which is true, stop nit picking just for the sake of it idiot

@@yperokeanios nobody said the pc was free. People said the software was free. Read

we live in a simulation

@@Xayuaplol I remember when I was 15 and discovered that as well

​@@XayuapI wonder how the devs are doing sometimes... And if they need some help...

​@@franciscosoares2440 they're doing JUST FINE THANK YOU and yes they need help

Yeah! I started a thread on blender artist two years back looking for tips on creating a better looking procedural film compositing node, but eventually had to stop because of my lack of knowledge on film emulsion layers… I could only dream of getting my hands on this blend file!

Interesting as heck. And it would be possible to simplify all of this physics based modeling into some shaders that approximate it way more efficiently.

Path tracing has essentially been accurate enough to do this since the early 90’s. The biggest changes and advancements since then are simply speed, shortcuts, noise reduction (see shortcuts), and minor light transport algorithm changes. That, and hardware scaling to levels where this is even able to be attempted.

It could be even more efficient, but for some reason he didn't use portals (at least not in any visible part of the video)

@@SupaKoopaTroopa64 I think the entire spirit of this exercise was to blow any efficiency up with an atomic bomb and go for the most exhaustive, least efficient, and most simulated way to possibly do it. 😂

@@itsd0nk Now someone's got to try it without multiple importance sampling LOL

@@SupaKoopaTroopa64 good point, I forgot about portals.

fr

Samesies!!! 😆

Ha, I know at least 4 nerds appreciating it with me!

@who

@@The-Middleman I happen to have a bunch of architect friends, some of who do archviz for a living and are quite nerdy. I also know one software dev, who is a nerd like me - we both dabbled in 3dsmax & Blender a bit.

ive done some comparisons of the Helios 422 that produced similar results, tho my models were based on a diff variation of the actual lens flavor that I got from ebay, lot of variations of that lens floating out there

It depends on where you're trying to do the post-processing. If you still have 3D information, then lens imperfections can be perfectly added back in, basically doing this process and just shortcutting it. If you have 2d information only and you are missing the depth of field data, you can *try* to infer it from how the image looks but there's always going to be something missing.

Chromatic aberration and lens distortion can be easily added on post, and camera setup with focal length and sensor size during modelling.

The simulation is the easy bit. The whole point in ray-trace renderers is that they closely aproximate light. It just takes brute force & time these days. (Yes, I am choosing to ignore 40 years of CG development.)

Simulate light in solids were never a challenge. Make computers that can do that is another story. To cut problems we used approximations that are a LOT faster, but bruteforcing everything is quite easy to program. The neat part is that we have now some knowledge to skip smaller parts and speed the whole process. One of those is killing light that is not on the window.

@@talkysassisyou are correct and knowledgeable but still not “easy” as in don’t think anyone’s doing it in less than a week if they haven’t before, he did a good job

​@@zlobzorNo, no, you're not wrong. Actually, it takes like 2 days to render a single Pixar frame.

fake real grain :P

The grain is why, it's the actual photons landing on the sensor that cause them, that's part of what makes it look soooo good

@@Lancea1ot I don't know, I think it's the real lens elements that make the biggest difference to me. The bokeh, fringing, and lens imperfections really sell the effect, and remind me of the look of older vintage lenses.

Imagine if @kanepixels used this for photographs in his various projects...

the noise actually looks exactly like analog film, so for our eyes used to digital, it looks a bit weird, but if you spend some time with analog film, you'll instantly recognise this lol

Noisiness here isn't a problem with GPU performance but instead time spent rendering. He decided he wanted to spend one week by rendering a bunch of different pictures instead of rendering a single picture for a week. If he'd done that instead it would have been a lot less noisy. Also the increase in performance per generation will not be enough to cut down the render time enough to actually make this less noisy. Renders nowadays use a lot of denoising so getting a denoiser to work instead would be a lot more beneficial

Not really, but a combination of significant perf. improvement in RT cores (which only deal with intersection testing) and further improvements in importance sampling techniques (ReSTiR, Path Guiding) embedded into Cycles might help a bit. Noise is inherent tho

Rt cores are already at real time in games. Just the high end stuff like the 4090. They are also noisy though

Real cameras are noisy though

I am pretty sur ethe noisybess is intentional.

BUT... it needs more yapping.

another horrifying part is editing down everything that just happened down to only 5 and half minutes

Hi dude, loved your scene in spiderverse :)

Wouldn't you just increase the glossiness to something like 0.05 so some light gets bounced back? I don't know how the coating colours would work, maybe giving a tint to the whole lens would be good enough.

​@@judealford6637 no. way.

Thanks for helping with the best movie of the year :)

you helped make the best movie! here b4 popular

As it should, really

And if you already have a regular bachelor's degree? Idk, a free master's degree or something? I don't do academic logistics, but I DO know fantastic art when I see it!

@@saviorofjoy8117 honorary PhD at the least.

​@@saviorofjoy8117he at least deserves an honorary degree.

What? That actually worked?

​@@octimus2000yea he shown the process

YOU HAVE TO TELL ME THE SHADER *NOW*

@@unliving_ball_of_gas it was seus ptgi. if you want to try you should know that the result will not be very impressive (what's impressive is just that it works on principle) , the image is very noisy. But to get a better image you can increase your screen resolution as well as put the in game setting of render resolution to the maximum. More pixels = more samples !

​@@cocacolazero635I disagree, it's absolutely impressive as hell. The noise doesn't even matter that much, when you see the gorgeous lighting it can produce

the process itself is literally science, which he created art from capturing, then used the end product to create more art.

Thanks so much! I'm glad I was able to introduce you to the wonderful world of deleting the default cube ;)

@@sirrandalot hahaha so true

@@sirrandalot lol this video should have had that in when you started building the camera at 0:25 "delete the default cube. now make a cube."

I heard that Toy Story 4 emulated realistic lens properties in its render pipeline. Some of those shots are pretty stunning, especially with the fair at night.

Yeah I was about to say the same thing as dude above me. While (as far as I know) they didn't simulate the three emulsion layers for color in film, they did simulate lens refraction and other stuff physically. The example that dude above means, is a lens that has two focal lenghts in one. So you could have a subject close and far to the lens and both are in focus. That comes at the cost of having a visible line in the middle where the two focal lengths meet, which is visible in the Toy Story 4 movie

Pixar presents Oppenheimer

@@ponyphonic yeah there were parts of the movie when i saw it in the theater where i completely forgot about the story because i was too stunned by the bokeh

​@@derAtzewhere can I see the line? How can I see it? Super interesting topic!!!

I remember reading about Pixar creating virtual versions of IRL types of lenses too.

Simulating a camera is actually a really important part of CGI, if you are mixing real footage with CGI you want the CGI to also be seen with the same camera, however I don't think they do it like this, I think even unity HD render pipeline has simulated camera settings, so some game engines do it as well

@@theaveragepro1749 Pixar doesn't make live action movies though. Lens parameters often don't have the character and feel of the lens, just basic parameters like focal length and aperture/depth of field (also wondering if raster aperture really counts). All game engines have basic lens parameters (FOV is just focal length for example), but what Pixar does, from my memory, is replicating the geometry of real life lenses to make it look as if full animation movies were shot on a real lens. Another thing they do is having operators with motion controllers mounted on real life camera rigs to simulate a handheld feel. Nothing you couldn't do with a couple of parameters in a 3d program or engine, but Pixar goes way beyond that for the sake of authenticity.

You can also simulate lenses as a series of formula defined 2d surfaces. This way you can use the formulas of real lens systems that describe spheric and aspheric surfaces without having to do any modelling.

Check.......