Backface material creating noise (or line)


  • So everytime I have a different material applied underneath my main, here the example is on the further couch. If I change my camera angle it does the same for the 2 classical chairs of the table. So I find myself needing to optimize the model a lot before being able to get something neat.


    Also, maybe the problem is face related. Because let's say I have a box with 6 faces. If I put myself in it, the sun light can enter from edges. Its like Enscape does not recognize the welding of the polys.


    I have tons of examples it has been there for a while now.

  • About the forum link you sent me. I get the problem yes. Is that what you wanted me to understand ?


    Because like some users said: if there are more than one material in a group… you can't apply it generically. Also if a material is metallic the borders will create noise ( white)

  • About the forum link you sent me. I get the problem yes. Is that what you wanted me to understand ?


    Because like some users said: if there are more than one material in a group… you can't apply it generically. Also if a material is metallic the borders will create noise ( white)

    As was said in that thread: To eliminate the problem, fill the group (wrapper, not the individual faces) with the main colour: it will make the 'white' bits the same colour as the faces and you won't get them any more. {If this is not an option, then you need to fill both inside and outside faces with the same material to eliminate the problem.}


    I have not experienced the noise border on metallic objects, so can't comment on that.

  • Just try it, four walls (four faces). There is a welding problem between profiles/faces.


    I suppose it is the same principle that applies to the "backfacing" problem. We wouldn't have to worry about it if at its roots, two faces joint by there profiles would not let the light pass through. It's why I believe that the backfacing problem is in fact the light that enters the objects' interiors and by the same logic exits from its faces' profiles.


    I don't think there would be a need to "discard backfaces rendering" or use an extension to UV MAP it, or to just paint over every single groups of every component of your model. I don't know the backend of Enscape but maybe there is a way to make it know that profiles that touches on exact same axis X'Y'Z are a whole. Although I know nothing about it so you tell me!

  • Hi :-)


    I've noticed that my video exports comes out with some flickering white highlights on my geometry. It happens on very detailed geometry.

    i'm using the latest preview version, and the compression quality is at the highest setting. auto contrast and auto exposure is turned off. exporting at 4k seems to reduce it a bit, but it is not gone.


    See the videos in these links:


    https://1drv.ms/v/s!AtDmbdAqfyUvgZMUcUgF34iRiFGaTg


    https://1drv.ms/v/s!AtDmbdAqfyUvgZF2S5qdrj4aWMloVQ


    The flickering occurs on the facade. it has some rounded/beveled edges, and it looks like it is the highligts on these edges that causes the problem.


    any tips on how to avoid this behavior? or any tips on how to get rid of it in post?

  • benjaminriendeau  Herbo This obviously shouldn't happen. I'll check back with our developers regards the status.

  • That looks like the back-face showing through to me (I have found that it's only visible with a DOF applied New Preview Version)

    Post production, you could generate the same video without the DOF and merge the two, but I would think it's less work to simply find these elements, group them and fill the group with the texture and re-do the video (it should fix the problem).

  • A fix for the DOF issue should be available in our next preview version.

    Regards the backface material shining through without DOF, we'll have a closer look.

  • i did some more experiments to get rid of the flickering lines in my videos, but without much luck.

    I just tried to paint all the back faces in the same material, but the flicker is still present when i export movies with DOF enabled. It happens on my rounded/beveled edges where highlights occur, like these in the facade:


    - there is no issues in static images, it seems...but in animations, it turns into this:


    https://1drv.ms/v/s!AtDmbdAqfyUvgZNVZ68Fl6MnAVjoFA


    When I dissable DOF I get something much more usable... but without DOF there is a lot of creative limitation for a project like this :-)


    https://1drv.ms/v/s!AtDmbdAqfyUvgZNdCBNhCa-sE3WvYw


    I hope for a solution soon, as the "backside material trick" didn't solve it in this case :-)

  • Herbo , do you still experience any problems while using our latest preview? :) Let me know if you do.

    as i wrote in the announcement thread it seems to have gotten a LOT better :-) much more usable now! again, great job from your side! i would still love to have a bit more control over the DOF... a wider focused area with a blurred background is still hard to achieve :-)

  • Herbo , happy to hear that! :) I'll gladly file a corresponding feature request to allow for more control over DOF - maybe you could let me know which further controls/adjustments you'd like to see implemented exactly?

  • Demian Gutberlet I think we actually covered it a lot in this thread :-) :


    Focal Range


    - my initial suggestion was working with a "focal range" rather than a "focal point"... this could be two sliders, defining a near- and far distance for the area which should stay in focus :-) That way we could keep an entire subject in focus, and have a nice, blurred background... something that is very difficult right now :-)


    alternatively there could be two sliders; one controlling the focal point, just as now... and a secondary one, controlling the width of the focus range... (eg. select focal point first, then define how much of the area in front and behind of this point should stay in focus).


    I hope you can find a simple elegant solution for this :-)

  • Thanks a lot Herbo , I've added your feedback to an already existing very similar feature request, so be assured that your voice is now on our agenda as well. :) Again, thanks for the suggestions! ;)