[Sidefx-houdini-list] Linear Workflow
emailgeneonthelist at gmail.com
Thu Aug 26 12:09:26 EDT 2010
Just don't ask me how to do that yet ;)
I'm still learnin' houdini.
On Thu, Aug 26, 2010 at 9:08 AM, Gene Crucean
<emailgeneonthelist at gmail.com>wrote:
> These threads are always so interesting :)
> All you should have to do in Houdini is use a LUT for test renders, and
> apply a gamma correction to input texture maps that aren't linear. Then
> render to a linear format like exr.
> On Thu, Aug 26, 2010 at 8:49 AM, Francois Duchesneau <sidefx at trinix.ca>wrote:
>> Great clarification. I'll keep that as a reference because when I will
>> think I've figureg it out I'll realize there's still something wrong :)
>> > On Thursday 26 August 2010 08:27:06 am François Duchesneau wrote:
>> >> This subject confuses me.
>> >> I thought Houdini already worked in linear space?
>> > It does, inasmuch as it doesn't assume anything other than linear.
>> > won't
>> > *add* to any existing LUT/sRGB issues, unless you ask it to.
>> >> I thought Photoshop only generated sRGB texture so we have to apply a
>> >> lut (or a gamma correction to approximate it) when we read those
>> >> textures in our shaders?
>> > Well, you should, assuming you want to work in linear. When you
>> look at
>> > your
>> > PS image on your computer, it looks "right", that's precisely what
>> > Microsoft
>> > invented sRGB for, so that would happen. Pop it over to mplay, by
>> > default(gamma 1), it looks the same. Thing is, that's incorrect, it's
>> > linear. It *should* look "dark" at gamma 1 in order to be linear. The
>> > confusion comes about because you're looking at the image through the
>> > filter
>> > of a monitor that isn't linear, you want to pull that out of the
>> > If
>> > you set mplay gamma to 2.2, that's a decent approximation of what a
>> > image looks like, and by default your PS export will look washed out.
>> > want to convert it to linear first(as Gene correctly points out, running
>> > it
>> > through Nuke and using a Colourspace node to do it is more accurate than
>> > simply inverse 2.2, but it's close).
>> >> When I read a Houdini image in Nuke. I set the read to linear and my
>> >> viewer color space to "none" and my image is exactly how I see it in
>> >> Mantra. Nuke works in linear so the gamma correction should be at the
>> >> end of it?
>> > To clarify, Nuke makes assumptions about the colourspace of your
>> > based
>> > purely on the file format(this can be tweaked in prefs). By default, a
>> > tiff
>> > image is assumed to be sRGB and an exr is linear. If you rendered a
>> > constant
>> > shader of that tiff image in mantra and rendered out an exr, then read
>> > both in
>> > Nuke, they will look different(assuming default prefs). You should be
>> > looking
>> > at *everything* in houdini with gamma 2.2, the viewport, mplay,
>> > you
>> > can do now in H11!). You convert your incoming sRGB images to linear
>> > first,
>> > they will look correct in all those contexts.
>> > The above example, you want your Nuke viewer(as a rule, mind you)
>> to be
>> > sRGB,
>> > not none, because just like with mplay set to 2.2 gamma, you want to
>> > out
>> > all srGB references, then at the tail end you pop your 2.2 gamma or
>> > similar
>> > LUT in there have it look 'correct'.
>> > All of this assumes you want to be working linear, of course.
>> > lots
>> > of people out there that never do film that live in an sRGB world and
>> > can
>> > happily go about working as if sRGB is an invisible filter laid over top
>> > of
>> > every last thing they're working on, since in the end it gets displays
>> > an
>> > sRGB buffer(or close). The one downside I would point out, though, is
>> > that
>> > light behaviour with PBR won't be the same, really I would argue this is
>> > good reason to consider linear workflow even outside of film.
>> >> Why do we have to set the gamma correction to "Gamma 2.2" to match XSI
>> >> linear space????
>> > If you're referring to the setting in the ROP that Mario
>> suggested, all
>> > that
>> > does is pour more sampling into the dark areas, it doesn't change
>> > colourspace
>> > per se. It's a handy trick especially if your final product ends up on
>> > TV. I
>> > suspect even in film it's handy for certain shots.
>> > Nuke's assumption about colourspace based on format drove me mad
>> when I
>> > first
>> > encountered it. Now the Foundry has added the ability to tweak those
>> > assumptions and I understand the pipeline, it's actually rather handy
>> > detecting things you're missed. I went through plenty of hair pulling
>> > this
>> > topic, believe me. I understand your pain. ;)
>> > Cheers,
>> > J.C.
>> > ---
>> > John Coldrick
>> > 416-504-0425
>> > jc at axyzfx.com
>> > -----------------------------------------------------------------------
>> > Life does not cease to be funny when people die any more than it ceases
>> > to be serious when people laugh.
>> > - George Bernard Shaw
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > Sidefx-houdini-list mailing list
>> > Sidefx-houdini-list at sidefx.com
>> > https://lists.sidefx.com:443/mailman/listinfo/sidefx-houdini-list
>> Sidefx-houdini-list mailing list
>> Sidefx-houdini-list at sidefx.com
> [Gene Crucean] - [VFX & CG Supervisor/Generalist]
> ** Freelance for hire **
[Gene Crucean] - [VFX & CG Supervisor/Generalist]
** Freelance for hire **
More information about the Sidefx-houdini-list