Poster not rendering the way it should

[DeadSpace47]

Note: l have very little to no experience at SFM, especially in terms of mechanics and the technical matters

So I've prepared this scene to render as a poster, but when I render it, it comes out looking almost drastically different than it does before it was rendered; there's lighting where there shouldn't be lighting, and there's a lack of shadows where there should be shadows
l will post some Gyazo links so you can understand better
(Unrendered) https://gyazo.com/e3da8ded8cf94b1f5e7d1fdc6ec4d140
(Rendered) https://gyazo.com/3e4620ccace9f648acc15a010d8cd67d

(Unrendered) https://gyazo.com/05434c32d63392ede13a0c05549e0194
(Rendered) https://gyazo.com/05434c32d63392ede13a0c05549e0194

[episoder]

posters don't render certain fx. like bloom and water is borken.

just render as image.

[DeadSpace47]

1920x1080, png file
All 3 options checked in the render settings and set to 64(for both)for testing. Also AO only

[Zappy]

Don't do a "poster" export. "Poster" exports are known to be buggy in multiple areas (such as post-processing (including bloom and material overlays) not being applied and "decaying" flexes not fully settling). Instead, do an "image" export, like this:

- Right-click the viewport, choose "Render Settings", and set it up as you want.
- Switch to the Clip Editor and have the scene (non-"work") camera active.
- Stay still in time, and wait for the bottom-right sample counter to loop back to "Sample 1 of X".
- Click "File" > "Export" > "Image...", and save it somewhere with the filename ending in ".png" or such, or alternatively click "File" > "Export" > "Image to Clipboard", open an image editor, paste it, and then save it from there.

This will export what's currently in the viewport (thus why you should wait for it to sample out first), at the resolution set in "File" > "Export" > "Movie...".



The last bit means that to use a resolution beyond 1280x720, you should follow these instructions:

- Right-click Source Filmmaker in your Steam library (in the "Software" or "Installed" categories).
- Choose "Properties" > "General" > "Set Launch Options...".
- Make sure "-sfm_resolution X" is present (without quotes), with X being 720 (the default) for exports up to 1280x720, 1080 for up to 1920x1080, or 2160 for up to 3840x2160.
- Reboot Source Filmmaker (ignore any "window too small" warnings) and load the session.
- Click "File" > "Export" > "Movie...", choose the resolution you want, and click "Cancel".
- Save the session and reload the session (to avoid a possible crash).
- Follow the above instructions to export it as an image.
- Optionally change the "movie" resolution back to 1280x720 and save the session.
- Change the "-sfm_resolution X" launch option to have 720 as the number, as higher values can impact performance a lot while working on sessions. (You can also just remove it, but if you keep it in with the value set to 720, it'll be easier/faster to change it to 1080 or 2160 again in the future.)

It may sound like a lot, but that's only because it takes many words to explain few things.

[DeadSpace47]

So far my only launch option is "Remove sfm_resolution 1080", l didn't understand why l should do the movie part

Also, l thought Posters are the way to go when it comes to SFM, l thought most of the arts l seen were made using the poster export. So posters should never be used especially for an inexperienced one like me?

Thanks for your assistance though! It's appreciated, l'll try it tomorrow

[Zappy]

Originally posted by DeadSpace47:

So far my only launch option is "Remove sfm_resolution 1080", l didn't understand why l should do the movie part -

Because "image" exports automatically go by the video export resolution that's currently set.

Originally posted by DeadSpace47:

- So posters should never be used especially for an inexperienced one like me? -

"Poster" exports should never be done, regardless of how much experience one has. However, "poster" exports will suffice in some cases, though "image" exports will still be equal/better in most cases.

[DeadSpace47]

l see...
At least now l know more about my tools
l guess now my option is to remove the launch option l mentioned above yes?

[Zappy]

Originally posted by DeadSpace47:

- l guess now my option is to remove the launch option l mentioned above yes?

Why/What for?

[DeadSpace47]

Never mind,a wrong thought about it
Thank you wholeheartedly!

[DeadSpace47]

Originally posted by Zappy:

Originally posted by DeadSpace47:

- l guess now my option is to remove the launch option l mentioned above yes?

Why/What for?

So l seemed to have found the problem, with a help from a friend of mine, the blame is the radius
That slider for the lights, l had them on high as it seems and when my friend zeroed them, they saw the difference
l wanted to see if this is true from you

[Zappy]

Originally posted by DeadSpace47:

So l seemed to have found the problem, with a help from a friend of mine, the blame is the radius That slider for the lights, l had them on high as it seems and when my friend zeroed them, they saw the difference l wanted to see if this is true from you

Depending on what you mean, the "poster" export did have the light correct. A light's "radius" slider determines how much the light moves around when sampling to simulate that the light doesn't come from a single infinitely small spot (much like the camera does for depth of field), but sampling can only occur when doing "poster"/"movie"(/video) exports and when staying still in time in the Clip Editor with the scene (non-"work") camera active. This means that the "radius" slider's effect can not be seen when using the "work" camera and/or while in the Motion/Graph Editor.

[DeadSpace47]

So when it's the suitable time to use the radius? Does it requires on multiple lights as well? And if it's possible to never actually have to use it in art making
l prefer whatever l see in the Motion editor to be in the final result(final render)

[Marco Skoll]

Originally posted by DeadSpace47:

So when it's the suitable time to use the radius?

Radius causes a light to have a penumbra and antumbra, rather than just an umbra[en.wikipedia.org], giving the impression of being a larger area light source by randomising the position of the light slightly between samples.

While a flash light would have a near zero radius, a large fire should have a generous radius to stop it casting unrealistically sharp shadows.
Similarly, lights representing reflected light off a wall or floor should generally have a high radius, because the ambient lighting from these sources should be more diffuse.

l prefer whatever l see in the Motion editor to be in the final result(final render)

This is never possible unless you're exporting in awful quality and ignoring several of the effects in SFM. The motion editor never samples, so you cannot use effects like depth of field, motion blur, light radius or anti-aliasing.

You need to go to a paused clip editor (and the scene camera) to get SFM to get the progressive refinement to kick in and show you the final result of the scene.
As you have to switch between modes to test and edit the effect, it does mean that some effects can be a bit of a case of trial and error, but you do get a sense for it quite fast.

[Zappy]

Originally posted by DeadSpace47:

So when it's the suitable time to use the radius? Does it requires on multiple lights as well? And if it's possible to never actually have to use it in art making -

Depending on what you mean, the "radius" slider of a light is, again, used to simulate that a light source is not infinitely tiny. As a real-life example, a light bulb may be a few centimeters wide, and the sun is very, very large, but also very, very far away so it appears much, much smaller (but still not infinitely small).

Again, a light's "radius" can be compared to a camera's depth of field settings, except without a focal distance. The result of a light having a "radius" is that an object's shadow can get blurrier the farther away it is from whatever it's casting a shadow onto.
(This is also the case in real life; If you hold a hand close to a wall, you may see the shape of the fingers clearly on the shadow, but the shadow may get blurrier the farther away from the wall the hand is. This is also why you can have a sharp shadow outside in bright sunlight, but almost no noticeable shadow at all if it's very cloudy (as the clouds, to my limited understanding, basically spread the light around more evenly).)

Originally posted by DeadSpace47:

- l prefer whatever l see in the Motion editor to be in the final result(final render)

Don't prefer that. For any sort of indicative preview, you would cut the performance down to roughly an 8th (12.5%) of what it normally would be, and for a reasonable preview, you would cut the performance down to roughly a 32nd (3.125%) of what it normally would be. That's not nice. Edit: To clarify, no, you can not enable sampling outside of the specific instances I mentioned earlier.

Or if you're talking about that you don't want sampling to occur in final exports, that's easily toggle-off-able, but will look much worse.

[DeadSpace47]

So in other words, always wait and check in the clip editor before rendering or deciding to put more lights/modify lights?
l thank you both for your very helpful and detailed explanations!

[Zappy]

Originally posted by DeadSpace47:

So in other words, always wait and check in the clip editor before rendering or deciding to put more lights/modify lights? -

Not necessarily "always", but yes.