Why do people render like 5000 layers when exporting something to nuke,fusion, after effects or whatever from their 3D program instead of just doing like 1 or 2 so you don't have to waste 50 hours in the compositing program trying to stick this all together? I saw a guy who added a trash bin to a 3D tracked scene and the fucking trash bin had like 10 layers in which shit like shadows to the ground and shadows to the wall were in separate layers, for what fucking purpose.
better final quality. but to be honest you can achieve great quality with making great assets. proven by many ue4 renders
>>583295Wat, the quality is literally the same as of if you rendered them all at the same time, only you have some meaningless option like for example you can color correct the reflections or some other stupid shit.
>>583293Well, it lets you fine tune certain aspects of the image without touching others, why guess how to touch up the shadows when you have a mathematically perfect representation? In some cases you can even bake out different lights and blend together the ideal setup in post instead of messing around with test renders all day.Or let's say you export reflections, GI and other layers containing image data that can be fairly noisy at lower sample rates but don't actually contribute significant detail to the image, with these things in their own layer you can apply noise reduction to smooth the image out instead of doubling render times on needlessly high settings as you hit dimishing returns.
>>583293>not just compositing in blender
>>583293>>583296>what is compositingyou guys need to get some knowledge on the subject, that's all. don't act like its retarded just because you're ignorant>>583334this thread's obligatory blenderfag
>>583337Please enlighten us
>>583339bah, just start by looking at a bunch of nuke or after effects tutorials and get the general idea behind it.. Its kinda like Photoshop giving the advantage of layering or shooting picture in the RAW mode: overall you're looking for a sense of control over the elements composing your imagePasses/AOVs like diffuse, GI, specular, lighting, shadows, zdepth, etc allow you to extract or isolate those individual informations to tweak a flattened RGB render, or "build up" the whole image yourself. Like >>583297 was saying, you basically have more control over everything. Also, you can usually work in a non-destructive manner with 32bit passes, which is better than going apeshit over a jpg. You can thus enhance and change a bunch of things in post, big or small, and tweak more minute details easily than if you were trying to change a bunch of stuff in your 3D scene. This workflow is also incredibly useful if you're trying to integrate renders in video/photo footage; with proper comp work, the result will probably look way more believable than just a raw render.Post-prod, be it for 3D, video footage, photography, etc. is a crucial step for any artist wanting to make his images look better and to his exact taste.
>>583339kek looks like this guy was enlightened and left
>>583347Yep >>583340 showed him.
>>583334Blender has a fucking legit compositor. I love using it for still images, but for animations it does suffer. Hard to go back and forth from the Compositor and the VSE, but it's doable.
>>583293There's definitely a middle ground. Some people export all channels in case they need one of them, but yeah, I think it's overkill when you're rendering out a bunch of extra passes on the off chance you wanna change that background reflection from blue to bluish. I usually export an AO, Z-depth, and maybe a base color and reflection pass, if that. Usually that's more than enough to make effective changes in the compositing.
kristin stewart is a mean bitch.
>>583340>>583347I was actually sleeping.Thats what i said. This shit is all micro-management.
>>583340Half of the things you listed can be tweaked in maya/houdini/cinema4d whatever itself and many of them you probably wouldn't even touch later on.
>>583383Yes, and your point is?
>>583384Why waste time exporting them in different layers and then combining them if its already tweaked?
>>583385If its already tweaked, then it is a waste of time and you've already got your beauty render.BUT imagine your Boss comes in 5 minutes before finishing time and says the customer wants the reflection on that pink Lamborghini more purple and more glossy.
>>583390>things that never happen
>>583382>implying tweaking a bunch of small details in a creative process is shit>implying post-production can't be used even for big changes when neededmfw /3/ will shit on every project posted here but isnt willing to go the extra step to enhance the quality of their work>>583393>things that never happenkek, this kind of thing happens all the time.Just this week I had a client saying that a character in the foreground of my render felt too in the shadows and contrasted. With 3 very simple passes that I already had (GI, lighting, normals), the issue was resolved in 2min, which was way more efficient than going back in my 3D scene, change the lighting, and rerender.
>>583453>things that never happen
Correct me if i am wrong but wouldn't the easiest way to do this without creating a mess in the project be doing all the passes in one set of exr files and just using the shuffle+merge nodes in Nuke or whatever you are using when you need to modify them? Seems better than combining fucking everything.
>>583598That is one option to keep it tidy. Cryptomatte is another way. I am fairly new to this workflow, but C4d for example can export a .nuke scene file for you together with AOVs. (also After FX)So you actually have to do nothing, the nuke file contains the merge operations/nodes to recreate the beauty pass.Blender has a Nuke exporter, i don't know about Maya. Pretty sure there is something similar.
>>583598>Correct me if i am wrong butNah the way you explained it seems alright