Many people do not understand what the bidirectional method and Metropolis light transport are designed for. These methods trace rays from both the camera and the light source, which is why you get caustics, without relying on photon maps or any other helpers in the process. This approach is very accurate, which is why it takes time to converge. However, why would you use it in simple interior scenes with mostly diffuse materials and then complain that LuxCore is slow? It is not slow, it is actually very fast.
@@DiffractionLimited I do quantum optics/imaging. One related hot topics in the research community is the localization of light in a disordered medium, which might be very interesting to do some visuals.
Thanks for making this excellent tutorial! I think I'm going to try this myself. I also want to try out the Python script you wrote for the wave simulations or ask if you would maybe be interested to make them. So, I wonder whether I could contact you directly by email. There does not seem to be a link or email address on your channel. You can let me know if you are open to this through the "about" page of my channel or the huygens optics website
Hi, so first: I added a contact email to my channel. If you need a simulation, just write me what you have in mind. I am happy to make one for you. If you try the python program, let me know if you have any trouble getting it to run so I can fix the issues. Also thank you for the kind words :)
Great tutorial. I'm having my own fight with blendluxcore now, and it's great, but it still seems to have some quirks. Like for getting the fog volume to appear I need to connect to outside volume instead of inside volume for the fog not to fill the whole scene. Plus, the beam then actually only shows up as a reflection on the table, not in the volume itself. Are these real quirks, or am I just missing out stuff?
It is not slow, it can be very fast if you have a good GPU and know how to optimize the rendering settings. The bidirectional rendering option is often overkill for simple scenes unless you're working with caustics, dispersion, or random optical tests like in this video. However, I can assure you that if you choose any rendering engine right now, you won't achieve faster rendering than LuxCore, especially when it comes to volumetric light and caustics.
Many people do not understand what the bidirectional method and Metropolis light transport are designed for. These methods trace rays from both the camera and the light source, which is why you get caustics, without relying on photon maps or any other helpers in the process. This approach is very accurate, which is why it takes time to converge. However, why would you use it in simple interior scenes with mostly diffuse materials and then complain that LuxCore is slow? It is not slow, it is actually very fast.
This is very useful indeed. I might start to use these kind of simulations for the figure of my future papers!
Thank you. Sounds like a great idea. I always apreciate nice visual explainations in papers. Whats your research area?
@@DiffractionLimited I do quantum optics/imaging. One related hot topics in the research community is the localization of light in a disordered medium, which might be very interesting to do some visuals.
Thanks for making this excellent tutorial! I think I'm going to try this myself. I also want to try out the Python script you wrote for the wave simulations or ask if you would maybe be interested to make them. So, I wonder whether I could contact you directly by email. There does not seem to be a link or email address on your channel. You can let me know if you are open to this through the "about" page of my channel or the huygens optics website
Hi, so first: I added a contact email to my channel. If you need a simulation, just write me what you have in mind. I am happy to make one for you. If you try the python program, let me know if you have any trouble getting it to run so I can fix the issues. Also thank you for the kind words :)
Amazing engine I hope they it gets funded soon.
Great tutorial. I'm having my own fight with blendluxcore now, and it's great, but it still seems to have some quirks. Like for getting the fog volume to appear I need to connect to outside volume instead of inside volume for the fog not to fill the whole scene. Plus, the beam then actually only shows up as a reflection on the table, not in the volume itself. Are these real quirks, or am I just missing out stuff?
Mindblowing. Is it accurate to the lenses shape and resolution, if you place it in front of the camera?
What version of blender is this on? LuxCore version 2.6 should work between Blender 2.82 to 2.93 LTS but on 2.83 LTS it doesn't work.
is there anyway to reduce or use gpu instead of cpu while rendering
Can Luxcore render calculate wave feature of light? like interference pattern
Unfortunately not, its a ray simulation only.
Now *that* would be awesome! But alas, even many commercial optics design packages don't do that...
Old LuxRender had an option for irregular data to input light wave frequencies and it was fully spectral rendering engine.
LuxCore is slow AF.
It is not slow, it can be very fast if you have a good GPU and know how to optimize the rendering settings. The bidirectional rendering option is often overkill for simple scenes unless you're working with caustics, dispersion, or random optical tests like in this video. However, I can assure you that if you choose any rendering engine right now, you won't achieve faster rendering than LuxCore, especially when it comes to volumetric light and caustics.