as the title says, i would want to know if it’s possible to render objects which are outside of my viewport.
I tried any custom resolutions/ratios and viewport sizes, but it’s always limited to my fullscreen viewport.
For example picture #1: I want to show a bit more of my highrise building in the background (without giving up my width), but i don’t know how (if it’s even possible).
Second question would be, if i change my output ratio for example to 1:2 (w/h): is it possible to shift the perspective which i want to be rendered? It seems like vray will always choose to render the center of my actual view.
I hope you understand my questions and i apologize in advance if there was already a topic about it. I scrolled/skipped through the search results but couldn’t find anything helpful.
Thank you very much!
First question - if you set your ratio to 1:1 and set the horizontal view like before, than you should get more of the building in the background. Best you switch to two-point camera and so you can angle the camera so that the lower edge is kept too. And best you work with a new added floating viewport or a multi viewport design, so that you can easier adjust the ratio of the viewport.
For your second question - I suppose so you missed the horizontal/vertical shift.
It’s not added to V-Ray for Rhino yet. I missed this options too. Maybe this parameter set could be added to VfR5. @Nikolay Is there a chance? Could be very useful for pro architecture viz.
first off, Zawa, you are not limited to the viewport size when rendering in any way. The active viewport is only used to capture the main camera parameters - fov, aspect, direction etc. By using a custom render size, you can easily achieve what you want. Just enable the safe frame and you will able to see what will be part of the rendering without being part of the viewport (or vice versa)
that little triangle means exactly that you’ll get more into the image than you have in the view.
On the other topic, Micha, to be honest, there is a ticket on our to-do list that Fernando opened like 4 years ago - “lock camera orientation”. That is to position your view and safe frame and then “lock” your render view, then you’re free to rotate your viewport camera as you like. This could easily include any shifts, custom FOV, clippings, etc.
Since there is some incentive now (2 people in 4 years asked for it), we might consider the effort. We are going in the direction of “per-viewport render view settings” anyway, so just wait for it.
I know the tilt/shift options are not daily needed, but some times it’s needed. I suppose so most for your advanced users.
For example a client wanted to get a view like this - horizontal and vertical lines aligned to the image edges and the viewpoint not at the middle. OK, I can render a wider view and crop it in post work, but if a large poster size is needed or an animation … .
I’m curious for "per-viewport render view settings”.
Sidenote: an option for features which are not implemented to the UI could be the possibility to enable seldom needed features per text lists (for example like the Octane UI). So, features could be fast added to VfR.
Thanks to both of you for your replies!
Unfortunately I didn’t quite get it. @Nikolay So first, that safe frame option was never used by me, but it seems really helpful
And yes it really does what you said, but the arrows only show in the horizontal or vertical line, but never in both directions (?) @Micha (+ @Nikolay) as soon as i change my ratio, it shrinks my width and i don’t know how to avoid that.
For example i’m using a ratio of 3:1 (in the first picture of my first post), which is just a little bit wider than what i see on the full screen of my monitor. But when i try to change the height which also changes the ratio, this comes out as a result:
@Zawa: You like to add more image space at the top only but this would cause, that the perspective center isn’t in the middle of the view anymore. This doesn’t work for the standard viewport. But you can switch to the Rhino 2-point-perspective mode and turn your camera upward. You get more sky and the vertical lines stay vertical.
@Nikolay The Octane list are the only UI of Octane. Yes, lists are like .vropt file, but more clean, easier to read for humans, no special syntax is needed, only a table with name and value. I expect something like:
.
GI
GI saturation 0.5
GI secondary multiplier 0.8
.
Camera
Tilt vertical 0.2
Tilt horizontal 0.0
Shift vertical 0.2
Shift horizontal 0.0
This options tables could be placed at the global options, at materials and at the object V-Ray properties. There could be found all options which are supported by the core engine but got no place at the UI. For a first run a global option table could nice.
so it is basically a UI of some sort for the .vropt, got it
We have something similar in mind for Grasshopper, where that is a serious problem. In Rhino you have .vropts and script access, so at least there is a way (ugly, but still a way)
It is already on 2-point-perspective and I’d like to avoid changing the camera angle, because i already imported some people into the scene. Further, by changing the angle towards the sky and the building i would lose my view on the ground which was my main focus in this perspective
@Zawa I think turning the camera to the sky and move the camera up should give you what you are looking for. The old way would be to set a wider camera angle and later cut away the unwanted part of the image. The 2-point-perspective allow to do the same without to cut anything away.
@Nikolay Using .vropt is quite difficult since the options are quite hidden and writing a script for every little function und add it to a button is also not userfriedly. Loading options from a drop down list could be quick&simple and no complex UI coding would be necessary.
Or is there a good visopt viewer available? Best started from within Rhino without save vropt file and read back.
I’m still amateurish with Rhino/Vray, so i assumed that it would be a simple matter to just adjust the height of the render by a little bit
However, I just tested a wider angle/lower lens length like you proposed and it works! Cutting away isn’t that much of a problem in the end. I never tried this option because i thought changing the lens length would distort the view/perspective of the human eye too much, but the result is exactly the same:
