Baking ray distance do not work. #62422

New Issue

Vyacheslav Kobozev · 2019-03-10T17:39:40+01:00

Vyacheslav Kobozev commented

2019-03-10 17:39:40 +01:00

System Information
Operating system: win7x64

Blender Version
Broken: 2.80 (sub 47), a0f2923fd8, 2019-03-08 21:52
2.79 main too

Short description of error
Baking emissive from object causes strange additional lines.

With cage it becomes even worse

Exact steps for others to reproduce the error
Here the file. Try to bake Emissive from Donor to Recipient with Cage or without
111blend.blend

**System Information** Operating system: win7x64 **Blender Version** Broken: 2.80 (sub 47), a0f2923fd821, 2019-03-08 21:52 2.79 main too **Short description of error** Baking emissive from object causes strange additional lines. ![190335.jpg](https://archive.blender.org/developer/F6795715/190335.jpg) With cage it becomes even worse ![190348.jpg](https://archive.blender.org/developer/F6795720/190348.jpg) **Exact steps for others to reproduce the error** Here the file. Try to bake Emissive from Donor to Recipient with Cage or without [111blend.blend](https://archive.blender.org/developer/F6795710/111blend.blend)

Vyacheslav Kobozev commented

2019-03-10 17:39:40 +01:00

Added subscriber: @Vyach

Vyacheslav Kobozev commented

2019-03-10 17:45:45 +01:00

Ok. It seems, that ray distance do not work for backface and inside of mesh. So cap and border baked on the bottom. And side was baked on the top:

Here the file with success baking

success.blend

And i forced to put cage inside recipient.
Should it work this way?
Why ray distance do not work at all?

Ok. It seems, that ray distance do not work for backface and inside of mesh. So cap and border baked on the bottom. And side was baked on the top: ![190355.jpg](https://archive.blender.org/developer/F6795783/190355.jpg) Here the file with success baking [success.blend](https://archive.blender.org/developer/F6795825/success.blend) And i forced to put cage inside recipient. Should it work this way? Why ray distance do not work at all?

Vyacheslav Kobozev changed title from ~~Baking artefacts object to object~~ to Baking ray distance do not work.

2019-03-10 18:04:32 +01:00

Vyacheslav Kobozev commented

2019-03-10 20:06:44 +01:00

As I found it works now back way: rays shooting from selected to active and hits inner cage.
Ray distance is not working at all.
Ofcourse cage extrusion is not working with backray: it extrudes only outside as it should.

As I found it works now back way: rays shooting from selected to active and hits inner cage. Ray distance is not working at all. Ofcourse cage extrusion is not working with backray: it extrudes only outside as it should.

Sebastian Parborg commented

2019-03-14 14:41:38 +01:00

Added subscriber: @ZedDB

Dalai Felinto was assigned by Sebastian Parborg

2019-03-14 14:41:38 +01:00

Sebastian Parborg commented

2019-03-14 14:41:38 +01:00

I can confirm that ray distance doesn't seem to work.
No matter what distance the bottom face of the active object will hit the top of the bake object even though the rays should be able to reach.

At least that is what I think should happen by reading the manual: https://docs.blender.org/manual/en/dev/render/cycles/baking.html?highlight=ray%20distance

I can confirm that ray distance doesn't seem to work. No matter what distance the bottom face of the active object will hit the top of the bake object even though the rays should be able to reach. At least that is what I think should happen by reading the manual: https://docs.blender.org/manual/en/dev/render/cycles/baking.html?highlight=ray%20distance

Vyacheslav Kobozev commented

2019-03-17 12:40:37 +01:00

@ZedDB, I felt that is something wrong before manual. Then I read it. And it is still not working as in manual or as expected(intuitive way).

Ingmar Franz commented

2019-04-27 16:05:52 +02:00

Added subscriber: @IngmarFranz

Ingmar Franz commented

2019-04-27 16:05:52 +02:00

There should be a rewriting of the manual concerning "ray distance", because it's not clear what the difference is between** "ray distance"**("cage" not checked) and "cage extrusion" ("cage" checked):
https://blenderartists.org/t/baking-with-cage-ray-distance-vs-extrusion/681424

Could it have to do with split vertex normals as explained generally here (left image):
http://wiki.polycount.com/wiki/Texture_Baking#Cages

This could be the case since the blender manual (https://docs.blender.org/manual/en/latest/render/cycles/baking.html)
writes for "cage extrusion":

"The inward rays are casted from a version of the active object with disabled Edge Split Modifiers."

Then, "ray distance"would automatically create a cage object butwithout removing any Edge Split Modifier like "cage extrusion" does?
NOTE: I've tested it and didn't find the Edge Split Modifier beeing removed with Cage Extrusion active (Blender 2.8 Beta). Marking edges as sharp always affects Cage extrusion (even without Edge Split Modifier)

According to Blender's source code in ui.py (blender-git\blender\intern\cycles\blender\addon), lines 1866 to 1871,
"ray distance"also issome kind of cage extrusion:

col.prop(cbk, "use_cage", text="Cage")
if cbk.use_cage:
col.prop(cbk, "cage_extrusion", text="Extrusion")
col.prop(cbk, "cage_object", text="Cage Object")
else:
col.prop(cbk, "cage_extrusion", text="Ray Distance")

If I understand it right, the manually created cage object replaces the cage object created automatically "extrusion", since the Blender manual writes:

"Object to use as cageinsteadof calculating the cage from the active object with the Cage Extrusion."

Member cgCody on blenderartist (link above) sees "extrusion" as on offset to the manually created cage object.

If "ray distance" and cage "extrusion" aren't the same, is there an example to illustrate this?

There should be a rewriting of the manual concerning **"ray distance"**, because it's not clear what the difference is between** "ray distance"**("cage" not checked) and **"cage extrusion"** ("cage" checked): https://blenderartists.org/t/baking-with-cage-ray-distance-vs-extrusion/681424 Could it have to do with **split vertex normals** as explained generally here (left image): http://wiki.polycount.com/wiki/Texture_Baking#Cages This could be the case since the blender manual (https://docs.blender.org/manual/en/latest/render/cycles/baking.html) writes for "cage extrusion": "The inward rays are casted from a version of the active object with **disabled Edge Split Modifiers**." Then, **"ray distance"**would automatically create a cage object but**without removing any Edge Split Modifier** like "cage extrusion" does? NOTE: I've tested it and didn't find the Edge Split Modifier beeing removed with Cage Extrusion active (Blender 2.8 Beta). Marking edges as sharp always affects Cage extrusion (even without Edge Split Modifier) According to **Blender's source code** in ui.py (blender-git\blender\intern\cycles\blender\addon), lines 1866 to 1871, **"ray distance"**also is**some kind of cage extrusion**: > col.prop(cbk, "use_cage", text="Cage") > if cbk.use_cage: > col.prop(cbk, "cage_extrusion", text="Extrusion") > col.prop(cbk, "cage_object", text="Cage Object") > else: > col.prop(cbk, "cage_extrusion", text="Ray Distance") If I understand it right, the **manually created cage object** *replaces* the **cage object created automatically "extrusion"**, since the Blender manual writes: "Object to use as cage**instead**of calculating the cage from the active object with the Cage Extrusion." Member cgCody on blenderartist (link above) sees "extrusion" as on offset to the manually created cage object. If "ray distance" and cage "extrusion" aren't the same, is there an example to illustrate this?

Vyacheslav Kobozev commented

2019-05-17 04:15:26 +02:00

In #62422#666997, @IngmarFranz

Thanks for explanation, but in this specific case only cage/extrusion fail, because there is no ray-limit.
As I can understand, it should work like this:

Purple is size of manual cage or extrusion. Black is object with semitransparent parts (baking source) and length of cyan ray will prevent backside baking.

Also there should be such image in the manual. It will work much better than hundred words. And I can do nice scheme, if you need.

> In #62422#666997, @IngmarFranz Thanks for explanation, but in this specific case only cage/extrusion fail, because there is no ray-limit. As I can understand, it should work like this: ![2181110.jpg](https://archive.blender.org/developer/F7042295/2181110.jpg) Purple is size of manual cage or extrusion. Black is object with semitransparent parts (baking source) and length of cyan ray will prevent backside baking. Also there should be such image in the manual. It will work much better than hundred words. And I can do nice scheme, if you need.

Vyacheslav Kobozev commented

2019-06-10 16:15:28 +02:00

any changes?

Vyacheslav Kobozev commented

2019-07-10 01:47:42 +02:00

I hope, it will be fixed for release at least :(

Joe Elliott commented

2019-07-16 06:41:24 +02:00

Added subscriber: @EllJNidan

Joe Elliott commented

2019-07-16 06:41:24 +02:00

Bear with me: I promise, this is relevant.

TL,DR: The "Ray Distance" setting in Cycles for texture baking, that seems to have replaced the "Distance" setting in Blender Internal, does not do the same thing. If it's supposed to do the same thing, it's broken and should be fixed; if it's supposed to do something different, then the old "Distance" setting should be brought back in some form.

There are two ways to bake textures onto an object. The usual way, the default way in Blender, is to ignore the other objects in the scene and just render, for example, the lighting, shadows, and/or textures that are visible on the active object. This method is best for capturing detailed, expensive lighting and effects by rendering them once as a texture, instead of every frame; baking a full render of an object's shading to save time rendering animations or game assets, or isolating certain effects to tweak them without affecting all of the others.

The alternative way, enabled by clicking the "Selected to Active" checkbox (Render settings -> Bake panel), renders all other selected objects onto the active object's surface. This method is best for transferring textures from one object to another; baking high-poly detail onto a low-poly mesh, or baking decals or stencils onto a model. That last application is the one that makes this bug most obvious.

Using Blender 2.79b and Blender Internal, if I set up a model to receive a baked texture, along with one or more "decal" objects to generate textures from, I will get the following results by default:

Obviously no good, but I can easily clean these results up by changing the "Distance" setting (also in Render settings -> Bake panel). By default it's 0.0, which is treated as infinity. If I make it a much smaller number (0.01 for the airplane, 0.02 for the head), I get this instead:

Much better. The stars and stripes appear (mostly) where they're supposed to on the airplane, and the eyes, brows and lips no longer show on the back of the head model. However, when I bake the same objects in Cycles:

Somehow the airplane actually looks worse than it did in Blender Internal. The head model looks okay at first*, as long as you don't look too closely at the hairline, which shows some improper baking. But if I pull the hair portion of the mesh away from the main head:

the face that was on the back of the head is still there, it's just hiding on the inside now!

When I look for the "Distance" setting in the bake panel, all I see is a "Ray Distance" setting. I'm not sure whether that's supposed to be the same thing or not, but it doesn't seem to do anything in this case. I get exactly the same baked result whether "Ray Distance" is set to 0.0, 0.01, 0.02, or anything else I've tried. And it doesn't matter whether I use Blender 2.79b or the 2.80 release candidate, I get the same result in Cycles regardless.

It looks like I may need to report a separate bug, too. I noticed it when I was looking at the way the eyes differ on the head model when baked from Cycles vs. Blender Internal: See how the Internal version, the iris butts up right against the top of the sclera, but in the Cycles version, there's a little line of brown where the iris is almost hanging off of the top of the sclera like a pendulum? When I mess with the margin:

...it becomes obvious that Cycles is actually rendering a margin around my source decal objects, instead of around the UV islands in the target object, the way Blender Internal does:

...but that's a separate bug, probably related to the way that Cycles omits the active object from the bake when "Selected to Active" is enabled. If no one else beats me to it, I'll report that one too, when I have some time. But anyway...

I'm attaching six versions of my .blend file, but you probably won't need them all to confirm the bug; there are files with "Distance" or "Ray Distance" set to 0.0, and set to 0.01 or 0.02 ("No Distance" or "Small Distance"); there are files for Blender Internal or Cycles; and there are files for 2.7x and for 2.8x.

*I do realize that the harsh shadows on the head model in these images is a result of my UV map, not necessarily a Cycles render bug. I used "Smart UV Project" to quickly get a map for baking. If this were a production model, I'd unwrap it by hand, which would probably eliminate those artifacts.

.blend files:

Bug Report Texture Bake Decals - 2_80 Cycles, Small Distance.blend

Bug Report Texture Bake Decals - 2_80 Cycles, No Distance.blend

Bug Report Texture Bake Decals - 2_79 Cycles, Small Distance.blend

Bug Report Texture Bake Decals - 2_79 Cycles, No Distance.blend

Bug Report Texture Bake Decals - 2_79 Internal, Small Distance.blend

Bug Report Texture Bake Decals - 2_79 Internal, No Distance.blend

EDIT: Someone else did beat me to the other bug report: https://developer.blender.org/T62429

Bear with me: I promise, this is relevant. TL,DR: The "Ray Distance" setting in Cycles for texture baking, that seems to have replaced the "Distance" setting in Blender Internal, does not do the same thing. If it's supposed to do the same thing, it's broken and should be fixed; if it's supposed to do something different, then the old "Distance" setting should be brought back in some form. *** There are two ways to bake textures onto an object. The usual way, the default way in Blender, is to ignore the other objects in the scene and just render, for example, the lighting, shadows, and/or textures that are visible on the active object. This method is best for capturing detailed, expensive lighting and effects by rendering them once as a texture, instead of every frame; baking a full render of an object's shading to save time rendering animations or game assets, or isolating certain effects to tweak them without affecting all of the others. The alternative way, enabled by clicking the "Selected to Active" checkbox (Render settings -> Bake panel), renders all other selected objects onto the active object's surface. This method is best for transferring textures from one object to another; baking high-poly detail onto a low-poly mesh, or baking decals or stencils onto a model. That last application is the one that makes this bug most obvious. Using Blender 2.79b and Blender Internal, if I set up a model to receive a baked texture, along with one or more "decal" objects to generate textures from, I will get the following results by default: ![Ex01 - 2_79 Internal, No Distance, Airplane.jpg](https://archive.blender.org/developer/F7612349/Ex01_-_2_79_Internal__No_Distance__Airplane.jpg) ![Ex02 - 2_79 Internal, No Distance, Airplane.jpg](https://archive.blender.org/developer/F7612350/Ex02_-_2_79_Internal__No_Distance__Airplane.jpg) ![Ex03 - 2_79 Internal, No Distance, Head.jpg](https://archive.blender.org/developer/F7612352/Ex03_-_2_79_Internal__No_Distance__Head.jpg) ![Ex04 - 2_79 Internal, No Distance, Head.jpg](https://archive.blender.org/developer/F7612351/Ex04_-_2_79_Internal__No_Distance__Head.jpg) Obviously no good, but I can easily clean these results up by changing the "Distance" setting (also in Render settings -> Bake panel). By default it's 0.0, which is treated as infinity. If I make it a much smaller number (0.01 for the airplane, 0.02 for the head), I get this instead: ![Ex05 - 2_79 Internal, Small Distance, Airplane.jpg](https://archive.blender.org/developer/F7612357/Ex05_-_2_79_Internal__Small_Distance__Airplane.jpg) ![Ex06 - 2_79 Internal, Small Distance, Airplane.jpg](https://archive.blender.org/developer/F7612359/Ex06_-_2_79_Internal__Small_Distance__Airplane.jpg) ![Ex07 - 2_79 Internal, Small Distance, Head.jpg](https://archive.blender.org/developer/F7612360/Ex07_-_2_79_Internal__Small_Distance__Head.jpg) ![Ex08 - 2_79 Internal, Small Distance, Head.jpg](https://archive.blender.org/developer/F7612358/Ex08_-_2_79_Internal__Small_Distance__Head.jpg) Much better. The stars and stripes appear (mostly) where they're supposed to on the airplane, and the eyes, brows and lips no longer show on the back of the head model. However, when I bake the same objects in Cycles: ![Ex09 - 2_80 Cycles, Any Distance, Airplane.jpg](https://archive.blender.org/developer/F7612365/Ex09_-_2_80_Cycles__Any_Distance__Airplane.jpg) ![Ex010 - 2_80 Cycles, Any Distance, Head.jpg](https://archive.blender.org/developer/F7612366/Ex010_-_2_80_Cycles__Any_Distance__Head.jpg) Somehow the airplane actually looks worse than it did in Blender Internal. The head model looks okay at first*, as long as you don't look too closely at the hairline, which shows some improper baking. But if I pull the hair portion of the mesh away from the main head: ![Ex11 - 2_80 Cycles, Any Distance, Head.jpg](https://archive.blender.org/developer/F7612369/Ex11_-_2_80_Cycles__Any_Distance__Head.jpg) the face that was on the back of the head is still there, it's just hiding on the inside now! When I look for the "Distance" setting in the bake panel, all I see is a "Ray Distance" setting. I'm not sure whether that's supposed to be the same thing or not, but it doesn't seem to do anything in this case. I get exactly the same baked result whether "Ray Distance" is set to 0.0, 0.01, 0.02, or anything else I've tried. And it doesn't matter whether I use Blender 2.79b or the 2.80 release candidate, I get the same result in Cycles regardless. It looks like I may need to report a separate bug, too. I noticed it when I was looking at the way the eyes differ on the head model when baked from Cycles vs. Blender Internal: See how the Internal version, the iris butts up right against the top of the sclera, but in the Cycles version, there's a little line of brown where the iris is almost hanging off of the top of the sclera like a pendulum? When I mess with the margin: ![Ex12 - 2_80 Cycles, Margin Bug, Head.jpg](https://archive.blender.org/developer/F7612379/Ex12_-_2_80_Cycles__Margin_Bug__Head.jpg) ...it becomes obvious that Cycles is actually rendering a margin around my source decal objects, instead of around the UV islands in the target object, the way Blender Internal does: ![Ex13 - 2_79 Internal, Correct Margin, Head.jpg](https://archive.blender.org/developer/F7612384/Ex13_-_2_79_Internal__Correct_Margin__Head.jpg) ...but that's a separate bug, probably related to the way that Cycles omits the active object from the bake when "Selected to Active" is enabled. If no one else beats me to it, I'll report that one too, when I have some time. But anyway... I'm attaching six versions of my .blend file, but you probably won't need them all to confirm the bug; there are files with "Distance" or "Ray Distance" set to 0.0, and set to 0.01 or 0.02 ("No Distance" or "Small Distance"); there are files for Blender Internal or Cycles; and there are files for 2.7x and for 2.8x. *** *I do realize that the harsh shadows on the head model in these images is a result of my UV map, not necessarily a Cycles render bug. I used "Smart UV Project" to quickly get a map for baking. If this were a production model, I'd unwrap it by hand, which would probably eliminate those artifacts. .blend files: [Bug Report Texture Bake Decals - 2_80 Cycles, Small Distance.blend](https://archive.blender.org/developer/F7612399/Bug_Report_Texture_Bake_Decals_-_2_80_Cycles__Small_Distance.blend) [Bug Report Texture Bake Decals - 2_80 Cycles, No Distance.blend](https://archive.blender.org/developer/F7612400/Bug_Report_Texture_Bake_Decals_-_2_80_Cycles__No_Distance.blend) [Bug Report Texture Bake Decals - 2_79 Cycles, Small Distance.blend](https://archive.blender.org/developer/F7612403/Bug_Report_Texture_Bake_Decals_-_2_79_Cycles__Small_Distance.blend) [Bug Report Texture Bake Decals - 2_79 Cycles, No Distance.blend](https://archive.blender.org/developer/F7612398/Bug_Report_Texture_Bake_Decals_-_2_79_Cycles__No_Distance.blend) [Bug Report Texture Bake Decals - 2_79 Internal, Small Distance.blend](https://archive.blender.org/developer/F7612402/Bug_Report_Texture_Bake_Decals_-_2_79_Internal__Small_Distance.blend) [Bug Report Texture Bake Decals - 2_79 Internal, No Distance.blend](https://archive.blender.org/developer/F7612401/Bug_Report_Texture_Bake_Decals_-_2_79_Internal__No_Distance.blend) *** EDIT: Someone else did beat me to the other bug report: https://developer.blender.org/T62429

Vyacheslav Kobozev commented

2019-09-05 09:03:05 +02:00

Any news?

Vyacheslav Kobozev commented

2019-10-16 11:10:58 +02:00

poke

Vyacheslav Kobozev commented

2019-11-05 20:57:02 +01:00

poke №2

Dalai Felinto removed their assignment 2019-12-23 16:34:54 +01:00

Dalai Felinto commented

2019-12-23 16:34:54 +01:00

Added subscriber: @dfelinto

Germano Cavalcante commented

2020-02-07 15:03:09 +01:00

Closed as duplicate of #66438

Germano Cavalcante closed this issue

2020-02-07 15:03:09 +01:00

Vyacheslav Kobozev commented

2020-04-16 15:26:15 +02:00

Added subscriber: @mano-wii

Vyacheslav Kobozev commented

2020-04-16 15:26:15 +02:00

@mano-wii
Can`t understand why its merged. Here the problem with ray distance logic (total length not limited, only cage height/distance)
There — problem with margins. Are they have same root?

@mano-wii Can`t understand why its merged. Here the problem with ray distance logic (total length not limited, only cage height/distance) There — problem with margins. Are they have same root?

Germano Cavalcante commented

2020-04-16 15:30:05 +02:00

Changed status from 'Duplicate' to: 'Needs Triage'

Germano Cavalcante reopened this issue

2020-04-16 15:30:05 +02:00

Philipp Oeser commented

2020-04-16 15:56:46 +02:00

Changed status from 'Needs Triage' to: 'Confirmed'

Vyacheslav Kobozev commented

2020-04-16 18:41:33 +02:00

Also the reason of such result, is that baking ray go throuh transparent shader and bake line from other side of mesh, because «baking ray length» describes only H, but not L.
Baking goes from initial mesh to target mesh, and baking ray starts from H:

Ray do not stop after passing H distance, if it not intersect with donor pixel.
It goes through mesh, collides with pixel on the other side and get this pixel.

Also the reason of such result, is that baking ray go throuh transparent shader and bake line from other side of mesh, because «baking ray length» describes only H, but not L. Baking goes from initial mesh to target mesh, and baking ray starts from H: ![35282753.jpg](https://archive.blender.org/developer/F8477153/35282753.jpg) Ray do not stop after passing H distance, if it not intersect with donor pixel. It goes through mesh, collides with pixel on the other side and get this pixel.

Vyacheslav Kobozev commented

2020-05-05 07:21:42 +02:00

poke

Vyacheslav Kobozev commented

2020-05-11 21:33:57 +02:00

Any news?

Dalai Felinto commented

2020-05-14 12:32:59 +02:00

Added subscriber: @AndyDavies-3

Dalai Felinto commented

2020-05-14 12:32:59 +02:00

Hi @AndyDavies-3 could you lend me a hand here? I think baking is working as expected in this case, but I could hear your 2 cents on it.

@Vyach can you include an image with the expected "correct" baked result from the reported sample file. Be aware that Blender doesn't have support for "blocker" geometry, which is fundamentally what you need for a model like yours.

Hi @AndyDavies-3 could you lend me a hand here? I think baking is working as expected in this case, but I could hear your 2 cents on it. @Vyach can you include an image with the expected "correct" baked result from the reported sample file. Be aware that Blender doesn't have support for "blocker" geometry, which is fundamentally what you need for a model like yours.

Vyacheslav Kobozev commented

2020-05-14 13:39:07 +02:00

@dfelinto I'll try to bake it properly or imitate proper bake.
if it works as intended, the algorytm is not full by design.
It have only elevation of ray-start above surface, but do not have ray length from elevation point to surface, that shouldn` be infinite anyway.

@dfelinto I'll try to bake it properly or imitate proper bake. if it works as intended, the algorytm is not full by design. It have only elevation of ray-start above surface, but do not have ray length from elevation point to surface, that shouldn` be infinite anyway.

Vyacheslav Kobozev commented

2020-05-14 14:09:05 +02:00

This comment was removed by @Vyach

*This comment was removed by @Vyach*

Vyacheslav Kobozev commented

2020-05-14 14:34:02 +02:00

In my opinion baking ray should be terminated not only by impact with Donor, but by impact with Recipient too or after passing ray-length.
Here scheme in 3d.
Any objections, that it shouldn`t?
rays.blend

And here is expected result (finally got it.)
bake2.blend

In my opinion baking ray should be terminated not only by impact with Donor, but by impact with Recipient too or after passing ray-length. Here scheme in 3d. Any objections, that it shouldn`t? [rays.blend](https://archive.blender.org/developer/F8535201/rays.blend) And here is expected result (finally got it.) [bake2.blend](https://archive.blender.org/developer/F8535215/bake2.blend) ![37341630.jpg](https://archive.blender.org/developer/F8535216/37341630.jpg)

Dalai Felinto commented

2020-05-14 14:48:47 +02:00

What you are suggesting (ray-length limit) could be implemented as a new feature. I wouldn't mind accepting such a patch.

To limit baking ray by collision with the low poly object (what you call the recipient) is too arbitrary, and not what you want need a lot of the time. Again, the proper solution for this would be to support "blockers" which was never considered a priority, but again, it would be an welcomed patch to receive as well.

What you are suggesting (ray-length limit) could be implemented as a new feature. I wouldn't mind accepting such a patch. To limit baking ray by collision with the low poly object (what you call the recipient) is too arbitrary, and not what you want need a lot of the time. Again, the proper solution for this would be to support "blockers" which was never considered a priority, but again, it would be an welcomed patch to receive as well.

Sebastian Parborg commented

2020-05-14 14:54:47 +02:00

Ok, I think I can simply add a "max ray distance" variable.
I already looked at the code and it should be hard at all.

Ok, I think I can simply add a "max ray distance" variable. I already looked at the code and it should be hard at all.

Joe Elliott commented

2020-05-14 15:07:55 +02:00

Added subscriber: @sebastian-4

Joe Elliott commented

2020-05-14 15:07:55 +02:00

@ZedDB Is it necessary to add a new "max ray distance" variable? There's already a "Ray Distance" variable in the Bake panel; isn't this what that's supposed to be for?

Edit: Sorry, @sebastian-4, didn't mean to tag you.

@ZedDB Is it necessary to add a new "max ray distance" variable? There's already a "Ray Distance" variable in the Bake panel; isn't this what that's supposed to be for?![Blender Baking Ray Distance.jpg](https://archive.blender.org/developer/F8535261/Blender_Baking_Ray_Distance.jpg) *Edit: Sorry, @sebastian-4, didn't mean to tag you.*

Sebastian Parborg commented

2020-05-14 15:43:49 +02:00

@EllJNidan that setting does not limit the ray distance of the rays. It simply seems to offset the starting location of the ray in question.

Sebastian Parborg commented

2020-05-14 16:06:13 +02:00

Posted a potential fix here: https://developer.blender.org/D7733

Joe Elliott commented

2020-05-14 19:25:10 +02:00

In #62422#931563, @ZedDB wrote:
@EllJNidan that setting does not limit the ray distance of the rays. It simply seems to offset the starting location of the ray in question.

Ah, I see. Thanks!

> In #62422#931563, @ZedDB wrote: > @EllJNidan that setting does not limit the ray distance of the rays. It simply seems to offset the starting location of the ray in question. Ah, I see. Thanks!

Vyacheslav Kobozev commented

2020-05-15 09:26:25 +02:00

@ZedDB okay, thank you very much for understanding.
Such option will make this kind of baking easier and can reduce artifacts in other cases.
As you can see, I`ve got proper result by adding lot of new geometry and making Donor clozed.

@dfelinto baking isn`t always from hipoly to lowpoly. Sometimes it is just transfer from one model to another.
So I prefer Donor → Recipient or Source → Target.

@ZedDB okay, thank you very much for understanding. Such option will make this kind of baking easier and can reduce artifacts in other cases. As you can see, I`ve got proper result by adding lot of new geometry and making Donor clozed. @dfelinto baking isn`t always from hipoly to lowpoly. Sometimes it is just transfer from one model to another. So I prefer Donor → Recipient or Source → Target.

blender-admin commented

2020-05-18 15:50:36 +02:00

This issue was referenced by blender/cycles@fa0b991b46

This issue was referenced by blender/cycles@fa0b991b46ef7b5f51cda266e440082102d6a8ed

blender-admin commented

2020-05-18 15:50:36 +02:00

This issue was referenced by 27cac4a102

This issue was referenced by 27cac4a102b917f9045ed4a4682bd8740852458c

Sebastian Parborg commented

2020-05-18 15:54:50 +02:00

Changed status from 'Confirmed' to: 'Resolved'

Sebastian Parborg closed this issue