Wireframe visible when going relatively far from the 0,0,0 (20 meters) #97259

Open
opened 2022-04-11 23:23:26 +02:00 by Juan Gea · 36 comments

System Information
Operating system: Linux-5.16.15-76051615-generic-x86_64-with-glibc2.34 64 Bits
Graphics card: NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Ti/PCIe/SSE2 NVIDIA Corporation 4.5.0 NVIDIA 510.54

Blender Version
Broken: version: 3.1.2, branch: master, commit date: 2022-03-31 17:40, hash: cc66d1020c
Worked: not sure

Short description of error
You can see the geometry of the object in cycles render in far away parts of it if the object its relatively far from the origin, 20 meters it's not so far, but you can see it.

Captura de Pantalla 2022-04-11 a las 23.24.19.png

Exact steps for others to reproduce the error

1.- Open the provided .blend
2.- Don't touch anything, just enable viewport render
3.- You should see the wireframe being visible
4.- If you don't see the wireframe, you might need to change your render device/backend. E.G. Change between CPU, CUDA, OptiX, HIP, Metal, etc. At the moment, @Alaska can only reproduce this issue in CUDA with Blender 3.2 while @derekbarker can only reproduce the issue with OptiX.

train_bug_report.blend

**System Information** Operating system: Linux-5.16.15-76051615-generic-x86_64-with-glibc2.34 64 Bits Graphics card: NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Ti/PCIe/SSE2 NVIDIA Corporation 4.5.0 NVIDIA 510.54 **Blender Version** Broken: version: 3.1.2, branch: master, commit date: 2022-03-31 17:40, hash: `cc66d1020c` Worked: not sure **Short description of error** You can see the geometry of the object in cycles render in far away parts of it if the object its relatively far from the origin, 20 meters it's not so far, but you can see it. ![Captura de Pantalla 2022-04-11 a las 23.24.19.png](https://archive.blender.org/developer/F12996741/Captura_de_Pantalla_2022-04-11_a_las_23.24.19.png) **Exact steps for others to reproduce the error** 1.- Open the provided .blend 2.- Don't touch anything, just enable viewport render 3.- You should see the wireframe being visible 4.- If you don't see the wireframe, you might need to change your render device/backend. E.G. Change between CPU, CUDA, OptiX, HIP, Metal, etc. At the moment, @Alaska can only reproduce this issue in CUDA with Blender 3.2 while @derekbarker can only reproduce the issue with OptiX. [train_bug_report.blend](https://archive.blender.org/developer/F12996736/train_bug_report.blend)
Author

Added subscriber: @juang3d

Added subscriber: @juang3d

#98702 was marked as duplicate of this issue

#98702 was marked as duplicate of this issue

#97027 was marked as duplicate of this issue

#97027 was marked as duplicate of this issue
Member

Added subscriber: @Alaska

Added subscriber: @Alaska
Member

I can reproduce this issue in Blender 3.1 but not Blender 3.2. This suggests the issue has been fixed in Blender 3.2.

I will bisect Blender to find the exact commit responsible for this fix so that it is known for if the Blender foundation wants to release a corrective Blender 3.1.3.

I can reproduce this issue in Blender 3.1 but not Blender 3.2. This suggests the issue has been fixed in Blender 3.2. I will bisect Blender to find the exact commit responsible for this fix so that it is known for if the Blender foundation wants to release a corrective Blender 3.1.3.
Member

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

Changed status from 'Needs Triage' to: 'Resolved'
Alaska self-assigned this 2022-04-12 01:17:29 +02:00
Member

Added subscriber: @HooglyBoogly

Added subscriber: @HooglyBoogly
Member

The fix came in 3c8182409c which appears to be a follow on commit from a few previous ones. I'm not sure if this will be back ported, and I'm not even sure if a Blender 3.1.3 will be released. I will mark this report as "resolved" in the meantime as this issue has been fixed in Blender 3.2.

@HooglyBoogly, if there is a Blender 3.1.3, do you think this fix would be suitable to be back ported to that release?

The fix came in 3c8182409c which appears to be a follow on commit from a few previous ones. I'm not sure if this will be back ported, and I'm not even sure if a Blender 3.1.3 will be released. I will mark this report as "resolved" in the meantime as this issue has been fixed in Blender 3.2. @HooglyBoogly, if there is a Blender 3.1.3, do you think this fix would be suitable to be back ported to that release?

Added subscriber: @derekbarker

Added subscriber: @derekbarker

Here it is in todays build

image.png

Though it is fixed on CPU and CUDA only present in OPTIX

Operating system: Windows-10-10.0.19044-SP0 64 Bits
Graphics card: NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090/PCIe/SSE2 NVIDIA Corporation 4.5.0 NVIDIA 512.15

Here it is in todays build ![image.png](https://archive.blender.org/developer/F12996982/image.png) Though it is fixed on CPU and CUDA only present in OPTIX Operating system: Windows-10-10.0.19044-SP0 64 Bits Graphics card: NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090/PCIe/SSE2 NVIDIA Corporation 4.5.0 NVIDIA 512.15
Member

Interesting! You're sure about that bisect result? I expected that commit to have no functional changes, it still looks to me like all it does is rearrange a bit of logic.

Either way, that commit wouldn't really make sense to backport, is part of a series of cleanups to that area that isn't worth extracting IMO.

Interesting! You're sure about that bisect result? I expected that commit to have no functional changes, it still looks to me like all it does is rearrange a bit of logic. Either way, that commit wouldn't really make sense to backport, is part of a series of cleanups to that area that isn't worth extracting IMO.
Member

Changed status from 'Resolved' to: 'Confirmed'

Changed status from 'Resolved' to: 'Confirmed'
Alaska reopened this issue 2022-04-12 02:18:44 +02:00
Member

Added subscriber: @brecht

Added subscriber: @brecht
Member

CC @brecht, can you take a look at this as it's probably related to the ray offsetting patch.

Just to update, here's what I observed:

  1. CPU rendering is mostly fine for me.
  2. CUDA rendering shows this issue.
  3. OptiX is fine.

System Information
Operating system: Linux-5.16.0-6-amd64-x86_64-with-glibc2.33 64 Bits
Graphics card: NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060/PCIe/SSE2 NVIDIA Corporation 4.5.0 NVIDIA 510.54
Blender version: 3.2.0 Alpha, branch: master, commit date: 2022-04-11 22:01, hash: 6f1ad5f5e7


@HooglyBoogly - Yes, that commit was what fixed it in OptiX. I was confused too and decided to do further testing and can confirm that commit fixed the issue in OptiX.

CC @brecht, can you take a look at this as it's probably related to the ray offsetting patch. Just to update, here's what I observed: 1. CPU rendering is mostly fine for me. 2. CUDA rendering shows this issue. 3. OptiX is fine. **System Information** Operating system: Linux-5.16.0-6-amd64-x86_64-with-glibc2.33 64 Bits Graphics card: NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060/PCIe/SSE2 NVIDIA Corporation 4.5.0 NVIDIA 510.54 Blender version: 3.2.0 Alpha, branch: master, commit date: 2022-04-11 22:01, hash: `6f1ad5f5e7` --- @HooglyBoogly - Yes, that commit was what fixed it in OptiX. I was confused too and decided to do further testing and can confirm that commit fixed the issue in OptiX.
Alaska removed their assignment 2022-04-12 02:21:24 +02:00

This comment was removed by @derekbarker

*This comment was removed by @derekbarker*

Was the patch in this build
image.png
I am seeing it on an RTX 3090 with optix

Was the patch in this build ![image.png](https://archive.blender.org/developer/F12997954/image.png) I am seeing it on an RTX 3090 with optix
Author

I can confirm is not fixed for Optix.

Driver 510.54 on Linux

Optix: Less visible, but you still can see the vertical line, it's not fixed

image.png

CPU: Less visible, same as optic, not fixed

image.png

GPU CUDA: Not fixed at all

image.png

This is with a build I personally did today, master branch.

Captura de Pantalla 2022-04-13 a las 0.20.51.png

I can confirm is not fixed for Optix. Driver 510.54 on Linux Optix: Less visible, but you still can see the vertical line, it's not fixed ![image.png](https://archive.blender.org/developer/F12998889/image.png) CPU: Less visible, same as optic, not fixed ![image.png](https://archive.blender.org/developer/F12998894/image.png) GPU CUDA: Not fixed at all ![image.png](https://archive.blender.org/developer/F12998898/image.png) This is with a build I personally did today, master branch. ![Captura de Pantalla 2022-04-13 a las 0.20.51.png](https://archive.blender.org/developer/F12998900/Captura_de_Pantalla_2022-04-13_a_las_0.20.51.png)

Added subscriber: @zhuqian

Added subscriber: @zhuqian
Added subscribers: @BYOB, @mirrorstream-2, @Fernando-Alcala, @lichtwerk, @OmarEmaraDev

I investigated these artifacts a bit but did not yet find a good solution.

What's a bit strange is that some of the edge artifacts don't seem to come only from directly neighboring triangles, but also from some triangles further away in the same plane. It's not that strange that such false intersections could be found, but I'm not sure why they would show around edges specifically. Regardless, this seems to indicate that explicitly checking for adjacent triangles would not be a total solution to this problem. I'd like to find a kind of ray offset or threshold that is smaller than before, but did not find anything good yet that doesn't bring back older artifacts.

The reason Embree is more accurate is because it uses a different triangle intersection test (Plücker). We could switch CUDA/HIP to use matching code. I don't know what OptiX is doing, but quality seems similar to Embree.

I investigated these artifacts a bit but did not yet find a good solution. What's a bit strange is that some of the edge artifacts don't seem to come only from directly neighboring triangles, but also from some triangles further away in the same plane. It's not that strange that such false intersections could be found, but I'm not sure why they would show around edges specifically. Regardless, this seems to indicate that explicitly checking for adjacent triangles would not be a total solution to this problem. I'd like to find a kind of ray offset or threshold that is smaller than before, but did not find anything good yet that doesn't bring back older artifacts. The reason Embree is more accurate is because it uses a different triangle intersection test (Plücker). We could switch CUDA/HIP to use matching code. I don't know what OptiX is doing, but quality seems similar to Embree.

I would have like to fix this for 3.2, but it's going to be for 3.3 since this is turning out to be complicated and too risky for 3.2.

I would have like to fix this for 3.2, but it's going to be for 3.3 since this is turning out to be complicated and too risky for 3.2.
Contributor

Added subscriber: @Raimund58

Added subscriber: @Raimund58
Contributor

Just a short question. Is this Viewport only or in the final Render as well?

Just a short question. Is this Viewport only or in the final Render as well?
Member

In #97259#1370572, @Raimund58 wrote:
Just a short question. Is this Viewport only or in the final Render as well?

I can personally reproduce the issue with CUDA in both viewport and final renders

> In #97259#1370572, @Raimund58 wrote: > Just a short question. Is this Viewport only or in the final Render as well? I can personally reproduce the issue with CUDA in both viewport and final renders
Member

Added subscriber: @Benjamin-Round

Added subscriber: @Benjamin-Round

Added subscriber: @TheFckinUnicorn

Added subscriber: @TheFckinUnicorn

Creator of the file here.... LordOdin made the report on my behalf because I'm too stupid to understand how any of this works...
Anyway I'm here with an update... LordOdin suggested me to try rendering the file with CUDA in 3.2 Alpha shortly after filing this report; that didn't work so I decided to put the entire project on hold till 3.2.0 released.
I tried rendering this file in 3.2.0 and.......
image.png
no bueno...

Creator of the file here.... LordOdin made the report on my behalf because I'm too stupid to understand how any of this works... Anyway I'm here with an update... LordOdin suggested me to try rendering the file with CUDA in 3.2 Alpha shortly after filing this report; that didn't work so I decided to put the entire project on hold till 3.2.0 released. I tried rendering this file in 3.2.0 and....... ![image.png](https://archive.blender.org/developer/F13151037/image.png) no bueno...

In #97259#1367178, @brecht wrote:
I would have like to fix this for 3.2, but it's going to be for 3.3 since this is turning out to be complicated and too risky for 3.2.

I guess I'll wait another update then...

meanwhile I'm going all the way back to 2.79
image.png

> In #97259#1367178, @brecht wrote: > I would have like to fix this for 3.2, but it's going to be for 3.3 since this is turning out to be complicated and too risky for 3.2. I guess I'll wait another update then... meanwhile I'm going all the way back to 2.79 ![image.png](https://archive.blender.org/developer/F13151118/image.png)

This issue was referenced by 79f1cc601c

This issue was referenced by 79f1cc601cdbcf142e1bf4c1966f64dcf93b030f

The artifacts are now mostly eliminated. For CPU and CUDA/HIP/Metal they are gone here, for OptiX it's much more subtle.

Eliminating this entirely is hard and comes with trade-offs where other renders have artifacts, so will lower priority.

The artifacts are now mostly eliminated. For CPU and CUDA/HIP/Metal they are gone here, for OptiX it's much more subtle. Eliminating this entirely is hard and comes with trade-offs where other renders have artifacts, so will lower priority.

In #97259#1401874, @brecht wrote:
The artifacts are now mostly eliminated. For CPU and CUDA/HIP/Metal they are gone here, for OptiX it's much more subtle.

Eliminating this entirely is hard and comes with trade-offs where other renders have artifacts, so will lower priority.

Sounds good; I shall try it soon.
Many thanks everyone.

> In #97259#1401874, @brecht wrote: > The artifacts are now mostly eliminated. For CPU and CUDA/HIP/Metal they are gone here, for OptiX it's much more subtle. > > Eliminating this entirely is hard and comes with trade-offs where other renders have artifacts, so will lower priority. Sounds good; I shall try it soon. Many thanks everyone.
Thomas Dinges added this to the 3.3 LTS milestone 2023-02-08 15:37:18 +01:00
Philipp Oeser removed the
Interest
Render & Cycles
label 2023-02-09 14:03:53 +01:00
Brecht Van Lommel removed this from the 3.3 LTS milestone 2023-02-09 19:35:08 +01:00

Heyyyyyyyy @brecht so guess what... It's back in 3.5.0. Present in CPU, CUDA and Optix (altho I never use optix cos I have a 1080Ti); happens in both viewport and final render. However this time, it only appears in some areas and not on the entirety of the mesh.
Blend file is attached. Switch to viewport render mode and zoom in on the annotated areas to see it in action. I've checked the modifiers and they dont seem to be causing it.The artifacts start to appear around frame 200 but it gets worse (as seen in attached screenshots) from frame 222.
image
image

Heyyyyyyyy @brecht so guess what... It's back in 3.5.0. Present in CPU, CUDA and Optix (altho I never use optix cos I have a 1080Ti); happens in both viewport and final render. However this time, it only appears in some areas and not on the entirety of the mesh. Blend file is attached. Switch to viewport render mode and zoom in on the annotated areas to see it in action. I've checked the modifiers and they dont seem to be causing it.The artifacts start to appear around frame 200 but it gets worse (as seen in attached screenshots) from frame 222. ![image](/attachments/caab2ba5-0da4-4820-afb8-875eeebe7f8d) ![image](/attachments/84911d60-5cab-4b07-9c75-d21e84320180)

The issue was flipped. From 3.0 to 3.2, the wireframe appeared in light. shadowframe 3.2.png

The "fix" in 3.3 removed the wireframe appearing in light to now shadow. shadowframe 3.3.1.png

The issue was flipped. From 3.0 to 3.2, the wireframe appeared in light. ![shadowframe 3.2.png](/attachments/af99268b-e589-47c7-9c11-4bd5eb416a83) The "fix" in 3.3 removed the wireframe appearing in light to now shadow. ![shadowframe 3.3.1.png](/attachments/fa6f8bf2-11db-43bf-a7ba-0012d8a6bed4)

Ah interesting. I was wondering why the artifacts disappeared when I hide the glass and black rubber objects. Well. This still needs to be fixed apparently.

Ah interesting. I was wondering why the artifacts disappeared when I hide the glass and black rubber objects. Well. This still needs to be fixed apparently.

I'm experiencing this issue in Blender 3.6.0, RTX 3080, both with OptiX and CUDA. Both in viewport and render.

I find this is especially noticeable when using a material with high transmission.
In this case, I have a new blender file with a light and an icosphere with 4x subdivision, set to shade smooth, using a principled shader with transmission set to 1.

I've attached the .blend file alongisde images that show the issue when the sphere is 20, 100, and 10000 units away - the last one really showcases this wireframe effect.

I hope this is helpful in resolving this issue!

I'm experiencing this issue in Blender 3.6.0, RTX 3080, both with OptiX and CUDA. Both in viewport and render. I find this is especially noticeable when using a material with high transmission. In this case, I have a new blender file with a light and an icosphere with 4x subdivision, set to shade smooth, using a principled shader with transmission set to 1. I've attached the .blend file alongisde images that show the issue when the sphere is 20, 100, and 10000 units away - the last one really showcases this wireframe effect. I hope this is helpful in resolving this issue!

I have it on 3.6.3, RTX3090, optix, but only in render, not viewport it seems.
I have a big piece of glass, and far from world center. It's in the diffuse direct, AO, a little bit in the diffuse indirect, not in any other pass it seems.
image

I have it on 3.6.3, RTX3090, optix, but only in render, not viewport it seems. I have a big piece of glass, and far from world center. It's in the diffuse direct, AO, a little bit in the diffuse indirect, not in any other pass it seems. ![image](/attachments/9e7c177f-de47-4cd7-b428-855d4b1caf9a)
1.9 MiB
Sign in to join this conversation.
No Label
Interest
Alembic
Interest
Animation & Rigging
Interest
Asset Browser
Interest
Asset Browser Project Overview
Interest
Audio
Interest
Automated Testing
Interest
Blender Asset Bundle
Interest
BlendFile
Interest
Collada
Interest
Compatibility
Interest
Compositing
Interest
Core
Interest
Cycles
Interest
Dependency Graph
Interest
Development Management
Interest
EEVEE
Interest
EEVEE & Viewport
Interest
Freestyle
Interest
Geometry Nodes
Interest
Grease Pencil
Interest
ID Management
Interest
Images & Movies
Interest
Import Export
Interest
Line Art
Interest
Masking
Interest
Metal
Interest
Modeling
Interest
Modifiers
Interest
Motion Tracking
Interest
Nodes & Physics
Interest
OpenGL
Interest
Overlay
Interest
Overrides
Interest
Performance
Interest
Physics
Interest
Pipeline, Assets & IO
Interest
Platforms, Builds & Tests
Interest
Python API
Interest
Render & Cycles
Interest
Render Pipeline
Interest
Sculpt, Paint & Texture
Interest
Text Editor
Interest
Translations
Interest
Triaging
Interest
Undo
Interest
USD
Interest
User Interface
Interest
UV Editing
Interest
VFX & Video
Interest
Video Sequencer
Interest
Virtual Reality
Interest
Vulkan
Interest
Wayland
Interest
Workbench
Interest: X11
Legacy
Blender 2.8 Project
Legacy
Milestone 1: Basic, Local Asset Browser
Legacy
OpenGL Error
Meta
Good First Issue
Meta
Papercut
Meta
Retrospective
Meta
Security
Module
Animation & Rigging
Module
Core
Module
Development Management
Module
EEVEE & Viewport
Module
Grease Pencil
Module
Modeling
Module
Nodes & Physics
Module
Pipeline, Assets & IO
Module
Platforms, Builds & Tests
Module
Python API
Module
Render & Cycles
Module
Sculpt, Paint & Texture
Module
Triaging
Module
User Interface
Module
VFX & Video
Platform
FreeBSD
Platform
Linux
Platform
macOS
Platform
Windows
Priority
High
Priority
Low
Priority
Normal
Priority
Unbreak Now!
Status
Archived
Status
Confirmed
Status
Duplicate
Status
Needs Info from Developers
Status
Needs Information from User
Status
Needs Triage
Status
Resolved
Type
Bug
Type
Design
Type
Known Issue
Type
Patch
Type
Report
Type
To Do
No Milestone
No project
No Assignees
13 Participants
Notifications
Due Date
The due date is invalid or out of range. Please use the format 'yyyy-mm-dd'.

No due date set.

Dependencies

No dependencies set.

Reference: blender/blender#97259
No description provided.