Camera Match anomaly?

[Kevin K]

Dr. Panzer, Dr. Panzer, emergency in room 101! 🙂

Matt...I  am working on this commercial project in Calif, and the local planning department is requesting some images of how the project will look within the context of the existing neighborhood. So, Camera Match is more than helpful in this situation, but I am noticing this little anomaly pertaining to my 3d model of the new building and the Camera Match Photo.  There is a sort of white outline around some of the objects, especially the real 3d trees, plants, etc (not image props).  You can see this in the screen shot called "Booker St. Anomaly". I also attached the before and after images as a reference.

Any thoughts on what may be causing this ?

Thanks

-Kev

[Kevin Allen]

Is that an image prop in the model? Looks like an artifact from the Image Prop mask.

[Kevin K]

Kev, no, those are real 3d trees, which is why I was surprised this was happening...no mask involved.

[zoomer]

3D Tress/Plants usually still have some Polygons that use transparency masks for all details.

It is generally better to set these from transparency Maps to stencils Maps.

(gray values in masks are very render time expensive, stencil masks are just either transparent or not)

Not sure if that will work here in VW.

(Add stencil mask "from existing texture" and deleting transparency map later ?)

But if the mask does not fit the texture, that will not help.

 

Second, try to disable all Reflection in the tree material.

 

Third, unlikely but deactivate any self illumination in Plant Material.

(something which is usually default in image props materials - so you do not notice

different lighting on both planes - but they will glow in the dark ...)

Edited July 22, 2022 by zoomer

[Kevin Allen]

What plants exactly?

[Mark Aceto]

7 hours ago, Kevin K said:

Dr. Panzer, Dr. Panzer, emergency in room 101! 🙂

Matt...I  am working on this commercial project in Calif, and the local planning department is requesting some images of how the project will look within the context of the existing neighborhood. So, Camera Match is more than helpful in this situation, but I am noticing this little anomaly pertaining to my 3d model of the new building and the Camera Match Photo.  There is a sort of white outline around some of the objects, especially the real 3d trees, plants, etc (not image props).  You can see this in the screen shot called "Booker St. Anomaly". I also attached the before and after images as a reference.

Any thoughts on what may be causing this ?

Thanks

-Kev

 

In another lifetime, I grew up in SLO and went surfing there all the time. Brought back some great memories...  Anyway, curious to see what Matt says as that artifact is only visible with the photo as the background (vs the VW model).

[Kevin K]

Mark

Wow...really? In a galaxy far far away in the past 🙂

Yeah I lived in Cambria and Cayucos for years and years before moving to French Poly.

I did a little test exporting a render bitmap image after placing a blue extrusion behind there 3d model and you can see there is not issue with any white outlines as occurred with the Camera Match Object Photo.

 

It will be interesting to have Matt weigh in.

[Tom W.]

You need to use the bat phone: calling @Matt Panzer...

[Matt Panzer]

22 hours ago, Kevin K said:

Dr. Panzer, Dr. Panzer, emergency in room 101! 🙂

Matt...I  am working on this commercial project in Calif, and the local planning department is requesting some images of how the project will look within the context of the existing neighborhood. So, Camera Match is more than helpful in this situation, but I am noticing this little anomaly pertaining to my 3d model of the new building and the Camera Match Photo.  There is a sort of white outline around some of the objects, especially the real 3d trees, plants, etc (not image props).  You can see this in the screen shot called "Booker St. Anomaly". I also attached the before and after images as a reference.

Any thoughts on what may be causing this ?

Thanks

-Kev

Hi Kevin,

Can you PM me the file?

is this white “halo” showing in the Vectorworks application, exported files, or both?

[Matt Panzer]

@Kevin K,

Try deselecting the "None fill uses alpha transparency" option in the Viewport's "Advanced Properties".  I think that might correct the issue.  I don't believe that setting should effect the viewport like that so this is something we'll look into.

Please let me know if this helps.

[Kevin K]

Hey Matt

Thanks a lot for you suggestions.  

I did not send you the file as yet because I am messing with a few items in the file.

Stay tuned and I will get back to you. 🙂

[Kevin K]

Matt

I have no idea under the sun how or why you came up with the suggestion to UNCHECK the option for 'none fill uses alpha transparency'....but it totally worked!! 

I am calling your boss and demanding you get a raise!!! 🙂

 

The image below is of another view, using camera match, but you can clearly see that the situation I was having, with the halo white outlines around any 3d landscape items etc, is totally gone. You may need to click the image to see it at correct resolution.

 

Anyway, thanks heaps.

 

[Matt Panzer]

11 minutes ago, Kevin K said:

Matt

I have no idea under the sun how or why you came up with the suggestion to UNCHECK the option for 'none fill uses alpha transparency'....but it totally worked!! 

I am calling your boss and demanding you get a raise!!! 🙂

 

The image below is of another view, using camera match, but you can clearly see that the situation I was having, with the halo white outlines around any 3d landscape items etc, is totally gone. You may need to click the image to see it at correct resolution.

 

Anyway, thanks heaps.

 

 

You're very welcome!  I'm glad it worked and nice rendering!!!

 

I only tried that option because I knew it had SOMETHING to do with transparency.  I certainly do not believe that this is intended behavior.  Just a shot in the dark, really.

I did track down a bug on the same issue you have (VB-150159) and added a comment about how that setting affects it.  Hopefully it'll help the engineers zero in on the problem.

 

Nevertheless, I'll PM you the cell number for my boss. 😉 

 

 

[Kevin K]

Hahaha….I anxiously await that number!

 

At any rate…good detective work!

[Matt Overton]

Don't quote me if I'm off here going by memory...

In Custom Renderwork you can turn off Anti-aliasing as the anti-alias pixels aren't transparent and don't work to a the background*  so often end up making a halo instead of a blend. 

 

To me mind photo matching anti-aliasing isn't your friend anyway as things like plants are fuzzy to start with and building edges are hard and shouldn't be fuzzy. 

 

*this might be just because I cheap out and set it to low which might make to the pixels to big. 

 

Edit to add: Nice work on the entourage. Had so much trouble getting 3D cars to sit nicely aligned to the road surface like that in my last images. 

Edited July 28, 2022 by Matt Overton
praise

[Matt Panzer]

6 hours ago, Matt Overton said:

Don't quote me if I'm off here going by memory...

In Custom Renderwork you can turn off Anti-aliasing as the anti-alias pixels aren't transparent and don't work to a the background*  so often end up making a halo instead of a blend. 

 

To me mind photo matching anti-aliasing isn't your friend anyway as things like plants are fuzzy to start with and building edges are hard and shouldn't be fuzzy. 

 

*this might be just because I cheap out and set it to low which might make to the pixels to big. 

 

Edit to add: Nice work on the entourage. Had so much trouble getting 3D cars to sit nicely aligned to the road surface like that in my last images. 

 

Yeah.  I thought turning off the Anti-aliasing would be my last resort workaround but it doesn't help.  It just makes the halo look more blocky in this case.

 

IMO, Anti-aliasing is very important in getting realistic results because the sharp edge of the rendered model makes the model appear pasted on the photo.  Blending is much more convincing but you do have to have the resolution high enough to prevent the model from appearing fuzzy.  I typically try to set the sheet layer DPI to match the DPI of the photo image displayed in the Camera Match object.  When you select a Camera Match object, it reports the photo's effective DPI (based on the image size) in the Object Info palette so its easy to find.  Matching the DPI like that allows the rendered pixels to match the pixels in the photo used for the render background.  Depending on what you're after, you may want to bump it up or down from there but that's a good starting point.

[Kevin K]

One final thought on this topic...then I will shut up about it 🙂

Note the before and after images.  I hired a drone pilot to take a few aerial shots of the site where this proposed project will be situated.

My point is that without Camera Match and its great masking and shadow tools, this would have pretty difficult and time consuming to procure by 'faking' a rendered view and placing it into a photograph.  Possible, but time consuming, without any real accuracy.

It is one thing to take a photograph from the ground, and if you have all the right GPS settings, etc tied to the photo, which can show the longitude and latitude as well the angle of the shot pertaining to North, an aerial photo is a different animal.

 

So....my sage advice is that Camera Match will probably serve you well.  🙂

-Kev

[Matt Panzer]

26 minutes ago, Kevin K said:

One final thought on this topic...then I will shut up about it 🙂

Note the before and after images.  I hired a drone pilot to take a few aerial shots of the site where this proposed project will be situated.

My point is that without Camera Match and its great masking and shadow tools, this would have pretty difficult and time consuming to procure by 'faking' a rendered view and placing it into a photograph.  Possible, but time consuming, without any real accuracy.

It is one thing to take a photograph from the ground, and if you have all the right GPS settings, etc tied to the photo, which can show the longitude and latitude as well the angle of the shot pertaining to North, an aerial photo is a different animal.

 

So....my sage advice is that Camera Match will probably serve you well.  🙂

-Kev

 

Thanks for sharing you Camera Match images (and thoughts)!!!

I'm always happy to see the different ways people use it and I'm happy it's working well for you.

 

A little history for those interested:  In 2007 (before Camera Match), I had to create a few renderings of how a project would look from specific locations in historic downtown Annapolis, MD.  It was grueling, frustrating, time consuming, and, while the end results looked decent, there was a level of uncertainly regarding the accuracy of them.  As soon as I finished those renderings, I knew there had to be a better way and immediately started to research and develop Camera Match.  I developed the view calculations from scratch by reverse engineering how perspective drawing are created by hand on a drafting table.  While it worked surprisingly well, I rewrote them twice since.  The last (and current) incarnation of the view calculations use a pure 3D geometrical approach.  But the hardest part of development was in the View Tuning.  SO many moving parts in there, but it was worth the effort, IMO. 🙂  The initial version was released for VW 2008 and had no Mask or Shadow objects.  Those came a version or two later...

[Kevin K]

Matt

Yeah, those fine tuning tools….so, so helpful. I can’t even fathom what was involved in creating those little gems!

Thanks for a bit of CM history!

[Matt Panzer]

3 hours ago, Kevin K said:

Matt

Yeah, those fine tuning tools….so, so helpful. I can’t even fathom what was involved in creating those little gems!

Thanks for a bit of CM history!

Thanks Kevin!  Yeah.  The hardest part of each tuning mode was keeping the reference point in the model pinned to the target in the Camera Match object.  It drove me a bit crazy for 2-3 months but it was so rewarding every time I nailed each mode down.