2
$\begingroup$

I have a scene, rendered in Eevee!

enter image description here

I also have some sun rays, with a spotlight and cube that provides volumetrics!

enter image description here

But... The cube providing volumetric also makes the rest of the scene really blurry.

I would like the sun beams to shine while keeping the rest of the scene clear. The following is a hasily photoshopped picture of what I would like to achieve:

enter image description here

Or, to use a picture from the internet, something like this:

enter image description here

The above picture, taken from the internet, uses the sun beams node. However, it is not possible for me to use a composited sun beams node, as the sun beams are originating from a light source that is off-camera.

In summary: I would like the exact same rays as provided by a volumetric cube, but without blurring the background. How is this possible?

$\endgroup$
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Render Volume pass separately and composite it as Screen blend type, adjust contrast and mix inntensity as pleasure to your taste. $\endgroup$ – vklidu Jun 7 '20 at 14:56
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Hello and congrats on your beautiful scene :). Blurred background is a natural consequence of shooting in foggy weather. It can be mitigated by moving objects closer to camera, using stronger lights and post-processing. Perhaps try asking on Photo Stack exchange. $\endgroup$ – Jachym Michal Jun 7 '20 at 14:57
  • $\begingroup$ Just use a lower value for volume scatter. Try 0.02 $\endgroup$ – no-can-do Jun 7 '20 at 16:28
  • $\begingroup$ @vklidu This is actually the technique I eventually went for. $\endgroup$ – Joehot200 Jun 7 '20 at 21:34
2
$\begingroup$

Light rays coming into dark (church window) always will look better, than open foggy environment for this sun-beams.

enter image description here

If you want to avoid volumetrics in back part of the scene, make volumetric Cube smaller or use some texture for Density node to keep Volume Scatter in specific part of your scene.

enter image description here Separate XYZ node is used instead of Mapping node just because it is still difficult for me to use it for orientation simple Gradient texture in one of main axis.

You can also render separately Volume Pass, add some contrast and composite it.

enter image description here

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ Accepted! Using texture for the density node is definitely interesting and not something I considered - however, in the end I used the suggestion of a separate volume pass, and then composited it on top with an add node. $\endgroup$ – Joehot200 Jun 8 '20 at 9:38
2
$\begingroup$

Just lower the values for the volume scatter, 0.2 is still too much.

Some notes:

In the real world there is only one sun. In your scene you have more than one bright light sources. Not only do all light sources have an effect on the volume scatter, but lights in many directions immediately kill the illusion of realism.

As pointed out in other answer the background plays a big part on the effect. A darker background will make the effect more visible.

Another factor to consider is the direction of the light. Any light shining from behind the camera will only be reflected back by the volume scatter, making your scene less contrasty, because the dark areas will be grayish.

Read the following link for more detailed information:

How to do volumetric lighting for a forest scene?

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ I attempted a low value for volume scatter, however this removes the light rays as well, which isn't desired. $\endgroup$ – Joehot200 Jun 7 '20 at 19:47
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ I'm sure there is a happy medium. Keep experimenting. But the main issue is how you are lighting the scene. Too many light sources and the sources behind or close to the camera view just flatten the effect $\endgroup$ – susu Jun 7 '20 at 19:54
  • $\begingroup$ @susu You are right - too many lights in different directions. I tried to find work-arround, but also your link to forest scene seems to be the best direction. Would you mind to vote close this thread as duplication? $\endgroup$ – vklidu Jun 7 '20 at 20:04
  • $\begingroup$ @vklidu I am against closing this as a duplicate. The answer on the other question can cause, to quote the answer: "The same effect as driving through fog, where it is harder to see because the light is reflected back at the driver instead of lighting the road and the landscape". My question is specifically about avoiding this issue where it looks like there is fog in the scene, so I would like to argue for this question to be kept. Moreover, the solution on that answer to said problem requires Cycles, however I am using Eevee. $\endgroup$ – Joehot200 Jun 7 '20 at 20:21
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @Joehot200 please edit your post and add all the relevant information to the question. Volumetrics in Eevee are more limited. $\endgroup$ – susu Jun 7 '20 at 20:25

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.