When rendering with EXR in iclone, does this result in an 8 bit EXR file or is the output buffer for Iclone’s native renderer higher in resolution now?

I sincerely hope it’s the latter, but I’m happy with the direction this is going…

Intel Core i7-13700F - 32GB Memory - NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 TI. Iclone 8, Character Creator 4, Blender, Davinci Resolve studio, Fusion studio

Don't know the answer but could you please explain to this old man what EXR output even is?

---

Alienware Aurora R16, Win 11, i9-149000KF, 3.20GHz CPU, 64GB RAM, RTX 4090 (24GB), Samsung 870 Pro 8TB, Gen3 MVNe M-2 SSD, 4TBx2, 39" Alienware Widescreen Monitor
Mike "ex-genius" Kelley

Originally developed by visual effects powerhouse, ILM, the EXR format is designed for photorealistic rendering, compositing, and digital intermediate use cases. All the things an Academy Award-winning visual effects company would need from a file format.

Some of the format’s technical aspects make this heritage obvious

• Up to 40 f-stops of high dynamic range
• 32-bit floating point depth
• Lossless compression
• Alpha channel
• Multi-pass and multi-channel images
• Extensive additional metadata support

Warped Reality VFX.

Okay, the EXR file (in Photoshop, at least) is 32 bits, which also includes the alpha channel.  Does that answer your original question?

I put a PNG image on top of the EXR one (in PS) and there is definitely a "difference".  Here is what the PNG image looks like:



And here is the "difference" (this layer set on top of the EXR image with "difference" selected):



Now - what the heck this means I have zero idea.  Looking at the EXR image I can't visually see any difference but clearly there IS some.  So what I want to know is - how would this make things better in an animation?  I'm guessing I can import the EXR images in to, say, Premiere, and then render out that way, but what does that buy me?  (Other than the EXR images are twice the size of the PNG ones).

---

Alienware Aurora R16, Win 11, i9-149000KF, 3.20GHz CPU, 64GB RAM, RTX 4090 (24GB), Samsung 870 Pro 8TB, Gen3 MVNe M-2 SSD, 4TBx2, 39" Alienware Widescreen Monitor
Mike "ex-genius" Kelley

Oh, I should add that switching layers back and forth in PS (to see) there definitely IS a difference - the EXR image looks "brighter" but I'm guessing that's because it has more dynamic range, right?

Hmmm - I have to ponder this all out.  Should we ALL be using EXR from now on?  

---

Alienware Aurora R16, Win 11, i9-149000KF, 3.20GHz CPU, 64GB RAM, RTX 4090 (24GB), Samsung 870 Pro 8TB, Gen3 MVNe M-2 SSD, 4TBx2, 39" Alienware Widescreen Monitor
Mike "ex-genius" Kelley

Hey Mike,

The TLDR version is that if you do any kind of post work an EXR file will provide greater dynamic range, prevent color banding and gives you more flexibility when doing render passes, color grading and the like…

Intel Core i7-13700F - 32GB Memory - NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 TI. Iclone 8, Character Creator 4, Blender, Davinci Resolve studio, Fusion studio

Well, I'm really at a stage in life where I'm not going to do much post work anymore, even to color grade.  I just use whatever comes out.

But I have to admit that the idea there is a greater dynamic range there means (in my mind, at least) that it will look better on screen.  Unlike a still image, though, I can't very well set up a situation to compare final renders when it comes to outputting an MP4, for example.  I dunno - can I get something approaching HDR using that approach?  Again, at my limited life (left) I want to keep it as simple as possible.  If all I have to do is to just render to EXR (versus PNG) then I'm on board.

I guess I'll have to make some tests to see if these (old) eyes can see a difference.

---

Alienware Aurora R16, Win 11, i9-149000KF, 3.20GHz CPU, 64GB RAM, RTX 4090 (24GB), Samsung 870 Pro 8TB, Gen3 MVNe M-2 SSD, 4TBx2, 39" Alienware Widescreen Monitor
Mike "ex-genius" Kelley

Should all renders from everybody be done as EXR? In short, no. If you are happy with your renders, which, until now in the native renderer couldn't be EXR anyway, then PNG sequence or AVI all day long. I only speak for myself, and view the renders I get from Iclone to be the start of the post process, so the flexibility of a 32 bit render is what I want. My original question was if the Reallusion implementation of EXR uses an 8 bit frame buffer, or a higher precision, floating point buffer. If it's the former, then we don't have any more advantage in post really than rendering PNG. If it's the latter, for me at least, that's a huge gain in post. Is it a deal breaker? Nope, I can still get results like I want in Blender. It would just save me a few steps and streamline the process.

Intel Core i7-13700F - 32GB Memory - NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 TI. Iclone 8, Character Creator 4, Blender, Davinci Resolve studio, Fusion studio

Well, not to belabor this (because I already feel like I'm wasting too much time pondering :>) clearly I DO see a difference between PNG and EXR - there is a definite perceived increase in dynamic range.  Whether this holds after I render out as an MP4 remains to be seen (I guess I can figure out some way to compare realistically - perhaps side by side comparisons set up in Premiere or some such).  And that's all I'm after. 

So I guess I'll just play around and see.  But thank you for at least asking about this because it's something I never would have even thought of.

---

Alienware Aurora R16, Win 11, i9-149000KF, 3.20GHz CPU, 64GB RAM, RTX 4090 (24GB), Samsung 870 Pro 8TB, Gen3 MVNe M-2 SSD, 4TBx2, 39" Alienware Widescreen Monitor
Mike "ex-genius" Kelley

@Kelleytoons
I've been using EXR (usually 32, sometimes 16 bit) for final renders for several years now, but I need source material that has more than 8 bits for HDR content, so I have some hands-on experience with this.

As you probably know, mp4 is just a container format; the important thing is the codec in that container. If you intend to produce only 8-Bit SDR (standard dynamic range) content (for example for most YouTube uses), using EXR is probably not going to do much for you except provide a little more latitude for color grading. However, if you need material for HDR (which has commonly at least 10 bits), EXR may be a good choice. (I'm talking about "real" HDR as the stuff on UHD blu-ray discs, not what iClone calls "HDR"). But for HDR content, you also need to do post production work as well as have video editing software and playback capabilities compatible with HDR (e.g. a video (not graphics) card for driving an HDR-capable monitor/TV). And that is a whole new can of worms. (I produce my HDR content for personal consumption and for YouTube, meaning I can upload HDR content to YT and the viewers can watch it as HDR as long as certain conditions are met (i.e. the YT app on their device is HDR-capable and so is the viewing device itself; modern TVs and smartphones usually are). Everybody else will be watching an SDR version automatically created by YouTube (the same way as YT automatically creates lower resolution versions of any high definition content you may have uploaded).

So, unless you have a way to view and work with content at more than 8 bit color depth, EXR is probably not worth it for you. When editing your videos using EXR, you will also need a beefy machine. Your new one may (!) be capable of doing that in RT without pre-rendering or proxies but you would have to test that with the NLE of your choice. (The problem is not so much the GPU but the fact that EXR files are large: at 3840x1622 pixel and 32 bit mine are usually 65-70 MB per frame, which means that depending on your frame rate you may need between 2,000 and 4,000 MB/s data throughput from your storage media for playback plus, of course, any processing by the computer itself. My video editing system's storage cannot do that in RT, but there are ways to work with that.)

there is a definite perceived increase in dynamic range

Well, if you are watching/comparing this on an 8-bit monitor/screen, I kind of doubt you are seeing more dynamic range (because 8 bit is all you can see); it may look that way to you because of the gamma used. If you are watching this on an HDR-capable monitor and have configured Windows and your machine properly to output HDR, then possibly.


My YouTube channel: Animations made with Cinema 4D and Reallusion Products