PlaySys has released Real HDR, a new application designed to create custom 32-bit HDR files. It allows the user to add light sources and adjust their shape, intensity, colour and position. It is also possible to subtract shapes using masks to create custom lighting scenarios that can be exported to any application that supports using HDRi images.
Real HDR’s 2D previews are converted to traditional 8-bit RGB and HSV in real-time for visual editing, but the output is a normalized, full float range image.
The software costs $59 for a perpetual license that allows the user to transfer the activation from one computer to another and benefit from all future updates. Find out more on the Real HDR website. This is PlaySys’ second application, they are also the creators of Real IES, the standalone utility for creating photometric lights.
Great to see some competition to the overpriced HDR light studio.
Hope for a maya version
Unless I’m missing something, this software looks to be DCC agnostic. Open standalone application, export an HDR, link HDR in whatever renderer/DCC that supports the required type of spherical mapping, go back to standalone HDR, modify the map, re-export, etc… I could be wrong, but that’s what it looks like to me at a glance. Cheers.
Yes, that is correct.
I think it may work with Maya since it is an external standalone tool but I have to try exr files in Maya to confirm. In the next few days I’m going to record a video for Real HDR in Arnold (3ds Max version, but Maya’s should be very similar).
HDRLS looks cool, but man it i is expensive.
Good work Luca, for that price I’m willing to support it and see it grow, looking forward to see what other features you add.
Thank you Sean! I just uploaded the new version on the website. My colleagues updated the user manual and created a sub-page on the website with the release notes. We also made the roadmap public so you can see which are going to be the priorities for the next releases.
$59 for a permanent licence of this vs $995 for a permanent licence of hdr light studio.
This tool doesn’t seem to do proper transformations at the poles. It’s a “dumb” 2D placementtool as far as I can see (which you can do for 0$ with fusion free) which in my opinion is pretty useless then and can’t even be compared to HDR light studio.
True, there are no transformation at the moment. This feature is already on the roadmap but for first release I concentrated on other priorities. Also while testing it for generic “outdoors” I noticed this way the shadows are prevented from being too soft since a circle is transformed (better say, not transformed) in a sort of drop shape, where the wide area and the small area coexist.
Martin, I just uploaded the new release of Real HDR where I included, among the features, the proper equirectangular transformation. I wanted to thank you for pointing this missing feature in the first release.
Well, this app seems promising and I do support another player in this market besides HDR light studio (hdrls). Just for healthy competition and more competitive prices which ultimately benefit us, the artist. That being said.
I admit, I have used hdrls for almost a decade and I am huge fan of it’s features. Yes, it’s expensive but let’s be honest here, at the moment real hdr maybe has 1/10th of the features or capabilities of hdrls? So, let’s not compare apples and oranges.
Could the price of this real hdr be maintained when it has features on par with hdrls?
Good point, my idea is not to recreate an already existing software. We are designing new features that I personally, as 3D artist myself, feel necessary.
Hi Luca
Apologies for missing your reply.
Sure, it’s never a good idea to blankly copy a software’s features.
1. New features or a different view on a workflow,…that another softwares don’t have is the better way to go to have your product stand out.
2. We all have basic needs as hdrls has put the bar very high.
Looking forward to the progress you make.
Kindest regards, Per
looks good but we shouldn’t forget that IBL only is not enough.
https://magicalpixel.blogspot.com/p/tool-auto-hdri-light-gen-v1_22.html
This is mainly a concern for studio lighting setups. If you’re doing exterior archviz or environments you’re perfectly fine with classic IBL.
Hi NNN
You’re right. IBL only is great for doing arch viz but for product lighting it’s often better to have 3d lights or both.
I have looked into the the link you posted.
This ILM inspired lighting tool that extracts area lights from hdr’s is amazing.
If you would combine that with placement tools like SLib Leuchtkraft.
https://store.cgfront.com/slib-plug-ins/21-slib-leuchtkraft.html
But for Max and in the Max viewport, than you would have a killer tool!
Cheers Per
Very nice, thanks for your efforts! Would be great to add a global blurring that creates blurry reflection maps for real-time use. I find that blurring in Photoshop is a pain because it creates a seam at the L/R edges that needs touch-up.
Good idea Eric, this was not in my roadmap. Just added.
What I miss mostly here is real time preview. Now we have to palce light, export, wait for corona and then we’ll see the result. It is not acceptable in precision way of thinking and adjusting light. But still, useful tool for 3dsMax user and I hope it will be developed for a faster and more accurate lighting, although I know it may be hard to achieve if you still use the way of exporting this hdr image first to see result.
True, but I already have the previewer in my mind, I still have to code it properly in Real HDR, but I was doing some raw tests and I can say that at certain moment of the development this feature will appear.
Peter I am still working on the realtime preview. I had to start a new roadmap only for this since I got some ideas in my mind.
By the way, today I released version 1.2 with a precise color selector that other users were asking about. One by one I am trying to integrate every request you write here.
Resolution of exports seems awfully low?
I see in the docs that ‘that’s what they settled on’
But if you’re doing any high-res prints 2Kx1K doesn’t seem enough.
I agree that it may sound low but consider that Real HDR is, at the moment, created to generate exr files to be used to emit light. Besides the highlights, these maps shoudn’t be seen so much in reflections and even if so, they are mostly made of colours to provide a general lighting and not the background itself. I tested the maps with V-Ray, Maxwell and Corona and 2k looked good even for high-res renders.
However, of course I take notes on every feedback I receive and I don’t exclude the possibility of adding back a resolution selector for the exporter.
Talking about background and reflections I am investigating the possibility to add a new module to the software. I refer to it in my roadmap as “Procedural SC” and I’ll post here when I have some good news about it.
Thanks for the feedback!
OK, thanks – look forward to the possibilities of the Procedural SC module!