Denoising Albedo gives wrong results #69770

New Issue

Closed

opened 2019-09-12 02:10:44 +02:00 by Daniel Salazar · 36 comments

Daniel Salazar commented 2019-09-12 02:10:44 +02:00

Member

Copy Link

System Information
Operating system: Windows-10-10.0.18362 64 Bits
Graphics card: GeForce GTX 1080 with Max-Q Design/PCIe/SSE2 NVIDIA Corporation 4.5.0 NVIDIA 436.15

Blender Version
Broken: version: 2.81 (sub 10), branch: master, commit date: 2019-09-09 20:20, hash: 3e81c1c1d5

Short description of error
Denoising Albedo pass appears washed out

Exact steps for others to reproduce the error

Open the following blend file and press F12
Albedo.blend

The Denoising albedo pass will come out like this

Lower the Principled Roughness value to 0 and press F12 again

This time the albedo looks correct

Switching to Metallic 1.0 and Roughness 0.5 looks like the albedo is completely lost

For the denoiser to give proper results, the Denoiser Albedo pass would need to give clean colors, not washed out colors.

**System Information** Operating system: Windows-10-10.0.18362 64 Bits Graphics card: GeForce GTX 1080 with Max-Q Design/PCIe/SSE2 NVIDIA Corporation 4.5.0 NVIDIA 436.15 **Blender Version** Broken: version: 2.81 (sub 10), branch: master, commit date: 2019-09-09 20:20, hash: `3e81c1c1d5` **Short description of error** Denoising Albedo pass appears washed out **Exact steps for others to reproduce the error** Open the following blend file and press F12 [Albedo.blend](https://archive.blender.org/developer/F7737135/Albedo.blend) The Denoising albedo pass will come out like this   Lower the Principled Roughness value to 0 and press F12 again This time the albedo looks correct   Switching to Metallic 1.0 and Roughness 0.5 looks like the albedo is completely lost   For the denoiser to give proper results, the Denoiser Albedo pass would need to give clean colors, not washed out colors.

Daniel Salazar commented 2019-09-12 02:10:45 +02:00

Author

Member

Copy Link

Added subscriber: @zanqdo

Added subscriber: @zanqdo

Daniel Salazar commented 2019-09-12 02:15:43 +02:00

Author

Member

Copy Link

Changed status from 'Open' to: 'Archived'

Changed status from 'Open' to: 'Archived'

Daniel Salazar closed this issue 2019-09-12 02:15:43 +02:00

Daniel Salazar commented 2019-09-12 02:32:07 +02:00

Author

Member

Copy Link

Changed status from 'Archived' to: 'Open'

Changed status from 'Archived' to: 'Open'

Daniel Salazar reopened this issue 2019-09-12 02:32:07 +02:00

Jacques Lucke commented 2019-09-19 17:18:59 +02:00

Member

Copy Link

Added subscribers: @Stefan_Werner, @JacquesLucke

Added subscribers: @Stefan_Werner, @JacquesLucke

Jacques Lucke commented 2019-09-19 17:18:59 +02:00

Member

Copy Link

While it is true that the Denoising Albedo looks washed out, it does not seem to be an issue. Using the Denoise node with it works just fine. Or do you get any issue with the denoising?

@Stefan_Werner Can you give more information? Feel free to close this if it is not actually a bug.

While it is true that the Denoising Albedo looks washed out, it does not seem to be an issue. Using the Denoise node with it works just fine. Or do you get any issue with the denoising? @Stefan_Werner Can you give more information? Feel free to close this if it is not actually a bug.

Daniel Salazar commented 2019-09-19 20:15:45 +02:00

Author

Member

Copy Link

Denoise is a complex feature meant for use in production files, you can't judge the results on a monkey head. The bug report is about the Albedo pass being incorrect, which clearly shows. Not about demonstrating it's effects on denoising. However I can provide an example of incorrect denoising extracted from a real scene.

Original (Noisy)

Denoised with Denoising Albedo (Incorrect result)

Denoised only with Subsurface Color pass (Correct result)

What is happening is that the correct albedo is already present in the Subsurface Color pass shown below

The Gloss color pass however gives a white result

When the 2 are added together in the Denoising Albedo pass the resulting pass is washed out hence being incorrect and useless for denoising

Blend file can be found here
Denoise_Albedo.blend

Press F12 and wait for the render to finish.

Denoise is a complex feature meant for use in production files, you can't judge the results on a monkey head. The bug report is about the Albedo pass being incorrect, which clearly shows. Not about demonstrating it's effects on denoising. However I can provide an example of incorrect denoising extracted from a real scene. Original (Noisy)  Denoised with Denoising Albedo (Incorrect result)  Denoised only with Subsurface Color pass (Correct result)  What is happening is that the correct albedo is already present in the Subsurface Color pass shown below  The Gloss color pass however gives a white result  When the 2 are added together in the Denoising Albedo pass the resulting pass is washed out hence being incorrect and useless for denoising  Blend file can be found here [Denoise_Albedo.blend](https://archive.blender.org/developer/F7758936/Denoise_Albedo.blend) Press F12 and wait for the render to finish.

adrenaline_hunter commented 2019-10-21 13:54:05 +02:00

Copy Link

Added subscriber: @adrenaline_hunter

Added subscriber: @adrenaline_hunter

adrenaline_hunter commented 2019-10-21 13:54:05 +02:00

Copy Link

I confirm the bug in real production

here an example scene: the albedo pass is causing a blurry denoise, while the DiffCol pass, wich in this case at least in teapot area seems better, does not retain all the infos (like Gloss, obviously).

non denoised scene

albedo denoise

diffuse denoise

albedo output

DiffCol output

full Blender scene
Cycles.blend

I confirm the bug in real production here an example scene: the albedo pass is causing a blurry denoise, while the DiffCol pass, wich in this case at least in teapot area seems better, does not retain all the infos (like Gloss, obviously). non denoised scene  albedo denoise  diffuse denoise  albedo output  DiffCol output  full Blender scene [Cycles.blend](https://archive.blender.org/developer/F7843888/Cycles.blend)

Riccardo Gagliarducci commented 2019-10-21 13:58:32 +02:00

Copy Link

Added subscriber: @Rickyx

Added subscriber: @Rickyx

Julian Perez commented 2019-10-21 14:56:48 +02:00

Copy Link

Added subscriber: @JulianPerez

Added subscriber: @JulianPerez

Julian Perez commented 2019-10-21 14:56:48 +02:00

Copy Link

I can confirm that too, for scenes where there are textures with small details the denoising albedo pass can't keep the texture detail. I've been combining all the color passes to have a clear albedo, but if there are textured glass or metal materials it gets trickier to fix with the color passes.

Look at this example, rendered at 64 samples only (the glass and fabric underneath would need a lot more samples to have a clean denoise), but look at the difference in the some of the fruits, especially the grapes, the denoising albedo looks weird and it doesn't seem to have enough color/texture information, so the denoise result looks more like an "artistic filter".

Noisy Image

Denoising Albedo

Mixed Albedo

Denoising Albedo Output

Mixed Albedo Output

I can confirm that too, for scenes where there are textures with small details the denoising albedo pass can't keep the texture detail. I've been combining all the color passes to have a clear albedo, but if there are textured glass or metal materials it gets trickier to fix with the color passes. Look at this example, rendered at 64 samples only (the glass and fabric underneath would need a lot more samples to have a clean denoise), but look at the difference in the some of the fruits, especially the grapes, the denoising albedo looks weird and it doesn't seem to have enough color/texture information, so the denoise result looks more like an "artistic filter".  Noisy Image  Denoising Albedo  Mixed Albedo  Denoising Albedo Output  Mixed Albedo Output

Lukas Stockner was assigned by adrenaline_hunter 2019-11-11 21:34:01 +01:00

Stefania Borali commented 2019-11-18 13:35:50 +01:00

Copy Link

Added subscriber: @sb_render

Added subscriber: @sb_render

Stefania Borali commented 2019-11-18 13:35:50 +01:00

Copy Link

I have the same problem. See that in the render with cycles there are more details, and with the intel denoise we lost the light

  I have the same problem. See that in the render with cycles there are more details, and with the intel denoise we lost the light

Lukas Stockner was unassigned by adrenaline_hunter 2019-11-19 22:02:48 +01:00

Brecht Van Lommel was assigned by adrenaline_hunter 2019-11-19 22:02:48 +01:00

adrenaline_hunter commented 2019-11-19 22:02:48 +01:00

Copy Link

Added subscriber: @LukasStockner

Added subscriber: @LukasStockner

msalv commented 2019-11-19 22:24:56 +01:00

Copy Link

Added subscriber: @moisessalvador

Added subscriber: @moisessalvador

msalv commented 2019-11-19 22:24:56 +01:00

Copy Link

I can confirm as well, I went through the original Intel documentation and was surprised at how good results they have on their page, and the claim that Denoising Albedo is the best input for the denoiser to have. The current denoiser albedo pass is simply adding the Glossy Color pass to all the others Color passes, but the Glossy Color pass doesn't contain percentage of reflectivity for things with frenel. The intel documentation doesn't specify a correct solution though, it's up to you what passes you choose and what combination, for example, if you want to add reflections to the mix or not, and how to do it, taking just the color or the actual first bounce. My current setup is to add Diffuse Color, SSS color and Translucent color, leaving Glossy color out.

I can confirm as well, I went through the original Intel documentation and was surprised at how good results they have on their page, and the claim that Denoising Albedo is the best input for the denoiser to have. The current denoiser albedo pass is simply adding the Glossy Color pass to all the others Color passes, but the Glossy Color pass doesn't contain percentage of reflectivity for things with frenel. The intel documentation doesn't specify a correct solution though, it's up to you what passes you choose and what combination, for example, if you want to add reflections to the mix or not, and how to do it, taking just the color or the actual first bounce. My current setup is to add Diffuse Color, SSS color and Translucent color, leaving Glossy color out.

Stefania Borali commented 2019-11-19 22:33:12 +01:00

Copy Link

In #69770#813349, @moisessalvador wrote:
I can confirm as well, I went through the original Intel documentation and was surprised at how good results they have on their page, and the claim that Denoising Albedo is the best input for the denoiser to have. The current denoiser albedo pass is simply adding the Glossy Color pass to all the others Color passes, but the Glossy Color pass doesn't contain percentage of reflectivity for things with frenel. The intel documentation doesn't specify a correct solution though, it's up to you what passes you choose and what combination, for example, if you want to add reflections to the mix or not, and how to do it, taking just the color or the actual first bounce. My current setup is to add Diffuse Color, SSS color and Translucent color, leaving Glossy color out.

So you solved the problem? I saw many tutorial that duplicate e apply the node denoiser at every path. But I think that is not comfortable do that.

> In #69770#813349, @moisessalvador wrote: > I can confirm as well, I went through the original Intel documentation and was surprised at how good results they have on their page, and the claim that Denoising Albedo is the best input for the denoiser to have. The current denoiser albedo pass is simply adding the Glossy Color pass to all the others Color passes, but the Glossy Color pass doesn't contain percentage of reflectivity for things with frenel. The intel documentation doesn't specify a correct solution though, it's up to you what passes you choose and what combination, for example, if you want to add reflections to the mix or not, and how to do it, taking just the color or the actual first bounce. My current setup is to add Diffuse Color, SSS color and Translucent color, leaving Glossy color out. So you solved the problem? I saw many tutorial that duplicate e apply the node denoiser at every path. But I think that is not comfortable do that.

Lukas Stockner commented 2019-11-19 22:42:23 +01:00

Member

Copy Link

This is not a bug.

The Albedo channel was designed for the original Cycles denoiser, which is completely invariant to constant shifts in feature passes. As you all noted, the Albedo pass works just fine with the original Denoiser.

Apparently the same is not true for OpenImageDenoise. In this case, we should adapt the pass to work better with it, but this is a feature request, not a bug - the channel does exactly what it was supposed to do, provide an albedo input that works fine with the original denoiser.

This is not a bug. The Albedo channel was designed for the original Cycles denoiser, which is completely invariant to constant shifts in feature passes. As you all noted, the Albedo pass works just fine with the original Denoiser. Apparently the same is not true for OpenImageDenoise. In this case, we should adapt the pass to work better with it, **but this is a feature request, not a bug** - the channel does exactly what it was supposed to do, provide an albedo input that works fine with the original denoiser.

Stefania Borali commented 2019-11-19 22:45:25 +01:00

Copy Link

In #69770#813352, @LukasStockner wrote:
This is not a bug.

The Albedo channel was designed for the original Cycles denoiser, which is completely invariant to constant shifts in feature passes. As you all noted, the Albedo pass works just fine with the original Denoiser.

Apparently the same is not true for OpenImageDenoise. In this case, we should adapt the pass to work better with it, but this is a feature request, not a bug - the channel does exactly what it was supposed to do, provide an albedo input that works fine with the original denoiser.

OK, but how can we solve the problem? How can we adapt the albedo?

> In #69770#813352, @LukasStockner wrote: > This is not a bug. > > The Albedo channel was designed for the original Cycles denoiser, which is completely invariant to constant shifts in feature passes. As you all noted, the Albedo pass works just fine with the original Denoiser. > > Apparently the same is not true for OpenImageDenoise. In this case, we should adapt the pass to work better with it, **but this is a feature request, not a bug** - the channel does exactly what it was supposed to do, provide an albedo input that works fine with the original denoiser. OK, but how can we solve the problem? How can we adapt the albedo?

adrenaline_hunter commented 2019-11-19 22:58:10 +01:00

Copy Link

In #69770#813352, @LukasStockner wrote:
This is not a bug.

The Albedo channel was designed for the original Cycles denoiser, which is completely invariant to constant shifts in feature passes. As you all noted, the Albedo pass works just fine with the original Denoiser.

Apparently the same is not true for OpenImageDenoise. In this case, we should adapt the pass to work better with it, but this is a feature request, not a bug - the channel does exactly what it was supposed to do, provide an albedo input that works fine with the original denoiser.

In the next few days I try to setup a basic scene that works with Cycles and LuxCore so we can compare the albedos of the two engines, afaik OIDN in LuxCore can retain the details of the textures very well.

Even if OIDN in Cycles is a great improvement at this stage is quite limited, it's a pity to left a major feature like this with these limitations.

> In #69770#813352, @LukasStockner wrote: > This is not a bug. > > The Albedo channel was designed for the original Cycles denoiser, which is completely invariant to constant shifts in feature passes. As you all noted, the Albedo pass works just fine with the original Denoiser. > > Apparently the same is not true for OpenImageDenoise. In this case, we should adapt the pass to work better with it, **but this is a feature request, not a bug** - the channel does exactly what it was supposed to do, provide an albedo input that works fine with the original denoiser. In the next few days I try to setup a basic scene that works with Cycles and LuxCore so we can compare the albedos of the two engines, afaik OIDN in LuxCore can retain the details of the textures very well. Even if OIDN in Cycles is a great improvement at this stage is quite limited, it's a pity to left a major feature like this with these limitations.

Stefan Werner commented 2019-11-21 15:21:25 +01:00

Member

Copy Link

@LukasStockner It looks to me like this is a thing specific to the principled BSDF, which if I'm not mistaken was added after your denoiser? A quick look in the debugger tells me that for most settings, the principled BSDF adds the white specular component to the albedo when it might be beneficial to only use the diffuse albedo.

@LukasStockner It looks to me like this is a thing specific to the principled BSDF, which if I'm not mistaken was added after your denoiser? A quick look in the debugger tells me that for most settings, the principled BSDF adds the white specular component to the albedo when it might be beneficial to only use the diffuse albedo.

Riccardo Gagliarducci commented 2019-11-21 17:18:47 +01:00

Copy Link

In #69770#813352, @LukasStockner wrote:
This is not a bug.

The Albedo channel was designed for the original Cycles denoiser, which is completely invariant to constant shifts in feature passes. As you all noted, the Albedo pass works just fine with the original Denoiser.

Apparently the same is not true for OpenImageDenoise. In this case, we should adapt the pass to work better with it, but this is a feature request, not a bug - the channel does exactly what it was supposed to do, provide an albedo input that works fine with the original denoiser.

If I understand correctly now OIDN accepts an input that no node can generate?

> In #69770#813352, @LukasStockner wrote: > This is not a bug. > > The Albedo channel was designed for the original Cycles denoiser, which is completely invariant to constant shifts in feature passes. As you all noted, the Albedo pass works just fine with the original Denoiser. > > Apparently the same is not true for OpenImageDenoise. In this case, we should adapt the pass to work better with it, **but this is a feature request, not a bug** - the channel does exactly what it was supposed to do, provide an albedo input that works fine with the original denoiser. If I understand correctly now OIDN accepts an input that no node can generate?

Julian Perez commented 2019-11-21 17:49:48 +01:00

Copy Link

For this denoiser to give the best results the albedo pass would have to combine Diffuse + SSS and Translucent passes, and I'm not sure if specular should be used too. Diffuse alone won't be enough.

For this denoiser to give the best results the albedo pass would have to combine Diffuse + SSS and Translucent passes, and I'm not sure if specular should be used too. Diffuse alone won't be enough.

Lukas Stockner commented 2019-11-22 11:13:24 +01:00

Member

Copy Link

In #69770#814351, @Stefan_Werner wrote:
@LukasStockner It looks to me like this is a thing specific to the principled BSDF, which if I'm not mistaken was added after your denoiser? A quick look in the debugger tells me that for most settings, the principled BSDF adds the white specular component to the albedo when it might be beneficial to only use the diffuse albedo.

Right, thanks for the hint, I found what's going on. D6289 should make the albedo pass more OIDN-friendly.

> In #69770#814351, @Stefan_Werner wrote: > @LukasStockner It looks to me like this is a thing specific to the principled BSDF, which if I'm not mistaken was added after your denoiser? A quick look in the debugger tells me that for most settings, the principled BSDF adds the white specular component to the albedo when it might be beneficial to only use the diffuse albedo. Right, thanks for the hint, I found what's going on. [D6289](https://archive.blender.org/developer/D6289) should make the albedo pass more OIDN-friendly.

Maciej Jutrzenka commented 2019-11-26 19:34:34 +01:00

Copy Link

Added subscriber: @MaciejJutrzenka

Added subscriber: @MaciejJutrzenka

Maciej Jutrzenka commented 2019-11-26 19:34:39 +01:00

Copy Link

Removed subscriber: @MaciejJutrzenka

Removed subscriber: @MaciejJutrzenka

Maciej Jutrzenka commented 2019-11-26 19:40:26 +01:00

Copy Link

Changed status from 'Open' to: 'Resolved'

Changed status from 'Open' to: 'Resolved'

Maciej Jutrzenka closed this issue 2019-11-26 19:40:26 +01:00

Maciej Jutrzenka commented 2019-11-26 19:40:26 +01:00

Copy Link

As lukas said fixed in https://developer.blender.org/D6289 apperantly i think i am closeing this as resolved.

As lukas said fixed in https://developer.blender.org/D6289 apperantly i think i am closeing this as resolved.

Maciej Jutrzenka commented 2019-11-26 19:40:53 +01:00

Copy Link

Added subscriber: @MaciejJutrzenka

Added subscriber: @MaciejJutrzenka

Brecht Van Lommel commented 2019-11-26 19:41:21 +01:00

Owner

Copy Link

Changed status from 'Resolved' to: 'Open'

Changed status from 'Resolved' to: 'Open'

Brecht Van Lommel reopened this issue 2019-11-26 19:41:21 +01:00

Brecht Van Lommel commented 2019-11-26 19:41:21 +01:00

Owner

Copy Link

We only close bugs when the fix is committed.

We only close bugs when the fix is committed.

Maciej Jutrzenka commented 2019-11-26 19:43:15 +01:00

Copy Link

ah didn't know. good to know also gives me idea for another status to add in proposal!

ah didn't know. good to know also gives me idea for another status to add in proposal!

adrenaline_hunter commented 2019-11-27 12:31:08 +01:00

Copy Link

the bug will be fixed in 2.82? Any chance to test it earlier? Thanks!

the bug will be fixed in 2.82? Any chance to test it earlier? Thanks!

Lukas Stockner commented 2019-11-27 21:32:03 +01:00

Member

Copy Link

Changed status from 'Open' to: 'Resolved'

Changed status from 'Open' to: 'Resolved'

Lukas Stockner closed this issue 2019-11-27 21:32:03 +01:00

Lukas Stockner commented 2019-11-27 21:32:03 +01:00

Member

Copy Link

In #69770#819303, @adrenaline_hunter wrote:
the bug will be fixed in 2.82? Any chance to test it earlier? Thanks!

Should be in the next daily builds.

> In #69770#819303, @adrenaline_hunter wrote: > the bug will be fixed in 2.82? Any chance to test it earlier? Thanks! Should be in the next daily builds.

adrenaline_hunter commented 2019-11-27 22:46:01 +01:00

Copy Link

In #69770#819781, @LukasStockner wrote:

In #69770#819303, @adrenaline_hunter wrote:
the bug will be fixed in 2.82? Any chance to test it earlier? Thanks!

Should be in the next daily builds.

ok, thanks!

> In #69770#819781, @LukasStockner wrote: >> In #69770#819303, @adrenaline_hunter wrote: >> the bug will be fixed in 2.82? Any chance to test it earlier? Thanks! > > Should be in the next daily builds. ok, thanks!

Sign in to join this conversation.

No Branch/Tag Specified

Branches Tags

main

brush-assets-project

blender-v4.1-release

blender-v3.3-release

blender-v3.6-release

universal-scene-description

blender-v3.6-temp_wmoss_animrig_public

temp-sculpt-dyntopo

gpencil-next

anim/animation-id-113594

blender-v4.0-release

blender-projects-basics

bridge-curves

sculpt-blender

asset-browser-frontend-split

asset-shelf

tmp-usd-python-mtl

tmp-usd-3.6

blender-v3.5-release

blender-v2.93-release

realtime-clock

sculpt-dev

bevelv2

xr-dev

v4.1.1

v3.6.11

v3.3.18

v4.1.0

v3.3.17

v3.6.10

v3.6.9

v3.3.16

v3.6.8

v3.6.7

v3.3.14

v4.0.2

v4.0.1

v4.0.0

v3.6.5

v3.3.12

v3.6.4

v3.6.3

v3.3.11

v3.6.2

v3.3.10

v3.6.1

v3.3.9

v3.6.0

v3.3.8

v3.3.7

v2.93.18

v3.5.1

v3.3.6

v2.93.17

v3.5.0

v2.93.16

v3.3.5

v3.3.4

v2.93.15

v2.93.14

v3.3.3

v2.93.13

v2.93.12

v3.4.1

v3.3.2

v3.4.0

v3.3.1

v2.93.11

v3.3.0

v3.2.2

v2.93.10

v3.2.1

v3.2.0

v2.83.20

v2.93.9

v3.1.2

v3.1.1

v3.1.0

v2.83.19

v2.93.8

v3.0.1

v2.93.7

v3.0.0

v2.93.6

v2.93.5

v2.83.18

v2.93.4

v2.93.3

v2.83.17

v2.93.2

v2.93.1

v2.83.16

v2.93.0

v2.83.15

v2.83.14

v2.83.13

v2.92.0

v2.83.12

v2.91.2

v2.83.10

v2.91.0

v2.83.9

v2.83.8

v2.83.7

v2.90.1

v2.83.6.1

v2.83.6

v2.90.0

v2.83.5

v2.83.4

v2.83.3

v2.83.2

v2.83.1

v2.83

v2.82a

v2.82

v2.81a

v2.81

v2.80

v2.80-rc3

v2.80-rc2

v2.80-rc1

v2.79b

v2.79a

v2.79

v2.79-rc2

v2.79-rc1

v2.78c

v2.78b

v2.78a

v2.78

v2.78-rc2

v2.78-rc1

v2.77a

v2.77

v2.77-rc2

v2.77-rc1

v2.76b

v2.76a

v2.76

v2.76-rc3

v2.76-rc2

v2.76-rc1

v2.75a

v2.75

v2.75-rc2

v2.75-rc1

v2.74

v2.74-rc4

v2.74-rc3

v2.74-rc2

v2.74-rc1

v2.73a

v2.73

v2.73-rc1

v2.72b

2.72b

v2.72a

v2.72

v2.72-rc1

v2.71

v2.71-rc2

v2.71-rc1

v2.70a

v2.70

v2.70-rc2

v2.70-rc

v2.69

v2.68a

v2.68

v2.67b

v2.67a

v2.67

v2.66a

v2.66

v2.65a

v2.65

v2.64a

v2.64

v2.63a

v2.63

v2.61

v2.60a

v2.60

v2.59

v2.58a

v2.58

v2.57b

v2.57a

v2.57

v2.56a

v2.56

v2.55

v2.54

v2.53

v2.52

v2.51

v2.50

v2.49b

v2.49a

v2.49

v2.48a

v2.48

v2.47

v2.46

v2.45

v2.44

v2.43

v2.42a

v2.42

v2.41

v2.40

v2.37a

v2.37

v2.36

v2.35a

v2.35

v2.34

v2.33a

v2.33

v2.32

v2.31a

v2.31

v2.30

v2.28c

v2.28a

v2.28

v2.27

v2.26

v2.25

Labels

Clear labels   

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

This issue affects/is about backward or forward 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

Issues relating to Wayland windowing support.

  

Interest

Workbench

  

Interest: X11

Issues relating to Xorg/X11 support.

  

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

Issues relating to security: https://wiki.blender.org/wiki/Process/Vulnerability_Reports

  

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 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

Milestone

Clear milestone

No items

No Milestone

Projects

Clear projects

No project

Assignees

Clear assignees

No Assignees

Brecht Van Lommel

11 Participants

Notifications

Subscribe

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#69770

No description provided.