1
$\begingroup$

I have a large file with lots of lights, that I created and have been working with Blender 3.6. When I opened it with Blender 4 I realized that renders are much different (Cycles); mainly brighter. I than created a test file with two Suzannes on a plane with one light and a camera. As you see, the renders come out different in the two different versions of Blender. I also realized that when I open the file with 3.6 the power value of the light is automatically changed to 127.32 W (it is normally 100 W).

I do not have any light related add-ons installed.

Is this normal? Should I continue working on older files only with older versions of Blender?

Render with 3.6

Render with 4

Improve this question
$\endgroup$
5
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ The lights have been reworked in 4.0, mainly the Point and Spot lights. Read more about the different spot light in my answer here: New Spot Light behavior in 4.0 no longer renders in a volume. And here is a discussion about the new behavior: Point/Spot lights discussion. $\endgroup$
    – Gordon Brinkmann
    Commented Nov 22, 2023 at 7:44
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ I’m sorry, but I'm voting to close this question because it is simply to be answered with "yes", and to make it a question with some helpful answer there should be an issue like "how to recreate this or that appearance with the new lights in Blender" > but then I would probably link to my answer above. Otherwise it is just something that has changed and all we can do is use workarounds or accept it (at least on this site, since we cannot make requests here to the developers to change it back). $\endgroup$
    – Gordon Brinkmann
    Commented Nov 22, 2023 at 7:49
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Your suggestion in Link solved my issue; although not the exactly the same, it gives quite a similar result. Thanks $\endgroup$
    – joethelion
    Commented Nov 22, 2023 at 8:08
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Just another idea; do you think light falloff node can be used to get a similar result? I played with it quite a bit, but could not achieve anything acceptable. $\endgroup$
    – joethelion
    Commented Nov 22, 2023 at 8:11
  • $\begingroup$ Good to know I could help a bit, unfortunately a workaround is often not the same as the original. I usually don't need the Light Falloff node (or at least not before the change), so although I could imagine it might be useful, I have no idea how to set it up ideally. The changes are meant to be more physically accurate in terms of energy conservation and how light radius, size of light source and softness of shadows are working, so I guess I might simply use the lights as they are now and find settings that suit my situation. $\endgroup$
    – Gordon Brinkmann
    Commented Nov 22, 2023 at 8:16

0

Reset to default

You must log in to answer this question.

Browse other questions tagged .