Hey Post-Pro Lounge,
I wanted to share a really clear, approachable breakdown of a topic that comes up a lot in 3D, VFX, animation, and virtual production workflows:
Watch here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1gApyppx3Yc
The video explains the difference between ray tracing and path tracing in simple terms, and why so many modern render engines have shifted toward path tracing despite its high computational cost.
Ray tracing (the traditional approach)
Ray tracing simulates light by tracing rays from the camera until they hit a surface. Historically, it handled direct illumination, sharp reflections, and refractions very well, but usually stopped after a limited number of bounces.
That meant clean, noise-free images, but also missing things like subtle indirect light, color bleed, and soft global illumination unless artists added extra tricks like light maps, radiosity, or ambient fills.
Path tracing (the modern standard)
Path tracing takes ray tracing further by allowing rays to bounce many times in random directions, simulating how light really scatters in the world.
This single unified system naturally produces soft shadows, indirect lighting, caustics, depth of field, and more, which is why engines like Blender Cycles, Arnold, V-Ray, Octane, and Corona rely on it for photorealism.
The tradeoff? Noise, performance, and render time.
Path tracing relies on Monte Carlo sampling, so images start out grainy and only clean up after hundreds or thousands of samples. That’s why denoising, render farms, and GPU acceleration are so critical in modern pipelines.
Real-time vs offline
The video also touches on why fully path-traced rendering is still impractical for most real-time applications like games. Most engines use hybrid approaches, rasterization for the base image plus selective ray tracing for reflections or shadows, with full path tracing reserved for offline or experimental modes.
It’s a great reminder that when we talk about “realism,” we’re almost always talking about time, compute, and compromise behind the scenes.
For those working in post, VFX, or virtual production:
How are you balancing realism vs render time right now? Are you leaning on denoising, hybrid workflows, or simplifying lighting setups to keep things moving?
2 people like this
Sayantan Adhikary I'm still new to color grading but I would love to see a video or an example of how you went about color grading this iPhone LOG. I shoot on my iPhone for my personal content and hav...
Expand commentSayantan Adhikary I'm still new to color grading but I would love to see a video or an example of how you went about color grading this iPhone LOG. I shoot on my iPhone for my personal content and haven't quite mastered color grading.
3 people like this
Sayantan Adhikary Color grading issues aside, no it cannot produce a cinematic look, by definition, unless you desire extreme deep focus. That's dictated by the optics of a teensy camera sensor and ca...
Expand commentSayantan Adhikary Color grading issues aside, no it cannot produce a cinematic look, by definition, unless you desire extreme deep focus. That's dictated by the optics of a teensy camera sensor and cannot be overcome.
1 person likes this
Totally get you, Cyrus Sales . iPhone LOG is powerful, but only when the pipeline is handled correctly — CST, exposure mapping, and highlight roll-off make or break it.
I can share a real before/after...
Expand commentTotally get you, Cyrus Sales . iPhone LOG is powerful, but only when the pipeline is handled correctly — CST, exposure mapping, and highlight roll-off make or break it.
I can share a real before/after breakdown from an iPhone LOG project and explain exactly how I grade it.
If you want, drop me a message — happy to walk you through a clean, repeatable workflow you can use on your own footage.
1 person likes this
100% agree Shadow Dragu-Mihai, Esq., Ipg The limitation isn’t color science, it’s optics + sensor geometry.
Can preserve dynamic range, but the fixed aperture + tiny image circle locks you into deep fo...
Expand comment100% agree Shadow Dragu-Mihai, Esq., Ipg The limitation isn’t color science, it’s optics + sensor geometry.
Can preserve dynamic range, but the fixed aperture + tiny image circle locks you into deep focus. No amount of grading can recreate subject separation that never existed optically.
iPhone can approach it, but it has a very real ceiling.
2 people like this
Interesting, it seems to be a standard Cineon log, so doing a Cineon conversion, and pulling out the green tint will give the exact result on the left (also made a video explaining how to work with lo...
Expand commentInteresting, it seems to be a standard Cineon log, so doing a Cineon conversion, and pulling out the green tint will give the exact result on the left (also made a video explaining how to work with log: https://www.youtube.com/live/_Sonn9Xuetc).