Now that Volumes are being implemented in Cycles-X, could be a good time to add an important feature for them, Masking, what I mean is that volumes are not supported in Cryptomatte or any kind of ID pass, so having Volume support on Cryptomatte or having a new masking pass for volumes could be great, and maybe this is the time to do it since itˋs a new implementation.
Yes, I understand you. My two cents would be that as Cryptomatte don’t support volumes there is nothing to develop on Blender’s side for it. A volumes render pass (only volumes) with alpha or the master solution: a good deep exr volume render implementation is the way to go.
Oh I’d heard they were super heavy. How do they even work ? How do you store depth information in an image file ? Hm, that’s not the subject. Sorry. Yeah I would love to have that kind of flexibility with Cycles.
I don’t know the proper technique, @brecht or @sergey know better for sure, the point here is that since volumes are being implemented from scratch, it may be the best moment to leverage the required development and implement this feature
At my day job, 95% of how we manage volumes in compositing is via per-light AOVs and not via IDs. My hope is that robust volume rendering will be part of a comprehensive LPE (light path expression) system.
The first priority for volumes is to improve the sampling, but we’ll look at render passes if there is time. Cryptomatte should work fine.
I don’t really see the value in ID passes for volumes, those work poorly with transparency and so also with volumes. There is no clear boundary to delineate the volume by. With deep EXR ID passes would make sense, though that’s not immediately planned.