Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - James Vella

Pages: 1 ... 14 15 [16] 17 18 ... 36
226
haha or that one, romullus probably has more experience using the latest version of 3dsmax. Jeez I should just upgrade at this point I feel like I'm missing out! :D

Not to hijack the thread but genuinely curious, I can install 3dsmax 2024 as well (since Autodesk keeps bugging me) but I remember in the past it screwed up my 3dsmax 2021 thumbnails, is this still the case or can I install it along side 2021 without issues romullus?

227
You need to convert your materials to glb format first:
https://help.autodesk.com/view/3DSMAX/2023/ENU/?guid=GUID-7ABFB805-1D9F-417E-9C22-704BFDF160FA

Or the way I do it (since I havent updated to 3dsmax 2023) is use my script to convert vray materials (not corona) to standard, export to blender then export to glb. Note if you are exporting from vray you need to be working in the roughness workflow, not glossiness.:
https://github.com/jmdvella/3dsmax-scripts/blob/main/JV_VrayRoughnessToFBX.ms




228
[Max] Feature Requests / Re: Chaos Libary Vegetation
« on: 2023-08-01, 16:00:11 »
I watched the video, but you didnt answer my question. Are these converted from vray or native corona materials?

229
[Max] Feature Requests / Re: Chaos Libary Vegetation
« on: 2023-08-01, 11:30:19 »
Are these cosmos assets you are using converted from vray or are they corona native materials?

230
[Max] Feature Requests / Re: Chaos Libary Vegetation
« on: 2023-07-31, 20:53:56 »
Front/Back, Translucency, Bump/Normal and Opacity is standard for vegetation.

I cant see your IOR map from this blurry screenshot however it would probably be the standard 1.5 so you can just ignore it.

Regarding comments like "we redo these steps every time" is very subjective, no software can tailor things exactly how you expect and usually tries to stick to industry standards. If you need things to work exactly how you expect then you can always hire someone for the day to build a material converter script, its not very complicated to automate.

Can you show a comparison of: Your Render/Material setup vs Cosmos Render/Material? I would be interested to see the difference. As they say a picture is worth a thousand words.

231
Yeah that was my feeling as well from the outside, a lot of really great tools (sculpting alone would be fantastic...) but I never liked the base environment, although I thought it was just getting too used to Max, as I found Maya or Modo just as baffling from ease of use standpoint.

Yeah you are not wrong, actually it kind of does relate back to this thread and that's the development cycles side of things. Its kind of a double edge sword, the fact that 3dsmax has 2 year release cycles (1 year bug fixes, small additions, 2nd year updated code base) is actually useful in production for not breaking plugins/scripts.

For example every scene I build I usually re-build in cinema4d and blender for assets that I sell. Sometimes these are as big as a living room, kitchen, etc. So getting all the camera/lights/render/displacement settings as close to 1:1 is my main goal. So back to my previous point, the first thing I tried to find in blender was camera/LUT matching (since curves/vfb settings change per render engine a custom LUT would be the quickest/easiest way to match across all software and engines (vray/corona/cycles) as curves (which is my preferred tone mapping solution isn't always able to be imported/exported). Sooo... I found an addon for blender which can do vertical matching/LUT however because the development cycle is so short it broke in the next version, people paid for it and the developer lost interest at some point and just didn't provide any support or even reply to emails. I can imagine this would happen regularly with other addons which brings me back to why I think even though its a bit painful wishing 3dsmax would develop new tools faster, having a slower dev time actually keeps functionality longer term, without changing too much of the inner code without breaking plugins this is a positive in my view, and this is where I see problems in blender. I rather have some continuity to my pipeline, especially when clients are paying me than be trying to figure out why things don't work as they should or they just decide to remove/change things because they can - this is my definition of 'too technical'. When I'm often looking for a button in blender ill watch a video from 6 months ago, that button is gone, and now you do it a new way and the documentation is often not helpful or lacking in detail. 3dsmax/c4d documentation is actually much better in my opinion. Vray probably has some of the best documentation I've read, I wish more companies would follow their path.

Just some food for thought, I think c4d now does half year releases but not sure at what point they change underlying functionality. However my hunch is Maxon have a pretty good understanding of these topics and I've rarely come across any major issues with pipeline breakages. I've even used plugins that are years old and they just work (not always but that would be 100% impossible in 3dsmax for example and certainly not in blender).

Always keen to hear other peoples thoughts on this too, I prefer not to think in a vacuum and I could always be wrong and happy to be so if you can alleviate my pain in some regards.

Another plus for c4d is scripting in python, its probably the easiest environment to automate/script for as 3dsmax's listener often hides things which can be a pain to hunt down if you don't know how to find that thing, where as python in c4d is quite straight forward. 

232
I use blender every day as well, certainly would never switch over 3dsmax. Don't get me wrong lots to love in blender but for archviz its a nightmare. Its staggeringly slow, yes it loads fast but that's about where it ends. Importing files is just painfully slow, the viewport struggles with anything larger than a living room (without user intervention). No instancing modifiers, lack of modifiers. The software updates often yet its not so easy to copy your settings across (although I did see something on this recently to make the update easier). File pathing is just horrible, anything that's deleted from the scene is kept in the scene as 'orphan data', which means you have to remove this stuff multiple times so you don't get double up's on mesh/material/texture naming. Camera settings are bonkers, there is no guess vertical, there is no way to import LUT files without scripting it into the config files etc... For me it feels like everything is too technical in blender and all the 'simple solutions' are just hacks or addons - a lot of which should just be apart of the base software.

Apart from that rant, there's some things which are great like the modelling tools, shader editor, compositor, sculpting, painting, geometry nodes, viewport - and good to see getting updated regularly.

233
Regarding plugins there's a good short list here, most of these are probably similar to ones you use currently such as floor generators, roof tiles gen, ivy gen, city gen, grass painter, forestpro/scatter (or you can use chaos scatter), forester (similar to growfx), anima (people), baluster (similar to railclone) etc.


In regards to performance in my experience I use both 3dsmax/c4d but more 3dsmax. I like c4d's interface and all but in my experience 3dsmax can handle a lot more geometry (larger scenes). 3dsmax works better with CAD files (maybe the newer versions of c4d are better I don't know I still use R19). Modelling tools are better in 3dsmax (again, maybe that's R19, I did see some new stuff for c4d modelling these days but not on top of it). Nothing really comes close to c4d's mograph tools, the animation is just fantastic to work with, the modifiers and interface is very intuitive which is one of c4d strong points.

They are pretty similar tools in my opinion (for generalists), usually you can find a way to do the same thing in both so in the end comes down to user preference, maybe do a few projects in c4d for a year and when you are comfortable with the tools you will have a better opinion on which works better for you.

234
Gallery / Re: Arrington Shell Kitchen Interior
« on: 2023-07-27, 12:07:00 »
Ah now I see, much better on your website, very clear! Great lighting, composition and colors well done!

235
Gallery / Re: Arrington Shell Kitchen Interior
« on: 2023-07-26, 13:47:00 »
Is it just me or is every single image either out of focus or blurred? I might need to clean my glasses

236
So its working as it should?

237
Script attached to this post

Notes:
- I updated the script to match how it works in the PhysicalToCorona script scene wide, only for objects with materials applied. Figured you might want this for this script as well romullus :)
- Just realized another bug when Add Gamma is enabled... wont copy bitmap settings such as U/V offsets etc. Ill come back to this with a fresh head. (these CoronaBitmaps are not so easy to work with, its difficult to troubleshoot :S)
- Ok worked out that bug above, updated in this version.

Version 1.8 Features:
- Materials convert only for scene materials that are applied to objects
- Bugfix for CoronaNormal stripped paths reverting when 'Add Gamma' enabled

238
Script attached to this post.

Thanks for pointing that out romullus. Unfortunately since the default anisotropy for 3dsmax 2021 is 1.0 its flipping out on you. Ive just removed the value/rotation for now so it doesnt mess up your settings (so to clarify it does not copy Anisotropy value or rotation from Physical to Corona, still works with bitmaps however). Let me know if you want it back and I might have to go on that one blind folded. There is a way once I install 3dsmax 2024 to have it behave differently for different 3dsmax versions but I wont be updating for now for work/pipeline reasons.

Version 2.2 Features:
- Materials convert only for scene materials that are applied to objects
- Anisotropy value/rotation removed for now (values only, bitmaps still convert)
- Normal Map settings convert - Flip Red/Green/Swap Red & Green

Test it out, let me know if I broke something else lol.

239
Script attached to this post

Version 1.7 Features:
- Bugfix for CoronaNormal resetting bitmap settings (U/V offset etc.) when using CoronaBitmaps

240
1) What is ACES Colour space? I know that 3ds Max + Corona cannot natively work in it but it can be applied in Post through the VFB but I typically play with the value until I get a satisfying result, depending on the image. Do real-life photographers work in ACES?

That value in the Corona VFB is just a tone mapping curve. 3dsmax + Vray can use ACES. No Photographers don't use ACES (mostly), if you work in Broadcast then you would have probably had to use it at one point or another. If you would like to understand what ACES is I recommend this article:
https://chrisbrejon.com/cg-cinematography/chapter-1-5-academy-color-encoding-system-aces/

2) Is it better to work with Photographic exposure turned on? I find it produces more "boring" results compared to it being turned off, less punchy images etc.

Depends, if you are matching a photo 1:1 then its easier to follow the setup of the camera used to take the 'backplate'. Otherwise its just personal choice.

3) What is the difference between Highlight compression, Filmic tone mapping, Tone Curve etc?

Highlight compression is simply just compressing highlights/burnout.
Tone Curves are just basically Curves like in Photoshop - left side is darkest shadows (blacks), middle is midpoint, right side is brightest highlights (whites), adjust to suit.
Tone mapping is just controlling the dynamic range in the image to suit whatever it is you are trying to achieve. There's plenty of different methods, an LUT is basically a preset of a tone map, same with Filmic, its just a term that was used to mimic traditional film photography but can look different in different scenarios or render engines. There's more to it then that but its about as basic as I can put it.

Pages: 1 ... 14 15 [16] 17 18 ... 36