Messages

5461

[Max] Tutorials & Guides / Re: Batch Editing Images with Corona Image Editor

« on: 2017-08-24, 14:51:27 »

Well, if you are asking the script to run denoising, it will take longer :) Opening the image in the CIE with Denoise data that was saved for later does no denoising at all, you just have the regular non-Denoised image until you explicitly run the calculations based on the saved data. That is definitely the time consuming part, and if the scripting you are using invokes denoising, that is why running the script takes significantly longer, as the denoising is the time intensive part.

If you are just saving from the CIE without running denoising, that means you aren't using it at all and could have submitted the job to the render farm going straight to PNG (at least as far as the denoising is concerned, depends on whether you are adjusting any other post process things like tone mapping etc differently than what was set in the VFB, though it doesn't sound like it).

5462

[Max] Tutorials & Guides / Re: Batch Editing Images with Corona Image Editor

« on: 2017-08-24, 14:07:50 »

uploaded and i guess denoise is already applied. Rebusfarm told me that to use denoise I need to save it as cxr, thats why its like that. otherwise i could have sent it as it meant to be.

And yes you got it right, it was faster for me to opening by hand, cliking load and selecting the file, then saving as png. :)

Your set of steps did not include "Run denoising"... you did do that in the CIE?

5463

[Max] General Discussion / corona-renderer.com website updates

« on: 2017-08-22, 22:05:40 »

Hi all!

Just a heads up, we're updating the website. Sections will be going offline one at a time, and then will be offline until everything is restored. We apologize for any inconvenience - we'll post on Facebook (and here) once the updated website is live!

Thanks,
   Tom

5464

[Max] General Discussion / Re: Problem: Pixel Aspect in Animation

« on: 2017-08-22, 18:44:09 »

No problem - not sure what it is with the avi output from Max, sounds like it is one more reason to avoid that workflow though and go with stills for later compositing together into an animation. Super flexible anyway, as you can re-render parts without re-rendering the whole thing, layer things more easily and work with render passes, be robust in case of failure partway through an animation's render, and more (edit, and change the compression options as necessary for file size needs, or to raise quality when a compression level isn't cutting it for a particular animation - otherwise you are "trapped" at the compression settings you had when rendering from Max).

Ultimately though, so long as you get your animation out the way you want, that's what counts!

5465

[Max] General Discussion / Re: Problem: Pixel Aspect in Animation

« on: 2017-08-22, 17:01:24 »

Can you share any of the rendered output? Either the avi, or even better if you can render a few frames to stills and share those? Even if you delete the objects in the scene and just leave the walls and floor :)

I take it you mean you loaded the AVI into After Effects, rather than loaded a stills sequence into it? If so, then perhaps there's something in the way Max generates AVI files (I've never done it, because it is not a good route to go!) - would be most interested in what happens when rendering to a sequence of stills though.

5466

[C4D] General Discussion / Re: Object Animation and Camera Animation

« on: 2017-08-22, 16:22:18 »

Yes, still the same, flicker free for any animation and that's the only change from doing stills - with a moving object, do not save and reuse the UHD Cache (since the lighting in the scene will be changing with the moving object), so just go for the regular set up of calculating the cache for each frame. Hope the animation is one you can share once done :)

5467

[Max] General Discussion / Re: Problem: Pixel Aspect in Animation

« on: 2017-08-22, 16:16:48 »

Rendering direct to a movie format is never recommended (lots of reasons, one major one being if anything goes wrong, all output is lost and you have to render from the start again, versus just having to pick up rendering where you left off if you are rendering to frames). Compositing the frames into animation in post also lets you control video compression etc better too. Lots of free applications for doing just that, so it needn't cost any money :) I can say from years of rendering animation that there is no benefit, and many drawbacks, to rendering straight to a movie format.

I suspect this is due to the viewer application doing something to the avi - another reason to render to still frames is you can open an individual frame and make sure it is fine. Even if you plan on still rendering to movie format direct, I'd do that just once, even just for a few frames, and make sure your images are coming out correctly. But basically, there is no way I can think of that your 1280x720 render is not still 1280x720, which would mean it is being displayed incorrectly in the viewer (that is, whatever is playing back the animation). You could right click on the avi file and check what dimensions it says it is.

Hope this helps!

5468

[Max] I need help! / Re: Render Shadow Only

« on: 2017-08-22, 15:36:32 »

hi romullus, like that but without the teapot, only the shadow generated by the light to the plane.

That's what the render shows though? The teapot is invisible, but the shadow it casts on the plane still shows up.

5469

[Max] General Discussion / Re: Problem: Pixel Aspect in Animation

« on: 2017-08-22, 14:34:25 »

Hi Philip,

I don't fully understand what you are describing - could you share screen grabs of your render set up, and of the "stretched" results that you are seeing? Are you saving directly to a movie format, or as a series of still images (the latter is always recommended by the way)? If you are saving to a movie format, what are you using to view the animation as perhaps it is stretching it to fit in some way? When you say preview, do you mean how things look in the Corona VFB?

Thanks!
   Tom

5470

[Max] General Discussion / Re: Alpha channel affected by Tone Mapping

« on: 2017-08-22, 14:31:19 »

I'm not sure I understand the question - if you are adding render elements in 3ds Max, such as masks and the alpha channel, those are not affected by tone mapping, which is just what is needed. Are you finding that they are affected by tone mapping when you save? If so, can you share your workflow and scene set up? Also, let us know which version of Corona you are using etc. :)

Thanks!
   Tom

5471

[C4D] General Discussion / Re: Object Animation and Camera Animation

« on: 2017-08-22, 14:21:51 »

From the Corona side, not much changes than rendering stills, mostly it comes down to setting the UHD Cache to animation (flicker free) in the Performance tab, if you are using the UHD Cache. This is the reason there's no tutorial specific to animation, because there isn't really anything that different. For flythrough-style animations you may want to save and reuse the UHD Cache to save calculating it on each frame, but not if objects are moving:

Other than that, animation is all 3ds Max related. Feel free to ask if there was any specific question you had in mind.

5472

[Max] Resolved Bugs / Re: Distributed redner problems...

« on: 2017-08-22, 14:14:57 »

Well, noise limit couldn't be used in 1.5 with DR, as Distributed Rendering did not work with adaptivity back then. That was introduced in 1.6 as part of the DR overhaul, and allowed DR to work with adaptivity and so work with the noise limit (https://corona-renderer.com/blog/corona-renderer-1-6-for-3ds-max-released/)

On the bands in the rendering, my first thought would be to double check that all machines have the same version of Max, and same version of Corona and Corona DR, just in case one (or more) did not get updated, it's easy to have happen. Let us know!

5473

[Max] Daily Builds / Re: Daily Builds 1.7

« on: 2017-08-22, 14:05:57 »

Thanks - i checked the link for that script on the forums and its dead - can it be found anywhere?

Only once bundled - the older versions are no longer available since the new version is planned to be bundled in the installer.

5474

[Max] I need help! / Re: Windows 10 cpu utilization

« on: 2017-08-22, 14:03:16 »

Here's the FAQ thread on CPUs - https://forum.corona-renderer.com/index.php/topic,16722

5475

[C4D] General Discussion / Re: shadows catcher & take out shadow...?

« on: 2017-08-17, 13:19:32 »

The Shadowcatcher is not yet implemented - you can track plans and progress on the Corona Renderer for Cinema 4D roadmap at https://trello.com/b/dgI8vjDb/corona-road-map-cinema-4d