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 - Nejc Kilar

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 71
1
[Max] I need help! / Re: Hi : How to create such lighting?
« on: 2021-10-12, 16:09:30 »
Glad to hear it was at least a little bit helpful. Go rock the project! :)

2
[Max] I need help! / Re: Hi : How to create such lighting?
« on: 2021-10-11, 14:20:24 »
Hey Yvesjaye,

Sure, I'm attaching a couple of screenshots of a potential set-up.

I've used a free JPG of a starry night sky and I've put that bitmap into a Corona Light material and applied it to the ceiling. Now because the map is 8bit you can start running into limitations when you tune up the intensity - If you want it to light up your interior you'll probably end up adjusting the intensity to be higher.

Then, in my opinion, you are faced with at least two options:
A) Place a Corona Light just underneath the ceiling, match its color to the starry night sky bitmap a bit and disable it from being seen directly, in reflections and in refractions. Also disable it's ability to occlude other lights. That'll create an effect that will look like the starry night sky ceiling is outputting more light than it actually is while in fact there's an invisible light there now doing all that grunt work. (Example: "Starry Ceiling with an additional extra light.png")
B) Either find a cool HDR image of a starry night sky or do some Photoshop magic with layering and masking. You can do that in 3ds Max as well imho where you try and isolate the stars (bright spots) from the background using the Composite map and then just up the star's intensity instead of upping the intensity of the rest of the image as well. It's a bit more of an advanced technique I suppose.

I'm pretty sure our resourceful users could think of even different ways of doing the same thing. Hopefully though, at least that option A I've listed above is of any use to you :)

Oh and as far as the rail light goes, its just a Corona Light Material applied to a spline / cylinder.


3
[Max] General Discussion / Re: CPU or Graphics Card
« on: 2021-10-08, 09:06:57 »
If you are using Corona then CPU is the primary factor that'll speed up your rendering times because Corona is a CPU renderer. GPU is primarily used for denoising in Corona and for denoising even older GPUs can be used (CUDA is required and Maxwell generation of cards is the last we officially support so that is GTX 9xx series).

As for 3ds Max's viewport, well, a stronger GPU will help keep the viewport more fluid if you are working on heavy scenes. In that case more VRAM will help too. Except a more powerful CPU nothing will speed up the actual rendering part though.

4
[Max] I need help! / Re: Hi : How to create such lighting?
« on: 2021-10-07, 10:01:33 »
Well, if you're referring to the starry ceiling then I'd start by using a Light Material and see where that takes me. You'd need a nice starry bitmap to drive the material, obviously :) If you'd like to get a really nice glow from the stars then I'm guessing that with the Light Material you'll want a pretty strong contrast between space itself and the stars - you can further emphasize that by using a Composite / Layer shader and do some extra masking there. Or you know, you can use the Color Correct shader to get it behaving exactly like you want it.

Alternatively, you could also do it with a Physical MTL by putting the starry ceiling into the self illumination slot but then you gotta realize that you can't use that material to light the room - self illumination is not to be used like that. But what it does do is it offers you slightly more control over how you want to light a room - f.e putting a giant rectangle light just below the ceiling. I mean this one isn't exactly a realistic approach but can be an option if you're trying to art direct the lighting in a different way.

There's probably a couple of different ways to approach it too.

Hope that helps :)

5
You are welcome! I mean I'm just thinking out loud here so don't take everything I say as fact. Truth is, I'm a little new to Zen as the 3970x is my first Zen workstation since... Well, since I was a kid sporting an AMD Athlon. Not that I didn't like Zen or Zen+, on the contrary really but at that point in time I already owned a server grade WS  that was and still is speedy :)

850W for a 3970x or a 3990x with a 3060 should be good enough in my opinion. If you aren't doing a lot of GPGPU stuff then going with a lower tier GPU makes perfect sense imho because it won't help you render faster with Corona at all and the Nvidia AI denoiser will work really fast on the 3060 too. Save some cash and buy an extra SSD or something :)

You can think of PBO as sort of an automatic OC yeah. AFAIK there aren't any prerequisites but lower temps and a thing you can't control anyway - power consumption of the chip. To enable it you basically turn it on in the BIOS and that's it. On my ASUS STRIX XE GAMING motherboard it actually came set to AUTO which I think just means ON - as evident by the CPU boosting up to 90c when it ain't explicitly disabled. Not quite sure how it works honestly because I was under the impression that the CPU's wattage should skyrocket with PBO being on but from what I can tell that didn't really happen. The boost clocks are a nice addition although I can't quite see them making a huge impact either. Honestly, somebody who knows more about PBO should probably speak up :)

As for tiny spaces and multiple nodes... Well, the more rendering power you cram into a single package the less heat output you'll have in that room plus it'll be one less machine to mess around with - so just like you said, less worrying about the different updates and all that stuff. If you can splurge for the 3990x and it makes business sense to do so I think that's the way I'd go. It'll last you longer because it is faster for rendering (not so much for other stuff though) and you'll have less machines to tend to.

6
@CrocsBlancs

Looking at those specs I think generally speaking you're good. The only thing that I would reconsider in your place is that 850W PSU for the 3970x and a 3090. AFAIK you are going to be pushing close to its limits if you'll be running the 3970x AND the 3090 full speed so I'd personally feel quite a bit more comfortable with 1000W+ there. Especially if you'll enable PBO.

Memory wise, I dunno, what you've listed seems great. Running a couple of different rendering benchmarks I can't really notice a difference between 3200mhz and 3600mhz (on a 3970x) and the timings on those modules you've selected seems tight enough. To be 99% sure whether that memory is going to work you can check the motherboards QVL list (on their website) but from what I'm seeing on the forums, most non QVL stuff typically works anyway.

Cooling wise, the 3970x does get toasty with the U14s but it is still within spec. If you can splurge extra I'd consider the Thermal Syphon IceGiant but since you're within spec with the U14s I wouldn't prioritize it. The 3990x appears to be easier to cool so the U14s supposedly does an even better job there.,

As for storage, well, 1TB seems a bit on the low side but I reckon you'll be shuffling projects to the HDD once you've completed them. It really depends on how big your projects get too but I'm thinking you've probably taken all that into the account already. Besides, want more space? You can always plug in another SSD later :)

All of the above is of course just my humble opinion :)

7
Glad you've found my first post helpful, SSS seems like the way to go about it indeed!

And if you are using Corona 7 then creating that wet "coat" on your character should be as simple as toggling the "clearcoat" layer in the new Physical MTL to ON. Remember, the "clearcoat" property basically simulates a "coat" of clear (refractive) and also reflective matter on your material. So if that material is "water" and it's really not too thick then that's how I'd approach it - with the "clearcoat".

8
Hey!

I'm a little bit unsure what exactly you are trying to replicate but anything body related my first approach would be to create a Physical MTL, turn on some SSS / Volume and then put a clearcoat on top of it for that "wet" look. Obviously you'd need to play around with finding the right values and applying the right dirt maps but that's how I'd approach the body. Looks very much doable to me unless I'm missing something :)

9
As soon as you start "Running out of RAM" what happens is that instead of reading scene data from RAM (which is super fast) Corona starts reading it from your SSD / HDD and both are orders of magnitude slower than your RAM. So any time your are running out of RAM it is expected that the rendering process will get slower - a lot slower if you have a lot of data that doesn't fit into your RAM.

So basically, your computer stores things it needs for fast processing in your RAM. If your RAM is full then all the applications need to search for that data on your SSD / HDD which as we've established is a lot slower. Think of it like feeding the CPU with data, if you can't feed it with enough data fast enough it won't help that it's the UBER MILLION CORES CPU as it'll be bottlenecked by having to fetch that data from hardware that's a lot slower. It literally won't be able to calculate at it's fullest potential because the data to calculate can't be delivered to it fast enough.

Your best remedy? Upgrade to more RAM if possible or try to optimize your scenes so that they fit into your RAM (smaller textures / HDRIs, less subdivided geometry etc...).


10
[C4D] General Discussion / Re: Cloud/dust explosions
« on: 2021-09-07, 09:36:35 »
Many thanks. So the workflow would be to create the simulation in say X-particles, export that as a VDB and then render in corona?

That's how I'd do it yeah :)

11
[C4D] General Discussion / Re: Cloud/dust explosions
« on: 2021-09-06, 12:43:10 »
Well creating VDB sims requires some sort of VFXy knowledge - so X-Particles is one option, Houdini f.e would be another. Even something realtime could probably get you there like JangaFX's EmberGen. Generally speaking you'd need to do particle / volume simulations in there which is typically focused around controlling your simulations via different forces and such to make them as you want them.

Depending on the complexity of the result that you'd need you could also try modeling similar shapes using polygonal modeling techniques and then maybe sculpt in some of the detail (using Cinema 4D's sculpting). Afterwards you take that mesh and apply a Volume material and try do to the magic in there... But I suspect if you want to get those nice "nebula" like details in the dust cloud itself that you'll have to do some simulating.

12
[C4D] General Discussion / Re: Cloud/dust explosions
« on: 2021-09-06, 09:16:29 »
I'd give this a go with OpenVDBs because with Corona 7 you can now render VDB simulations using the Corona Volume Grid.

As for the little rocks on the side, while we don't support Particle rendering right now (we are looking at it for v8 but can't promise anything at the moment) you could potentially get away with simulating the particles and then converting them to Geometry. Not the absolute best solution but a solution none the less :)

13
[Max] General Discussion / Re: Tonemapping - Plz Halp
« on: 2021-08-30, 09:14:09 »
Hi Martin

Thanks for the LUTs.

I can not find the option to load a LUT as a log...

Mat

Hey!

You should find that option in the Render Settings under the Camera menu :)

14
[C4D] Resolved Bugs / Re: Light material not working.
« on: 2021-08-26, 16:43:36 »
Hey there!

I'm curious, does the entire light mesh disappear or is it more of a case where you see don't see the bitmap and instead just the bright white light?

15
Thanks for the feedback Cjwidd, are you referring to any specific examples? I might be able to post node graph here.

Yes, I am referring to the example with the violin.

Hey cjwidd,

First of all let me just say that we are super excited to hear you've enjoyed the webinar and that you've found it useful. That was after all our main purpose :)

I'm attaching the node graph screenshot for the violin scene we've used in the webinar. The full credit goes to GeorgeK for coming up with this one but the reason I'm sharing the graph with you is because we've changed the materials every so slightly for the webinar version.

What changed? Well basically GeorgeK tweaked a couple of other material parameters as well and for the webinar we really wanted to emphasize that even if you leave all the other non-clearcoat related parameters the same you'll still get a completely different look & feel of the wood material as long as you introduce the clearcoat and some absorption.

So the node graph attached is the one from the webinar. Hope you'll find it useful and if you have any questions just let us know.

Oh and again, kudos to GeorgeK for coming up with the scene :)

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 71