Messages

1

[Max] I need help! / Re: Help! Miniature effect using Tilt-Shift.

« on: Today at 15:30:43 »

The weburbanist link is badly formatted (I had to remove the last few digits), facebook link works now.

In Corona, there's no way to rotate the focal plane against the sensor back,  that's why Tilt/Shift won't get you this effect. But it's perfectly achievable with exaggerated DOF settings, the info I've posted above should be enough to get you started.
If your scene scale is realistic - for example if you look at an area spanning kilometers - you will have to use unrealistically low values for the f-stop value, try going below 1.0, maybe even as low as <0.1 to make sure.
And don't forget to enable 'Depth of Field', otherwise you won't see any effect.

2

[Max] I need help! / Re: Help! Miniature effect using Tilt-Shift.

« on: Today at 13:21:24 »

There are no images/links attached...

You don't necessarily need Tilt/Shift functionality to achieve this effect.
In general you'll have to:

- enable Depth of field in the camera properties
- use either low f-stop or large sensor size values (keep sensor at the default if you want your camera to correspond with real world cameras, only change it if you know what you do)
- use high focal length values (depends on the scene scale, try 50-100mm for small scale stuff, 1000mm and above for large scale scenes)

Post a few examples and your scene scale and we'll be able to help you out with more detailed instructions.

3

[Max] I need help! / Re: how to prevent DoF on backdrop picture ?

« on: 2024-05-04, 13:35:41 »

I think the best way to solve this on the part of the developers would be to make the enviro distance parameter (in the development/experimental stuff rollout) interact with DOF, then we could simply set it equal to the target distance of the camera and there would be no blur, but now unfortunately it won't work.

Ah that wouldn't work in many cases as for most use cases it would involve a 3d object rendered on another geometry with Shadowcatcher Mtl (some sort matte object), so no DOF on environment only wouldn't help much, at least in all the cases I would've needed such an option.

Generally, we would need an option to exclude from DOF:
- environment (any pixel that ends up in infinity/env with no alpha)
- background (any pixel that ends up in infinity/background with no alpha)
- objects that act as a matte with Shadow Catcher Mtl (any pixel that ends up on a matte geometry), best optionally per Shadow Catcher Mtl

This has some challenging implications with regards to reflections/refractions and object/alpha blending but I'd take any rudimentary approach over having no option at all anytime.

I'd love for development to take 1-2 cycles trying to solve these little quality of life requests (there are lots more) but I guess everyone has their own set of annoyances they would like to see solved.

4

[Max] I need help! / Re: how to prevent DoF on backdrop picture ?

« on: 2024-05-03, 17:48:11 »

I've requested that a looooong time ago as I've ran into it a few times. No solution yet, unfortunately.

5

Gallery / Re: Saturn's Ice Rings

« on: 2024-05-02, 14:04:08 »

Rendering space stuff is fun and can be so complicated to do at the same time. Loving it!!

6

[Max] Corona Goodies - User Contributions / Re: AgX in Corona

« on: 2024-04-29, 13:21:29 »

But when importing exr's from corona to fusion, there is a extra gamma applied (1.2?) because the image in fusion is much darker than in VFB. And then you need to specify the float gamma thing to have the same result in vfb and fusion ?

AgX luts for Corona from this thread are made for default Corona behaviour regarding gamma transforms in VFB. by default VFB has hidden 2.2 transform after the TONE MAPPING stack and effects. it also has hidden gamma transforms in every LUT operator.
if you are using my AgX luts there is no need for string option changing VFB's gamma behaviour ("float gamma thing").

Wait, so for any LUTs from outside Corona install we need either the string option or a gamma operator @0.45 before the LUT? I remember trying some LUTs from other sources but gave up thinking they were not the right type.

7

[Max] Feature Requests / Re: Motion-blur support when using map sequences / animated textures

« on: 2024-04-26, 15:12:59 »

An idea - what if the devs would add "advanced motion blur hack" checkbox somewhere in the UI, that would automatically do what Marcin described here, i.e. split the selected time range in multiple sub-frames, render them out in sequence, then merge them all and output result to VFB. I think that would be simple enough to implement solution that would be very useful for so many users, at least until devs could figure proper changing topology MB support.

This is not about changing topology (I don't think we'll ever see that btw...), it's about animated textures, which would be useful on its own.

But I fully support the 'under-the-hood' automated hack. It would make things way easier for all things that don't support motion blur. Quite a good suggestion, actually! Doing it manually is a no go for animations (imagine the amount of work needed), so anything that allows for this to be automated would be very welcome.

8

[Max] Feature Requests / Re: Motion-blur support when using map sequences / animated textures

« on: 2024-04-26, 11:43:46 »

But that workaround is only for long-time exposure and wouldn't work for 'normal' motion blur like the usual 0,5 frames and fast moving objects unless you stretch all your animation to something that you can render out. Or you would need to offset frames in the camera by tiny bits.

Motion blur for textures is such a nice to way to trick your way around certain problems, please try... (same for Distance Map)

9

[Max] Feature Requests / Re: Motion-blur support when using map sequences / animated textures

« on: 2024-04-26, 10:35:30 »

+100 here. I requested this before, too, it's a must have (just like motion blur support for Distance Map).

10

[Max] General Discussion / Re: Gamma Correction Tone Mapping Operator Removed - Bring it back!

« on: 2024-04-24, 14:16:38 »

For what it's worth - Gamma operator lets you use lut files in Image Editor in the same manner as in every other software. just makes things simpler for the time being.

And that's already enough a reason to bring it back imo.

It looks like the Corona team is trying to protect the user from any wrong direction in postproduction, omitting the fact that some users might know exactly what they're doing or need that functionality.

11

[C4D] Resolved Bugs / Re: CoronaSky with projection dome broken ?

« on: 2024-04-16, 12:06:48 »

Hi,
I want to use the dome projection with a hdri and strange result here. Can you confirm a bug ?
Thanks

With dome mode you have to keep the radius/camera values somewhat realistic. A too small radius may end up looking like what you have, try increasing it.

12

[Max] General Discussion / Re: Gamma Correction Tone Mapping Operator Removed - Bring it back!

« on: 2024-04-16, 11:35:22 »

Same here - I don't get it. There are cases where this is useful, technical or artistic, removing it just doesn't make sense. On the contrary, it was something that was missing for some users and requested, please bring it back.

13

[Max] I need help! / Re: Node to rotate a texture?

« on: 2024-04-12, 12:18:11 »

Surprisingly difficult problem :D
I thought BerconMapping Map could help but it doesn't work on environment maps, only 2D/Object/Screen.
UVW Randomizer does funny things, too.

14

Work in Progress/Tests / Re: Juraj's Renderings thread

« on: 2024-04-10, 18:57:29 »

Man that's some impressive work, I wouldn't know how to do some of the materials displayed there. Insanely good and beautiful.

15

[Max] I need help! / Re: Tile map displacement mapping on displaced edge.

« on: 2024-04-10, 17:37:15 »

I see you are using meters, maybe change to cm would help ?

This might be not practical. Most archviz scenes or anything showing real world scenarios of larger scale will have to be setup in meters. At the same time, a tiles map might be one of the most useful things to have for archviz especially. If there are limits to how small values can get within the tiles map then this needs a second thought, some users just have to work in meters.