Messages

1

[C4D] I need help! / Re: Rotating texture

« on: 2023-12-16, 13:52:41 »

I tried it in Corona 10 and the problems exist here too.
In the meantime, is there a solution to rotate the texture in a Corona bitmap?
If you have hundreds of individual parts, you can't rotate the texture in each one using coordinates.

2

[C4D] I need help! / Re: Difference between VFB and C4D Picture viewer

« on: 2023-12-14, 12:43:45 »

Hi there,
unfortunately there is no positive result when i save it with "image" or with "single pass". But when i transfer the values from the lights in Lightmix to the percent-values in the Layers in photoshop i get the correct result. But this can't be the solution because it's very elaborate to transmit all the values.
I don't know what happens that this problem exists only in this file. This problem doesnt exist in other files. And when i open a former variation this file there is not such a problem.
I hoped there is a possibility to fix it.
Greetings, Wolfgang

3

[C4D] I need help! / Difference between VFB and C4D Picture viewer

« on: 2023-12-13, 21:57:53 »

Hello,
I have a problem with a big difference between the Corona VFB and the C4D Picture Viewer. I need the Picture Viewer to export my file with all layers (LightMix, Masks and so on).
Normally, when I export from the Picture Viewer, the result is the same as in the VFB. But in this file, the C4D picture viewer looks like the overexposed beauty pass in VFB.
I don't know if I accidentally changed something that causes this difference, but I can't find it.
This problem seems to exist only in this file.
Best regards, Wolfgang

4

[C4D] I need help! / Re: Elements disappearing

« on: 2023-11-21, 10:11:42 »

Hi,
thanks for your help. I understand it's not a corona problem!
It's a problem with the resolution. I would have to render it in a resolution that can show the elements. But that is not possible because of the render time. Other tips are also not possible. For example, more gloss for the wood material. Our client wants the wood with very little sheen and we need to visualize it that way. I also tried randomize mapping, but the result is the same.
The only solution I found is to increase the distance between the narrow bar elements. This is the result.
So I can say: I have learned a lot ;-)



Translated with www.DeepL.com/Translator (free version)

5

[C4D] I need help! / Re: Elements disappearing

« on: 2023-11-17, 13:06:57 »

If I increase the resolution, you can see something, but not clearly. So I would have to render it in a monstrous resolution so that the elements are visible. That is not possible.

6

[C4D] I need help! / Re: Elements disappearing

« on: 2023-11-17, 12:39:44 »

Yes, I already wrote above that it's probably a lighting or camera angle problem. And I also know that my elements haven't disappeared ;-)
But I can't change my entire lighting and camera setup because of this problem.
The point of this scene is to show the counter and some of the surroundings. That's what I set up the camera for. And the light is already the way it will be installed later.
1: This is how the perspective should look. You can see the elements on the right, but not on the left.
2: I have now changed the perspective. One element is now halfway visible, but all the others to the left of it are still blurred. And they have disappeared on the right.
The light remains the same, only the camera is shifted. It's certainly not a problem with the light, but with the camera angle. I also tried changing the focal length of the camera: From wide angle to telephoto. But that doesn't help either.
I'll say it again: if the camera is looking vertically at the elements, you can see them. But the counter has an L-shape. So it doesn't matter how I position the camera, it will never be perpendicular to all the elements. It's not a problem of light. And I can't change the perspective because I have to show the counter like this.
I wanted to know whether I could change something in the render presets, for example.
In image 3, I simply rendered the whole thing with a clay material (physical) and theCinema 4D internal physical renderer. Here you can see all the elements.
This is a corona problem, isn't it?

7

[C4D] I need help! / Re: Elements disappearing

« on: 2023-11-17, 10:10:05 »

@Beanvision: I've uploaded the File (with Assets) to: „Corona Uploader l Upload“.
I post in the uploader the message:
To Beanvision: This is the File with Assets for the Problem on Topic: Elements disappearing (https://forum.corona-renderer.com/index.php?topic=41393.0)
Best regards, Wolfgang

8

[C4D] I need help! / Re: Elements disappearing

« on: 2023-11-17, 08:03:16 »

It's real geometry.
No Different with denoise or without denoise.
It's a final render.

9

[C4D] I need help! / Elements disappearing

« on: 2023-11-16, 16:13:28 »

Hi,
I have a problem with the display of small, round bar elements in my counter design. The flatter the angle of view of the camera on the counters, the more the elements disappear. They become a smooth surface.
I have already tried:
- to use a different sky (HDRI)
- sometimes with and sometimes without the sun and with different angles
- Striplight in front of the raw rod elements with different angles
- smaller IOR of the wood material (for example less than 1.2)
- less reflection in the wood material
The only thing that makes the elements visible is the change in the camera position. The camera must be pointed exactly frontally (at right angles) to the counter as in picture 2. This works. But it would not be the perspective I need. For example, I need a perspective like in picture 1 and the elements disappear there.
Is there anything I can change in the render settings to make the elements visible? Or is there another solution?
Best regards, Wolfgang

10

[C4D] General Discussion / Re: CRITICAL SPEED ISSUE WITH APPLE M SYSTEMS

« on: 2023-11-15, 12:41:05 »

I have seen benchmarks that show that the m3 max is just as fast as an m2 ultra. If this is realistic, could it be that an m3 ultra is 2 times faster than an m2 ultra? That would be an incredible increase in speed. Wouldn't it? The question is whether these are realistic considerations on my part. I'm wondering whether I should buy a PC now (as a Mac user) or wait for the m3 ultra.
Wolfgang

11

[C4D] I need help! / Re: Corona Bitmap and UV-Randomizer Problem

« on: 2023-10-27, 16:39:38 »

Hi Beanzvision,
after the upgrade to Corona 10.2 the UV-Randomizer works.
Thank you!

12

[C4D] I need help! / Corona Bitmap and UV-Randomizer Problem

« on: 2023-10-27, 12:57:23 »

Hello,
I've got a problem with the Corona Bitmap in combination with the UV-Randomizer.
When i use a C4D-Bitmap the result is randomized.
When i use a Corona-Bitmap the result is not randomized.
In my Test i just changed the C4D-Bitmap with the Corona-Bitmap Node. All other parameters are absolutly the same. What is the problem.
I send 2 Pictures an the C4d-File (with Diffuse-Image)
My Sys-Config: MacBook pro 16, 2,4 GHz 8-Core Intel Core i9, 64GbB Ram, MD Radeon Pro 5500M 8 GB, Monterey 12.6.6, C4D R21, Corona 9 (Hotfix 1)
Greetings, Wolfgang

13

[C4D] General Discussion / Campatibility Mac OS Ventura and C4D R21

« on: 2023-08-06, 19:18:31 »

Hello,
I am planning to switch to a mac studio ultra M2 in the near future. Now I am concerned about the compatibility of C4D with Mac OS Ventura. Currently I am working with a MacBook pro 16" 2019 (latest Intel) and it works very well with C4D R21 and Catalina.
I hope Ventura works well with C4D R21 too, because I don't need a newer version unless it's absolutely necessary.
Can someone tell me if it works well: Ventura, C4D R21, Corona 10?
Have a nice evening, Wolfgang

14

[C4D] General Discussion / Re: mac studio / mac pro m2 ultra

« on: 2023-08-06, 14:51:17 »

@prince_jr: You ordered a M2 ultra with 60 core GPU but not with 76 core. I asked me if there is a difference between these configurations. Do you know if the 76 core could accelerate the viewport or anything else in C4D/Corona?

15

[C4D] General Discussion / Re: mac studio / mac pro m2 ultra

« on: 2023-07-28, 18:52:38 »

Hello,
there is something I still do not quite understand. In the old benchmark, the MacPro 2019 (Xeon W-3275M 2.50GHz) achieves 12,178,400 rays. The MacStudio M1 ultra achieves 6,780,610 rays in the old benchmark. It is only half as fast as the MacPro.
In the new benchmark, the MacStudio M2 ultra achieves 11,029,942 rays (see page 2 in this thread). The MacStudio M1 Max achieves 4,753,992 in the new benchmark. The M1 ultra would be twice as fast (i.e. approx. 9,500,000).
Unfortunately there is no MacPro 2019 result for the new benchmark. How fast would it be. Would it also have 12,178,400 rays? If so, that would be about 10% faster than the M2 ultra.
I am considering buying an M2 ultra. But a MacPro 2019 Xeon W3275 would also be a good alternative. E.g. you could alternatively render on this machine with AMD cards redshift GPU.
Have I classified and estimated the benchmark results correctly?
Many greetings, Wolfgang