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 - karnak

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 5
In the attachments a crashing scene with an animated CoronaCamera and a Render only masks (disable shading) enabled.
The scene is crashing at frame 19 and in other points of the animation range 0-235.
There is also a regular PhysicalCamera with the same settings and animation and no crash.
Corona version is 6 hotfix 1 and 3dsmax2021.

Depth of Field, Vertical shift and Parabolic Image filter seems to be involved in the crash.

in the VFB the shortcut CTRL + PAGE UP switches the render element correctly, but also scrolls the render (if zoom is more than 100%).

To reproduce:
  • show Corona VFB with a few active render elements
  • MOUSE WHEEL UP to zoom
  • CTRL + PAGE UP to switch to the previous render element in the list
Corona version is 6 hotfix 1 and 3dsmax2021

Happy to help!

Corona version is 6 hotfix 1 and 3dsmax2021 (but it's the same with 3dsmax2020, 3dsmax2019, 3dsmax2018, 3dsmax2017).

To reproduce:
  • set Customize > Preferences... > General tab > Color Selector > Corona Improved Picker
  • then go to Scripting menu > New Script > and paste > colorPickerDlg (color 128 128 128) "Title"
  • MAXScript editor menu > Tools > Evaluate All
  • The color picker dialog will show up, move one slider
What I experience is 3dsmax instant crash as soon as I move one slider in the color picker dialog.
Sometimes it gives an error (see image below) and then crash as soon as you try to close the dialog.

No issue with the color selector set to the default one.

I tried your suggestion, at least half of it, and uninstalled/installed Corona, but issue is still there.

MAXScript method colorPickerDlg crash the application when Corona Improved Picker is used.

Hardware / Re: For the overclockers out there
« on: 2019-06-12, 09:33:14 »
Happy to be of help!

Hardware / Re: For the overclockers out there
« on: 2019-06-11, 13:46:41 »
I tried to document myself on this topic earlier this year.

I struggled a lot because of the amount of disinformation there is online (myths not based on actual facts, blind and aggressive devotion to a particular software or testing methodology and the list goes on..). It's hard to separate the bad information from the good one.

Here a list of the few things I have learned and tested:

  • Keep open HWiNFO64 and monitor Windows Hardware Errors (WHEA) at the bottom of the sensors list, system might not crash even if there are WHEA errors listed, which is nevertheless a sign of an unstable overclock.
  • AIDA64: System Stability Test (default) is useful for monitoring voltages and temperatures under plausible load
  • AIDA64: System Stability Test (FPU only) is useful for monitoring voltages and temperatures under unrealistic continuous AVX load. Be careful with it because temperatures go up quickly.
  • AIDA64: System Stability Test is not useful for testing stability, because it is unable to make a lot of errors show up.
  • Prime95: before a certain version there were no AVX instructions used, recent versions have AVX instructions enabled by default, but you can disable them with a string option. Basically no need to use old magical Prime95 version.
  • Prime95: Blend (default) test is very useful for testing stability, you can read in its logs every time there is an error. Sometimes the system don't crash even if there are fatal errors listed in the log, which is a sign of an unstable overclock.
  • Prime95: Small FFTs (default) puts the system under unrealistic continuous load.
  • Prime95: Small FFTs (with custom settings). From my understanding of it, most of the popular suggested values are based on quite old tests done by a user with electrical engineering background, but since many years passed and cpu architectures changed so much, those values are just magical settings. You know, like the ones that people put in render settings or material because someone 10 years ago told them to do so.

edit: fixed some sentences

[Max] General Discussion / Re: Names of corona map types
« on: 2019-04-25, 12:31:56 »
I'm glad I could help you!

[Max] General Discussion / Re: Names of corona map types
« on: 2019-04-25, 11:53:02 »
I haven't thought about the implications of your request, but I have two workflow suggestions.

The first suggestion is that you can type c*b to quickly find a CoronaBitmap map in the Material/Map Browser's search field.

The second suggestion requires some preparation. Open the Material/Map Browser's drop down menu and create a new material library and name it for example favourites.mat, then drag and drop in this new library a CoronaBitmap and rename it as CBitmap. You can now type cb to quickly find a CoronaBitmap map.

[Max] General Discussion / Re: VrayuHDRI map rotation
« on: 2019-02-25, 09:42:06 »
I would also open the Curve Editor and double check what's going on with the animation curve associated with the VrayHDRI map.

To move a window between screens I use Win + Shift + Left/Right Arrow.

[Max] Feature Requests / Re: The most wanted feature?
« on: 2019-01-02, 10:09:01 »
Thank you lolec, I think your message has very good insights and is very respectful of both consumers and the development team.

Interesting findings Juraj, thanks for sharing.

During a project early this year, I also found out something.
I was testing my project for performance and found out the following:

Code: [Select]
    CoronaBitmap    8bit image   38 sec
    CoronaBitmap   16bit image   46 sec <<<

(Default) Bitmap    8bit image   41 sec
(Default) Bitmap   16bit image   41 sec

This measure was taken (average of multiple measurements) by looking at the UHD cache precom time, the loaded images were in TIF format but I can't find in my notes how many channels. Corona was version 1.7.4.

Work in Progress/Tests / Re: dubcats secret little hideout
« on: 2018-09-28, 19:41:55 »
That would be extremely cool to have.
What X-Rite device you have? I can help you on the software side if you want to read some surfaces.
I know it's not the same as BSDF scanners, but at least it's something.


I forgot to say that I get the same values with calibrated polarised photography and with spectrophotometer with manual removed specular.

What happens outside F0 is a totally different matter though and depends on other factors, some of them are well approximated by the BRDF models used inside the shader, others are not.

Work in Progress/Tests / Re: dubcats secret little hideout
« on: 2018-09-28, 18:52:24 »
I'm not sure about the libraries, but in my previous example what I get from the instrument is the energy that the surface reflects, without distinction between diffuse reflection and specular reflection. Therefore to get only the diffuse you need to subtract the specular reflection and you can do this easily if you know the IOR of the surface (and if you don't care that much about it, you can just remove 4% which is equal to the energy that the default IOR adds).

I think a good way to remove 4% from RGB colors might be to use Lab mode and only work with the L component.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 5