Messages

1

[C4D] I need help! / Re: Multiple file/startup templates with different render engines. How?

« on: 2022-07-11, 21:30:15 »

Ok, so no answer from the devs yet, but from what I found out so far, you do this:
1. Create/set up the scene as you want it to be. Including renderer settings/objects in the scene/materials etc
2. Add project to database, which is done like this (it's in the Asset Browser):


And then you can just open the asset browser, double click on the file/preset you just saved/added and it loads up.

2

[C4D] I need help! / Re: Multiple file/startup templates with different render engines. How?

« on: 2022-07-11, 14:39:21 »

Yeah, tried asking Maxon as well, no answer yet though.

3

[C4D] I need help! / Multiple file/startup templates with different render engines. How?

« on: 2022-07-09, 15:17:07 »

I am trying to figure out if it's possible having multiple template files that include both different render engine settings and assets/objects in the scene.
For example, one starting file/template for Corona, where render engine is set to Corona (of course), environment/hdri is already set and a few basic materials have already been added, and another one with the exact same idea but for Redshift.
On C4D startup I see this quick menu where there's this one default template already added, which makes me think there should definitely be a way to add custom ones:

Problem is, I can't find a way to do that.

Any help would be much appreciated.

P.S. saving two different c4d files with different names and just keeping them on desktop isn't very convenient. Also then there are potential problems with backup directories and etc.

4

[Max] I need help! / Re: Reflection IOR vs falloff for wooden floor

« on: 2022-07-05, 10:25:32 »

You're talking about this video, aren't you?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vhBsO-8Fbpo

If this is the case, I asked my self THE SAME question during the whole video! Why in heaven does a "PRO" artist use these kind of odd workflows that have no apparent benefit? At first, I thought I was missing something. Now I'm more with Tom on this.

Yeah I was referring to this exact video in this case. But seen plenty of similar ones over the years.
BTW, as you can see in RenderFarm's answer (comments section of youtube), it looks like we're not missing something. It's just a personal preference, which maybe gives some more artistic control over the material.

5

[Max] I need help! / Re: Reflection IOR vs falloff for wooden floor

« on: 2022-07-04, 19:45:29 »

I assume it's just that, but still, wondering if I'm missing something else here

6

[Max] I need help! / Reflection IOR vs falloff for wooden floor

« on: 2022-07-04, 18:17:01 »

When creating some of the materials (usually it's wooden floor) I often times see people using falloff nodes to control varying degrees of reflection depending on the view/camera.
But isn't IOR/reflection IOR settings doing exactly that? Why then complicate things and use some additional nodes? Unless you need that extra control that falloff nodes give you. Or am I missing something else here?

Thanks

7

General CG Discussion / Re: Clean masks when using DOF

« on: 2021-11-18, 11:13:55 »

Thanks, gonna look into those.
But generally speaking I'm wondering if it's even possible to get a good/clean mask (which includes dof effect/blurry edges) for PP. Let's say I want to color correct a single object in an image, and that image has dof effect rendered/baked in. I found when I select that item with dof'ed masks and then color correct it some weird stuff happens with the edges. I read that cryptomatte is much better at handling dof/motion blur when it comes to mask, but Corona doesn't support it yet. And so I started thinking maybe I'm trying to achieve something that is not even possible without cryptomattes, but then another question arises- how did people do this before cryptomatte exist. Or how do people get nice clean masks in Corona which doesn't support cryptomatte?

8

General CG Discussion / Clean masks when using DOF

« on: 2021-10-24, 16:51:48 »

Hey everyone.

Is it even possible to get super clean masks when using dof? I want to comp in Davinci Fusion, but I find that I get some kind of "halo'ing"/dark edges when trying to use blurred (because of dof) masks. And now I wonder if that's even possible, or should I leave dof for post production? If so, what's the best software to get most realistic and easy dof effect?

Thank You

9

Hardware / Re: Personal render farm that is not local

« on: 2021-03-22, 14:57:05 »

I see. Well I thought I cannot be the first one that thought of this idea here in corona forums, someone should've done it already. And I still hope that someone shows up and directs me the right way:) If not, I'll try searching answers somewhere else.
Why MAXON though? I'm using Max, you meant Autodesk maybe?

10

Hardware / Re: Personal render farm that is not local

« on: 2021-03-21, 10:43:20 »

I thought I am asking a pretty simple/straightforward question, but now I'm thinking I might have been wrong.
Is it such a complex thing to setup so no one knows? or it's not even possible? or what?

11

Hardware / Personal render farm that is not local

« on: 2021-03-07, 19:32:05 »

Hello,

How would one setup a mini "render farm" so few people can access/use it while not being in the same (local) network? Anyone can direct me the right way?
Basically we're a team of few, everyone working from home. And we would like to have our own/shared render farm (even if it's only one pc).
Thank you.

12

[Max] Daily Builds / Re: New Corona Physical Material (PBR) playground!

« on: 2021-02-01, 13:40:16 »

I suggest that you need to add a very understandable and detailed chapter on helpdek site, explaining this "new" material approach with comparison to traditional one, and how one should migrate to it, filled with examples and tutorials.

Totally agree with Anatoly on this one.
I want to see various examples of various materials converted correctly from legacy to new PBR material (or in other words, in a way developer intended). All with clear explanations, like what bitmap goes where and why.
I don't want to spend another weak experimenting and guessing if it's the most efficient/correct way of doing this or that or not.
Hope you'll consider this and make it real.

Thanks

13

[Max] General Discussion / Re: Favorite type of Material-standard among users?

« on: 2020-06-29, 17:56:22 »

mantaskava
many 3d models do not need PBR materials, for web app, mobile app, mobile games etc. As we work close with game models like in megascan it have all PBR maps but for mobile games they not needed. Also some product render of mechanical parts etc does not need PBR, and CAD software i believe do not support PBR, archicad, fusion 360 etc

Yeah but who makes professional/commercial renderings with native (and not third party) render engines inside archicad or fusion 360 anyways? Let's take Unity, Unreal, Vray, Corona, Redshift, Cycles, Octane, Fstorm, Arnold, Keyshot, Lumion, Maxwell - I believe all of them will render your materials physically correctly, although workflows and results will vary and you're gonna have to adapt to every render engine a little bit differentely (meaning results won't look exactly the same in all of them out of the box).
So what exactly makes or brakes "PBR" model(material)? Say a client asks for a model with two versions, one PBR and one not PBR. How it will affect the material you're making? For me - the only thing that changes is the software I'm rendering/setting up the material in (although textures remain the same).
Again, it's either that I am missing something here or PBR term really doesn't say/define much.

EDIT:
For now I see it like this - take one model and try rendering it in all of previously mentioned render engines (and try to get the same result), you're gonna HAVE to tweak the textures/materials in all of them to get some decently similar results. Then take some render engine that doesn't support PBR (like someone here mentioned Archicad's native renderer) - you're gonna have to tweak materials/textures too. Long story short - in ANY of render engines you won't get the same (good) result without some manual tweaking of the settings and/or textures. Even if you take two "PBR" engines, results and workflow will be different. And that's probably why it doesn't say much.
Shouldn't we all  be more specific and mention the exact render engine instead? Until there's some "true" PBR which makes same material look exactly the same in all of render engines, without any additional tweaking.

EDIT number two:
Let's take Megascans for example - I've seen lots of textures (albedo) where sRGB values goes well below 30-50 ("correct" PBR values for totally black color). Does this mean megascans models/materials are NOT PBR ready? And as far as I'm aware they say it's PBR, but that doesn't make sense then.

EDIT number three:
So what exact criteria a render engine has to meet so it is considered PBR? And then the second part of the question - can you guys mention these render engines that are not PBR?

14

[Max] General Discussion / Re: Favorite type of Material-standard among users?

« on: 2020-06-29, 11:27:22 »

Is it only me or the term PBR is badly over used these days? Isn't like 99% percent of render engines "PBR ready" nowadays? Only thing that differs a little is a workflow (e.g. metalness vs specular vs layered mtls etc), but all them are PBR still.
Can anyone name a few render engines that doesn't support PBR yet? Haven't done the research, but I cannot think of one.
Often times clients ask for "PBR models" which always makes me smile because I see most of them don't even know what does that mean (and that it means pretty much nothing these days  IMO).
Personally, I don't think mentioning the term "PBR" since a few years back is worth it at all.
Probably a bit of off topic here but wanted to say this thought for a while now :) And what are your thoughts about this guys?

15

[Max] I need help! / Re: Ornatrix issues

« on: 2020-05-26, 18:19:18 »

I see. Waiting for these fixes then.

Thanks