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 - mantaskava

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 6
16
[Max] I need help! / Ornatrix issues
« on: 2020-05-26, 09:48:36 »
Hello,

I'm having a few issues setting up ornatrix. Wondering if that's me who's doing something wrong or what.

Problem number 1:
I am getting this error message once I hit render IF Hair From Guides modifier is applied. Sometimes it just crashes Max and sometimes I'm able to click continue, but usually it crashes later on anyways.



Problem number 2:
Color from base mesh/object not working (using bitmap). Although it should work straight out of the box as far as I know, since it should be the default setting. What's interesting you can see in viewport it's actually working as intended (hair's getting color from base mesh), but in IR it's not. The only way to make it work I found is applying Mesh From Strands modifier and un-ticking "Per Strand UV coords". But IMO it's just a workaround.



Any thoughts?

Thank You.

17
[Max] General Discussion / Re: Tonemapping - Plz Halp
« on: 2020-04-24, 15:04:02 »

Not to mention that such filmic curves compress highlights so much that you will have to increase energy levels of your scene which increase realism but will also have an impact on render times (more overblown areas). Unreal engine implementation fakes it by applying a 1.45 gain before the post-process because they did not want artists to be bothered by the exposure loss (was a bad choice imho).

This doesn't make sense. Exposure increase is identical to increasing light source intensity. One stop of Light is double the light (since one is exponential and other linear). That's not opinion, that's fact.
None of this affect render times negatively per se, that's the purpose of MSI to control.

These threads are just getting weirder and weirder.

(Great tests Lolec! btw).

So here's a situation/scene - a single room with a single light in it. Now there's two ways to brighten it up, either you brighten your light or increase your EV/Exposure. Do I understand correctly that there's totally no difference which method you choose? Even if you would brighten your light to some crazy values (like 20 000 of whatever), it would still be okay? By okay I mean materials would still respond to light as expected etc.

18
So to confirm I made one last test with disp 2.5D + 1px size with autobump on and off and I can say shading is pretty much the same (correct).
In the end the conclusion is: 2.5D disp with autobump on works correctly, while the old disp with autobump on has some weird shading bug.

19
Okay so to get the most correctly shaded version should I leave autobump ON or OFF now? With 2.5D displacement I mean.

20
Okay newest version with the auto bump off (which indeed seems to be the cause).

New Disp 2px autobump off:


Old Disp 2px autobump off:


I assume it is a bug then?

Another thing I notice is that new version has considerably more shading "artifacts". And those artifacts gets worse the further you go from camera. Is this expected? Should I just decrease px size to like 1px and forget? Or there's something wrong too?

21
New test with glossiness value of 0.5

New disp:


Old disp:


Issue still remains basically.

22
Just re-done the test as Romullus suggested and it seems that results doesn't change too much.
Main problem isn't the difference in quality though, but the fact that the shading/reflections looks totally different, like the light would come from different direction in both of these cases.

Old disp 2px:


New disp 1px:


Difference is best noticed when switching quickly between the two examples.

23
So I'm baking this displacement map of the tiles in substance designer, but I notice quite a big visual difference between the two types of displacement when rendered in Corona (3DS Max).

Why is that? Or is this supposed to be like this?

Old disp:



New disp:



Thanks

24
Gallery / Sink and mixer set by Antonio Lupi
« on: 2020-01-18, 14:11:49 »
Hello,

Here's a few renders of the set:

















Hopefully you enjoyed those :)

More can be found here:

https://www.behance.net/mantas_kava

Or here:

https://www.facebook.com/faktorstudio

Thank You and have a good day.




25
what do your bump settings look like?

There's no bump at all.

26
I think the only solution would be subdivide like crazy, untill those steps become not noticable from reasonable distance.

Yeah it seems like subdividing like there's no tomorrow really helped! Thanks

27


Topic name says it all basically. You can see what's going on in the screenshot above.

It looks like it has something to do with UVW's stretching (I might be wrong), but if I want to get correct aniso effect I got to keep uvw straight.

Any thoughts/ideas how to get it fixed?

Aniso set to 1.0 just to exaggerate the effect. On lower levels it is not as obvious.


28
Gallery / SJUKRAHOTEL In Iceland
« on: 2019-11-08, 17:50:18 »

29
I just understood that it's actually UNNECESSARY to input numbers into controller itself. The most important part is to LINK the parameters and then I can input the numbers to Triplanar node directly (and all other Tri nodes get's updated accordingly). And Bezier Point3 controller does just that. Plus it's even better that I can later hide these controllers to not get in the way.

Case closed it seems :)

Romullus, as always, thank you for your input.

30
Okay just found out about this option:



So in regard to controllers not coming across scenes- all good now. Looks like it was just hidden in slate editor.

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 6