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 - lupaz

Pages: 1 ... 46 47 [48] 49 50 ... 64
706
General CG Discussion / Re: best mouse for 3ds MAX
« on: 2019-02-13, 16:37:55 »
    My report after testing several mice. :p
    About a month ago I bought:

    • Evoluent VM4SW VerticalMouse 4 Right Hand Ergonomic Mouse with Wireless Connection

    Returned: It's TOO vertical. It slips when lifting it to move it. Annoying. Also it gave me pain in the lower part of the hand.
    Also it's too massive and I kept hitting the keyboard.

    • 3Dconnexion Spacemouse Compact 3D Mouse

    Kept. It's nice to have when navigating through some scenes.

    • Logitech MX Ergo Wireless Trackball Mouse – Adjustable Ergonomic Design, control and Move Text/Images/Files Between 2 Windows and Apple Mac Computers (Bluetooth or USB), Rechargeable, Graphite

    Returned
    Definitely an option. It's nice that I don't need to move around the hand. I'd consider it if I got wrist pain. Not at the moment.

    • VicTsing MM057 2.4G Wireless Portable Mobile Mouse Optical Mice with USB Receiver, 5 Adjustable DPI Levels, 6 Buttons for Notebook, PC, Laptop, Computer - Black
    • VicTsing Wireless Mouse, 2nd Computer Mouse with 5 Adjustable DPI Levels, Ergonomic Optical USB Mouse with Nano USB Receiver, 6 Buttons for Laptop, Notebook, PC, Black

    Returned.
    Both VicTsing were pretty goor for such cheap mice. But I like the wheel in my m325 better.

    BTW I found a way to fix logitech's wireless problems: a USB extender.



707
regarding Fstorm I will repeat my question from before:

I'm having a look at fstorm right now to determine the best approach for conversions... however I'm not really sure how useful all of this is. My personal "goal" of the converter is that each render engine conversion should yield a usable result - a one click solution with as few necessary adjustments from the user as possible.
What I see so far is that fstorm materials are rather "spartan", which is fine, because that means it's easy to translate. The maps, however, are pretty much all custom and either different or complete remakes of the max ones (like noise, output, falloff, gradient etc) with different settings which makes it basically impossible to get proper conversion results.
So, if there are any Fstorm users here I would be happy to hear opinions about that and what you think would be a useful conversion for you.

Hi Deadclown,

Thanks in advance.

I think that to have a basic converter is better than no converte.
For example switching to corona materials with most maps in a bitmap loader replacing fstormbitmap. Also glossiness.
The rest can be done manually for now and we go from there (?).
Let me know if you have questions. I’ll be happy to do tests and stuff.

Thanks.



I haven't got any feedback on fstorm, neither here nor for the other converter I maintain, so I assume that there are very few people that actually need it.

708
[Max] Feature Requests / Re: Conversion from Fstorm
« on: 2019-02-13, 00:12:36 »
Ah ok.
Thanks!

709
[Max] Feature Requests / Conversion from Fstorm
« on: 2019-02-12, 23:30:18 »
Conversion from Fstorm please. Thanks.

710
For sure.
I wonder how it'll affect our eyes too! Much more light going into our retinas :S

711
AdobeRGB is dead and HDR will become common space, color management must come.)

Wow. You're right! Once displays become HDR we'll need to change our workflow. Massive change. I didn't even think about it.
It may take...what?...10 years though?

712
You can disable filtering (and thus blurring) completely in native bitmap loader by choosing none as filtering option. My guess, it's the same, or nearly the same, as choosing nearest neighbour in Corona bitmap and setting blurring to 0,01
I just saw that you're changing filtering in native bitmap, but sticking to default in Corona bitmap, so i thought it would be fair to either leave default filtering in both loaders and change only blurring, or test all possible combinations.

Ok. Let's discard my "no filtering" test. Pyramidal is the default.

With the native bitmap loader at 0.01 I get sharper results than with CoronaBirmap at 0.01.
As far as I can see, there's no difference in CoronaBitmap between blur at 1 and blur at 0.01.

713
Yes, batch material editor is highly recomended!

See attached please. The layer Background is the original image. The rest are rendered on the top viewport.

I see, you tested against bilinear filtering interpolation only? Corona bitmap offers two more interpolation methods, bicubic for superior quality and nearest neighbour for ultimate sharpness ;] You should include them in your test as well.

Why?
There's something I'm not understanding I think.
Are you saying that in order to have a texture unmodified (not blurred) by CoronaBitmap I need to choose an interpolation method?

I rather use the standard Bitmap node and choose almost 0 blurring.

Why can't CoronaBitmap give the option to not blur the textures?





714
    Actually, let me rephrase my request:

    Could CoronaBitmap have an option to not blur the bitmap at all?

    In a test I just did I can get sharper textures with standard 3Ds Max's bitmap than with CoronaBitmap.

    I tried standard bitmap with 0.01 blurring and CoronaBitmap with 0.01 as well. There's a difference.
    Why? Am I missing something?

    See attached please. The layer Background is the original image. The rest are rendered on the top viewport.

    Edit:
  • if you want to make bluring at 0.01 by default, then it's probably would make sense to change interpolation to bicubic as well, but that would make Corona bitmap much slower than native bitmap.
This would take too long if I need to do it for every texture.

715
Would it really benefit to have it at 0,01 by default? Are there some common issues with 1,0?
I am guessing (but just guessing) that having all textures with blurring set to 0,01 by default could result in some flickering artifacts due to hard edges (in animations).

I think it makes a big difference. To get sharp textures you need to lower the blurring.
About animations, yes, but most of the work done with corona is still images I believe. Anyone doing an animation would need to raise the blurring.

716
[Max] Feature Requests / Re: Bump mapping improvements
« on: 2019-02-08, 17:55:13 »
Please find 2 GIFs below. One with Corona and another with Fstorm.
I'm not sure if this is the best way to show it.
In my opinion the blurring in corona makes the bump almost disappear when zooming out.
It could be something else though. Like AA. Don't know.

Also in my opinion bump mapping in Corona is very good, except for small details.


717
[Max] Feature Requests / Bump mapping improvements
« on: 2019-02-07, 22:40:55 »
Hello,

I'd love to see a better bump mapping in Corona.

In particular the ability to lower the blur value to near zero without problems.
Currently bump mapping in corona seems to work best with some blurring, which makes bump mapped surfaces to look not sharp enough.

Thanks.

718
I'm really trying to get my head around ACES and tonemapping and general colour management. I've been using the settings dubcat posted a while ago but i'm only now getting into the details about what it does and why. I'm very confused about LUTs and ACES workflow right now. Could anyone perhaps help me understand it a little more as some of you seem to have a good grasp of things when it comes to colour and corona.

I have a couple of questions about which LUTs can be used with the ACES tonemapping settings to simulate various camera responses etc rather than to just produce a 'look'. I'd like to have a couple of LUTs to use to bring the data back into what a real world camera might produce right in the VFB. Or am I completely misunderstanding the workflow and I'm supposed tonot use the LUT then do my grading in lightroom? Ive tried using dubcats colour chart in aces scenes without a lut then matching in 3DLUT creator which gives a great result. Would i then save out this LUT and use it in the VFB for other images in this light/camera setup?

There's not much information out there for beginners on this but im finding the reading incredibly interesting.
That blender video only confused me more but it helped me to take an interest in colour space and tonemapping.

Why go through all that trouble?
Would the result be THAT much better?
Isn't it better to wait for the developers to work on the new built-in tonemapping?

719
Gallery / Re: NORDIC Animation
« on: 2019-02-07, 16:06:51 »
Hi Serkan,

Very nice job.
Can you tell us your render time per frame in average? What resolution is the animation?

720
Hi,

I just wanted to suggest to make the default of the bitmap blurring at almost zero.
Thanks.

Pages: 1 ... 46 47 [48] 49 50 ... 64