CML

[CML]

we are excited to announce the new Corona materials library  site which will be online soon
We are inviting all corona users to take part in the sample scene challenge.
All Corona users are invited to the challenge.
All user can upload  renderings to this topic, or send us an email.

Create a simple model which will showcase the material in the best way.
The model should be consist from mix of curved and straight surfaces.
Max Version  2012-2014
Corona light studio setup
render size 600/480
Zip file

Prize:
Chosen scene will be awarded by LIFETIME credit link to the user website.

Good luck.

http://coronamaterials.com/
info@coronamaterials.com

[Juraj]

Email:coronamaterials.com@gmail.com

You bet.

[lmikkelb]

Nice!

[Ondra]

Email:coronamaterials.com@gmail.com

You bet.

well... google apps for your domain started charging even for the basic plan, so... :D

On an unrelated note, I am kinda interested who is doing this - if it is somebody from this forum I know ;)

[Juraj]

..it's not a joke ?

[CML]

hi all.
The new Email,

info@coronamaterials.com

[Tanakov]

I planned the same thing, so if someone thought of same thing it must be a good idea.

Can you tell something more about the site it self?

[Ludvik Koutny]

I am quite curious why this wasn't planned in cooperation with Ondra.

[Tanakov]

Its quite clear, the person behind it counts on growing popularity of Corona Renderer.
Does not wish to share the propable income from any kind of ads.

[lacilaci]

Well, idea not bad, not new nor unexpected... But the approach makes it look... well, fake at least :D

[maru]

I thought the same. "I made a website, now you make models and materials". Hmm...

[CML]

Hello
I am a Corona user just like all of you and thought that it would be great to have a material library that we could all use.
My identity is hidden for now (personal reasons)

The site will be simple and user friendly.
Will include easy and fast search options as well as other nice features and extra resources.
Please post your sample scenes here so we can all take part of choosing the right one.
Happy Wednesday.

[CML]

Well, idea not bad, not new nor unexpected... But the approach makes it look... well, fake at least :D

Hi I'm sorry you feel this way , not sure why...
The site is still in development and will be online soon.
Best regards

[CML]

I thought the same. "I made a website, now you make models and materials". Hmm...

hmmm....
http://www.vray-materials.de/
and hmmm number 2
http://resources.maxwellrender.com/visual_catalog.php?t=#page=1
hmm number 3...
http://www.idst-render.com/materials/flooring.html

what a strange idea...:)

[shadowman]

IMHO
Today corona is in the alpha stage of development it is not a commercial product, so everything is changing - how shader settings behave, etc..
So people see this idea strange.

[Juraj]

I thought the same. "I made a website, now you make models and materials". Hmm...

hmmm....
http://www.vray-materials.de/
and hmmm number 2
http://resources.maxwellrender.com/visual_catalog.php?t=#page=1
hmm number 3...
http://www.idst-render.com/materials/flooring.html

what a strange idea...:)

It's not this simple.

What you listed are open, community managed pages with materials that come with free or custom textures created by users. This makes it legal and it's not profit-based, apart from donations.

On other hand, something like SIGER Shader is commercial, but the content is created by them, both shaders and textures alike.

Any content that you will generate from users will at highest chance include textures that are dubiously derived from sources with copyright (cgtextures, Arroway,etc...) and would be problem to share for free, but definitely not sell.

I think you don't understand any of this, because the setup and communication looks amateurish at best.

[Ondra]

Allright, lets give this a chance. Something like this will need to happen in the future, maybe it will be this project, maybe some next one.

[CML]

I thought the same. "I made a website, now you make models and materials". Hmm...

hmmm....
http://www.vray-materials.de/
and hmmm number 2
http://resources.maxwellrender.com/visual_catalog.php?t=#page=1
hmm number 3...
http://www.idst-render.com/materials/flooring.html

what a strange idea...:)

It's not this simple.

What you listed are open, community managed pages with materials that come with free or custom textures created by users. This makes it legal and it's not profit-based, apart from donations.

On other hand, something like SIGER Shader is commercial, but the content is created by them, both shaders and textures alike.

Any content that you will generate from users will at highest chance include textures that are dubiously derived from sources with copyright (cgtextures, Arroway,etc...) and would be problem to share for free, but definitely not sell.

I think you don't understand any of this, because the setup and communication looks amateurish at best.

Hello
Ty for the detailed reply.
The site will be free , all the legal issues containing textures use will be solved and explained once the site is online.
Best regards

[Juraj]

Allright, lets give this a chance. Something like this will need to happen in the future, maybe it will be this project, maybe some next one.

If it's free I am all for it. Otherwise I would find your stance odd :- ).

Hello
Ty for the detailed reply.
The site will be free , all the legal issues containing textures use will be solved and explained once the site is online.
Best regards

Alright, good luck then !

[Chakib]

It's not bad to try this concept with Corona even if it stills in Alpha stage.

[lacilaci]

Very well then... I guess only time will tell :)

[CML]

hello
here is a few options for the  sample scene.
replies are welcome.
thanks.
    
    
 

[CML]

one more option
   

[Ludvik Koutny]

The top one is better, as it looks just ugly. The bottom one though... looks quite perverse...

[maru]

This is just wrong. :O

[CML]

thanks for the comment,

This is just wrong. :O

can you please be more specific?

what about this one?


Rawalanche( thank you,) Referred me to this discussion http://forum.corona-renderer.com/index.php/topic,1070.0.html (haven't seen it before.)
do you think one of them will be good as main sample scene?
http://forum.corona-renderer.com/index.php/topic,1070.msg8113.html#msg8113 ( by Bertrand, bbb3viz)
http://forum.corona-renderer.com/index.php/topic,1070.msg8384.html#msg8384 ( by maru)
http://forum.corona-renderer.com/index.php/topic,1070.msg9277.html#msg9277 ( by Volden)

thanks again.

[gracelorn]

Volden's is pretty cool, IMO.

[shadowman]

+1 for Volden

[romullus]

do you think one of them will be good as main sample scene?
http://forum.corona-renderer.com/index.php/topic,1070.msg8113.html#msg8113 ( by Bertrand, bbb3viz)
http://forum.corona-renderer.com/index.php/topic,1070.msg8384.html#msg8384 ( by maru)
http://forum.corona-renderer.com/index.php/topic,1070.msg9277.html#msg9277 ( by Volden)

thanks again.

Volden's model looks good, but it has bad uv mapping and hence is not suitable for material testing.

[CML]

do you think one of them will be good as main sample scene?
http://forum.corona-renderer.com/index.php/topic,1070.msg8113.html#msg8113 ( by Bertrand, bbb3viz)
http://forum.corona-renderer.com/index.php/topic,1070.msg8384.html#msg8384 ( by maru)
http://forum.corona-renderer.com/index.php/topic,1070.msg9277.html#msg9277 ( by Volden)

thanks again.

Volden's model looks good, but it has bad uv mapping and hence is not suitable for material testing.

good point, what about bertrand (bbb3viz) model? without bold logo.
light and model shape looks great for my opinion.

[Juraj]

I will alwas be for simple models like Bertrand's, it's imho vast superior to the random mess of shapes that the rest comply of. I can't even read textures on the others.

[CML]

I will alwas be for simple models like Bertrand's, it's imho vast superior to the random mess of shapes that the rest comply of. I can't even read textures on the others.

Thanks for replying
I just got confirmation from Bertrand's to change his model and use it as a sample scene.
I will post a render of the modified model and hope to see what you all think...

[Tanakov]

thanks for the comment,

This is just wrong. :O

can you please be more specific?

Its about the yellow shape, it looks like a Vagina.

I "Vote" For Vorden

[maru]

Its about the yellow shape, it looks like a Vagina.

Actually, I thought it looks like a dick. Freud would say something...

[Juraj]

Funky how that differs, I guess everyone sees what they want :- ).

Regarding the Volden's preview ball, I absolutely don't understand how in seven hells is it practical ? You need to see 30+ highlights on one preview to gauge reflective and refractive properties ?
Or you just like it because over-complicating stuff is the right way to go as opposed to simple ball ? 90perc. of time materials are applied to some forms of primitives anyway so something like that is not only overkill, it's useless for any textured material because you can't see how the surface properties are affected by mapping, which is much more important than being able to gauge color driven parameters. And that doesn't even take into account you can't see those textures at all because such shape can't even be UV-mapped correctly.
Such funky nerdy thing is really only good to evaluate simple metals/plastics/glasses/liquids. The moment you introduce UV-mapped texture...it's useless eye gimmick.

I really want to read some logical argument in favour of it, because I am persuaded it's "cool factor" that draws people for such mess.

The Jeff Patton's MentalRay object was way more reasonable and could really satisfy pretty much anyone.

[Ondra]

Actually, I thought it looks like a dick. Freud would say something...

I did a poll, best answer I got was "powerball" :D

[Utroll]

Its about the yellow shape, it looks like a Vagina.

Actually, I thought it looks like a dick. Freud would say something...

He would say thanks that was 200$ at the end anyway.

I don't get why you're stuck on a preview shape while you choose a few in my opinion :)
Nobody wants to choose a curtain material while it makes a ball. Same for terrain material etc... you probably could set a studio with grid giving scale but then please stick to few different forms according to the use of the material.

- I like the maxwell preview (in soft) rationnalism (floor, translucence, clothing, emission...)
- In vrayMat I remind people had to post pictures to illustrate what the standard shape could not display.

Happy to see it will be open in 5 days, exactly for the A6 release !!  [/HOAX]

[Ludvik Koutny]

I was drinking some water while reading recent posts of this thread and it successfully made it's way out through my nostrils. :D :D :D

[fellazb]

I personally like the idea of having multiple preview shapes for different materials being represented at it's best way. For example curtains, flooring, curved car materials or terrains etc. with a limit of 5 or 6 shapes.

[Volden]

Hi all. Tomer asked me to post renders of my test model.
Thanks for your kind comments about it.

[CML]

hello,
your latest comments  made me think about creating  a very simple scene which will present the material in the best way..
the concept here is "The Big Red Button " Made by Daniel Soltis.
what do you guys think about the idea?
is it worth some more details??

[rafpug]

Hello CML

This solution is a middle road of this thread

much more simple and linear "my opinion"

Regard and good work
Raf

[Ondra]

What I like is to have some reference gray material intertwined with the sample material, so that
a) emission shows correctly
b) it shows how the main material looks when partially in shade

[Utroll]

What I like is to have some reference gray material intertwined with the sample material, so that
a) emission shows correctly
b) it shows how the main material looks when partially in shade

why not the cutout logo part on top of the sphere ?

Another question which is may be interesting, may be irrelevant : could it be a ray/seconds limitator to make all people rendering a material sample having a fake same minimal 'hardware' configuration ? I'm not sure I'm clear but if everybody could render the material sample with 500.000 r/s and stopping at pass 20th with same (default?) settings, would it give a international material cpu consumption for a given material ? Like a mark from 1 (grey diffuse no refl, nothing) to ... well...  100 open scale.

I'm trying to figure if corona could allow to set up a reference system, hardware independant, to evaluate a material 'cost'. That would be better than trying to figure from stamp if a xeon blabla with this motherboard and xxGo ram rendering in 8 sec is a 'good' or not performance. May be you could use that factor for dev./optimization comparison purpose, people doing material would at least. And it's always helpfull in a production context to know. Specially if that mark could be metatagged within material for futur library uses (in two years you would be happy to have Corona for sketchup and a matlib with 'performance' sorting ability while client on your neck).

If a international cpu cost unit is doable I have no doubt you could implement in a breath.

[Ludvik Koutny]

I think the one from Volden looks great and does the job :)

[Ondra]

I also like it, but I would simplify the mesh quite a bit.

One of the previous ones that does quite good job of showing the material is IMHO:

even though it is not that pleasing visually.

[CML]

hi

some more test with changes over previous model.
what do you guys think about it?
thank you all for taking a part in this wonderful process.

[arqrenderz]

I like those models for previews.

[Chakib]

+1000 for  Volden's model.

[Ludvik Koutny]

It may do a better job of showing off material, but it still looks unprofessional and ugly. I will try to pump some out once i get back from work. In the meanwhile, i still think Volden's model looks the most professional of them all.

[Tanakov]

hi

some more test with changes over previous model.
what do you guys think about it?
thank you all for taking a part in this wonderful process.

For me this one needs way bigger logo area. I would tweek the "hands" to make it look more symetrical. 120 degrees each to add some futuristic more organic look.

I like this one, but it lacks the proprtions that would please the eye.

[CML]

+1000 for  Volden's model.

It may do a better job of showing off material, but it still looks unprofessional and ugly. I will try to pump some out once i get back from work. In the meanwhile, i still think Volden's model looks the most professional of them all.

hi guys thanks for replay.
o.k, one more solution,
what about let users to choose from 2-3 different model?
Volden's ,
very good modeling, but its very hard to understand texture pattern, with all cutouts in model.
Bertrand
very nice, clean and clear.
cml
The Hugger!!!

[CML]

For me this one needs way bigger logo area. I would tweek the "hands" to make it look more symmetrical. 120 degrees each to add some futuristic more organic look.

I like this one, but it lacks the proportions that would please the eye.

thanks, i will update the model today, and add some details.
If anyone would like to play with "the  hugger " sample scene, it will be great.( just ask for the model)
thanks.

[astudio]

As for me Bertrand's ball with pedestal of the last one. This way we'll get enough of curved and planar surfaces.

[Ondra]

just offtopic idea, I could integrate the winning entry directly into Corona so it could be displayed in the material editor natively

[romullus]

Don't know about others, but i prefer simple sphere in material editor.

[CML]

just offtopic idea, I could integrate the winning entry directly into Corona so it could be displayed in the material editor natively

very cool idea, one of the material option will be cml sample scene...nice.:)

[jjaz82]

good initiative, many models, but for now, for me the best model for the evaluation of materials is the jeff patton's model, in the same model there are flat and round surfaces with absorption scale and more effect and color checks..

[Utroll]

good initiative, many models, but for now, for me the best model for the evaluation of materials is the jeff patton's model, in the same model there are flat and round surfaces with absorption scale and more effect and color checks..

Quite nice, some depth, flat, curve, but the ring around is may be not needed ? It makes it so retro SF :)
The base + hugger or simple sphere cut out grey ?

[CML]

hi,
made some small correction on the hugger sample model.

[Utroll]

That's seems quite nice, a good in-between last two... funky UV though :)

Found that blog if one need inspiration http://seamless-pixels.blogspot.de/
It seems licence free, would be impolite not to mention him but that would not breach law.

[Juraj]

Don't know about others, but i prefer simple sphere in material editor.

Exactly, the whole point is UTILITY, not eye-candy. Of course it has to look professional, not amateurish, but is what is enough is enough.
On Volden's model I don't see a single place where I could rest my eye and evaluate pattern/texture, so all I see is bunch of highlights. The amount of details and shapes make it extremely noisy.
Most things in life are just combination of basic primitives, so it's even out of touch with largest amount of assets one would apply the material onto.

I am big fan of Patton's, although Bertrand's is probably what I will convert myself to in-material editor use.

[cecofuli]

In my personal library, I use this scene ;-)
It isn't very PRO, but I have everything I need:

(*) Flat area with real reference (girls)
(*) Good flat and smooth reflection
(*) Good refraction and absorption

Myabe you can have some idea for your setup.
I added material.de model, because I'm used to see the shader with VRay )))

DIFFERENT SHADERS UVW set-up on the wall good to see texture tiling problems


DIFFERENT REFRACTION GLOSSY VALUES - Nice absorption effect on the wall


DIFFERENT REFLECTION GLOSSY VALUES - Nice glossy effect on the wall

[Ondra]

You should apply the material also to the girls clothing.



And test some glass materials :D

[cecofuli]

Ehehe =) I'll do ^__^
PS: girls model from, I think, from Poser

[peterguthrie]

keep it simple i'd say.

I like the default corona one, how about an option so that the checker mat gets applied to the sphere and the actual material is applied to the ground/back wall. does that make sense?

personally that would do for me i think but then i dont often do complex materials with refraction/sss etc.

[cecofuli]

Peter my scene is very easy =) I just added two walls, three cylinders and a two puppets.
But I know, this scene can be useful for me, maybe for other people no =)
I just wanted to share my internal setup. I didn't expect to use this scene

Jeff patton's model is good. But, like other models, isn't very useful for texture like large wall, floor.
It useful for "small" shader, like rust metal, sand, small stucco etc.. but for 2mtx2mt texture?

[peterguthrie]

Peter my scene is very easy =) I just added two walls, three cylinders and a two puppets.
But I know, this scene can be useful for me, maybe for other people no =)
I just wanted to share my internal setup. I didn't expect to use this scene

wasn't really commenting on your set-up, more on the idea of a custom mat editor preview. Yours does look very useful.

[cecofuli]

Opps.. Sorry...  Small misunderstanding  ))

[lmikkelb]

Nice setup cecofuli, looks really useful.  And Keymaster was that your first thought, transparant clothing? :)haha, I like!

Had to make one :) speedy modeling, and really bad mapping(fixable) :), combined curved and flat surfaces.

I named it: The spinnable head with monkey looking feel to it. X-)

[Ludvik Koutny]

keep it simple i'd say.

I like the default corona one, how about an option so that the checker mat gets applied to the sphere and the actual material is applied to the ground/back wall. does that make sense?

personally that would do for me i think but then i dont often do complex materials with refraction/sss etc.

Just to make sure... we are discussing preview scene for material library webpage, not what you see in material editor. ;)

[peterguthrie]

keep it simple i'd say.

I like the default corona one, how about an option so that the checker mat gets applied to the sphere and the actual material is applied to the ground/back wall. does that make sense?

personally that would do for me i think but then i dont often do complex materials with refraction/sss etc.

Just to make sure... we are discussing preview scene for material library webpage, not what you see in material editor. ;)

ahhhhhh , oops!

[CML]

Hi all
Since I would like the process of choosing the perfect sample scene to be shared with all of you,
I would like to post a poll on the subject.(keymaster will upload it soon)
my original plan was to already have a complete sample scene.
This and some final security issues (my responsibility to be concerned for all of you) will delay the site to go online.
 
I hope you all understand and be patience just a little more.
Please take part of the poll
http://forum.corona-renderer.com/index.php/topic,2584.0.html
Ty again for your patience.
Best regards

[Chakib]

just offtopic idea, I could integrate the winning entry directly into Corona so it could be displayed in the material editor natively

I think there is no good model near Volden's model here, so i suggest to choose it because it's really helpful and pleasing to the eye.

For your idea it's awesome can't wait to see it in the A6.

[CML]

volden and cml combined models. its just a sketch
do you think we should add this option to the poll?
.

[Ludvik Koutny]

I do not think we need to rape his Volden's model ;) It is his intellectual property after all :)

[romullus]

Can't you make your own model? Afterall it's just few primitives thrown together - few minutes worth job.
As for Volden's model, i cannot imagine how i could evaluate a bit more complex material on such a bad uvmapped model like this.

[gracelorn]

I like the idea of combining the two models. Now it has larger smooth surfaces and still looks good and unique. I would also flatten the sloped base and maybe fix the UVW mapping. But Rawalanche is right, we need to get Volden's permission to do that.

[CML]

I like the idea of combining the two models. Now it has larger smooth surfaces and still looks good and unique. I would also flatten the sloped base and maybe fix the UVW mapping. But Rawalanche is right, we need to get Volden's permission to do that.

Can't you make your own model? Afterall it's just few primitives thrown together - few minutes worth job.
As for Volden's model, i cannot imagine how i could evaluate a bit more complex material on such a bad uvmapped model like this.

I do not think we need to rape his Volden's model ;) It is his intellectual property after all :)

hi guys, thanks for comment
I would not dare to change volden model without his permission.
it was his idea to upload it to the forum as sketch to read your comments about it.
romullus, i think your right about the uvw map, it is a big problem. for tiles textures.
so, i came up with the idea for the new model. great look of volden and Practical surface from me.

[Volden]

Hi guys. About UV mapping.
I was inspired by Jeff Patton`s shader test model, and I made the same UV mapping (on sphere) as he has (simple plane projection perpendicular to the camera). And that`s enough to understand how will look final material.
There`s 3 softboxes, and I could add an environment there (f.e. walls and ceiling with grey pattern). And maybe I could remove one of the softboxes to shade one side of the model.

If you will decide that Tomer`s idea is acceptable and prefferable as main material preview model, I`ll chane the geometry.

Sorry for my English.

[Paul Jones]

I'm liking the girl and two walls, for arch viz it's great to have the walls.

[steyin]

In my personal library, I use this scene ;-)
It isn't very PRO, but I have everything I need:

(*) Flat area with real reference (girls)
(*) Good flat and smooth reflection
(*) Good refraction and absorption

Myabe you can have some idea for your setup.
I added material.de model, because I'm used to see the shader with VRay )))

Love this set up, wish I had it. Is it a basic studio lighting set up?

[agentdark45]

I'm liking the girl and two walls, for arch viz it's great to have the walls.

I agree, that scene seems to cover all the bases for properly evaluating a material.

[cecofuli]

Yes, it's very simple setup. Here the screenshot.

[Volden]

Here`s the new one.
What do you think about it?

[romullus]

Should you get rid of these extrudes, model would be nearly perfect, imho.

[Volden]

No, I`ve changed my mind. Last one sucks. Original model is much better. I will not change anything, sorry guys. I made it for my own purposes, and I like it. That`s all.

[gracelorn]

I would get rid of the lower extruded bits, but keep the upper ones. I think they are what makes this model so unique and recognizable. Also they may be helpful in evaluating refractions.