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 - sebastian___

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 14
General CG Discussion / Re: ai corona renderer
« on: 2024-02-25, 21:41:20 »
I had pretty good results using AI to write max scripts. And of course much more complex ones than just making me a cube. But you have to try multiple LLM, like bing chat, maybe switching between algorithms and so on.

The development of a script would be much improved if a LLM would be able to test itself what he writes, instead of back and forth: here's the code, and now give me back the debug error and now here's the next version, and so on.

As for the rendering, I think it would be great to have an AI renderer, or "interpreter" directly in max viewport or render buffer, instead of taking an image from Max and moving that image on all kinds of websites.
As far as I know there's no such initiative for max, but there are a few for blender and maybe c4d.

[Max] I need help! / Re: adding new objects to render
« on: 2023-12-14, 13:04:53 »
There are workarounds but as mentioned, the result could be less than perfect, depending also on your skill.

But sometimes the trouble is worth it, if your whole frame takes 2 hours and just the selected objects takes only 10 minutes.

I'm speaking only from memory, so I might not recall perfectly the names of the options.
You don't even need to deal with render elements.
There is a function in max called - render only the selected objects. If you need the render area to be a bit bigger than the selected objects, place behind each objects a square plane, or any kind of shape which is bigger than the objects. Make the object visibility to 0. And make sure these invisible objects are selected.
Now Corona will render a bigger area to maybe encompass the shadows as well, you can use the same method if you have small areas with reflections in other parts of the screen.

At the end you just place this new layer on top of the old layer, and feather the edges a bit.

I'm not sure if newer versions of Corona have some additional options in this direction.

[Max] I need help! / Re: Corona 11 ACES Workflow
« on: 2023-12-14, 12:52:35 »

Also, we are planning new VFB features for Corona 12 (and a reskin),

For the reskin don't forget to make the VFB be able to be resized smaller (if posible) because the old version had a hard limit, which was bigger than if you would use the VFB in a viewport.

AgX Appearance Punchy is just one of demo looks supplied by the author. you can make it as contrasty as you need it to be.

I found out about Agx a few weeks ago and I tried to modify or make new looks to better approximate the contrast of the default sRGB. I tried it in blender, even though I don't use blender but it was easier to test it there.

And the more I increased the contrast, the more I feel like I was "breaking" the Agx. But at the same time there are many ways you can manipulate the image in OCIO so maybe I did it wrong ?

- !<Look>
    name: Punchy
    process_space: AgX Base
    description: .......
    transform: !<CDLTransform> { power: [ 1.3, 1.3, 1.3 ], sat: 1.2 }

  - !<Look>
    name: Punchy Full
    process_space: AgX Base
    description: Trying to increase the contrast, this one seems ok
    transform: !<CDLTransform> { power: [ 1.35, 1.35, 1.35 ], sat: 1.4 }
 punchy double : this one is more contrasty but in certain situation maybe negates a bit of the AGX advantages ??

  - !<Look>
    name: Punchy Double
    process_space: AgX Base
    transform: !<GroupTransform>
        - !<CDLTransform> { power: [ 1.35, 1.35, 1.35 ], sat: 1.2 }         
        - !<CDLTransform> { slope: [1.1, 1.1, 1.1], power: [ 1.1, 1.1, 1.1 ], sat: 1.2 }         
        - !<ExponentTransform> {value: [1.1, 1.1, 1.1, 1]}      

[Max] Feature Requests / Re: The most wanted feature?
« on: 2023-09-01, 05:14:18 »
I will try to give a reply to your points with either guessing or speaking from my perspective - which might not align with the arch/viz crowd.

I like the idea of getting a complete final image straight from 3ds max complete with everything correct looking like motion blur, clean DOF, smoke, mist and everything, and in post maybe only doing small retouching and color correcting, but that's still a dream at this point. We will get there at some point, but not today or at least not for most complex projects.

We have tons of renderers for 3ds max, maybe the most of any dcc, Corona is among the famous ones perhaps because of the ease of use or the quality of lighting and so on. I saw complex films, advertising and so on made with Corona, but Corona can be very slow for video or for very high res stills of complex scenes.
  Passes, cryptomatte and so on can be good tools to avoid re-rendering.

I got the message years ago that it's hard to code a renderer for GPU and it can have more limits than the CPU counterpart. But there are at least 3, 4 or more renderers which manage to be a hybrid - rendering simultaneously with cpu and gpu. I'm imagining that people look at these renderers and wish the same capability for their favorite renderer Corona.
There are some renderers which manage to produce an identical image regardless if you use CPU, GPU or CPU+GPU.

Plus as time goes by more and more people have very powerful graphic cards in their computer, maybe even 2 or 3. For different reasons, gaming, help with davinci resolve, Premiere, particle simulations and many other programs which increasingly demand more and more gpu power. So we have these cards installed in the computers - at our disposal, they produce a lot of heat, use a lot of power, and for nothing. Corona doesn't use them at all.
  At least it would be nice if Corona would use some gpu. A few years ago someone from Corona replied here that glow, bloom, glare and other post process effects could easily be calculated on the gpu. But I wonder if at least those are implemented yet in Corona ?

There's no premultiply, premult or unpremult needed with the method above.

I posted this solution before in the past.

Some leaves rendered and then composed as layers in AE over a background.

notice the dark edges here :

And here we have white edges:


And here - tga with premult unchecked - perfect edges. Does this method solves the dark edges issues ?

....I had to model a bunch cookie cutter type houses for a background scene. .....

How much RAM was needed to render this kind of scene ?

[Max] Feature Requests / Re: The most wanted feature?
« on: 2021-11-04, 09:28:19 »
I was talking about the "disturbing" and the "shame on you" parts.

That was a quote from Star Wars  :)
So it was funny, even though that post was supposed to be sad.

[Max] I need help! / Re: PC shutting off constantly...
« on: 2021-08-19, 22:33:40 »
You could try opening up the PC case, taking off the cover or the lid, I'm not sure what's the proper word for that in english. And pointing a big room fan at the computer, maybe on max power. And try to reproduce the conditions in which the pc shuts down. In case maybe there's an obscure component somewhere or the ram, or the PSU, which does overheats and doesn't have a temperature sensor to report back to the OS.

If it's still shuts down in the same way, it could be the PSU, which is maybe on the low size, at 650W, depending on PSU quality.

[Max] I need help! / Re: Fastest way to render depth only
« on: 2021-08-13, 23:01:11 »
Isn't even faster to use the scanline renderer for that ?

[Max] I need help! / Re: My render preset is not saved
« on: 2021-08-11, 01:26:13 »
Sometimes 3ds max saves the preset without any extension. So just make sure it has ".rps" in the name when you save the preset.

General CG Discussion / Re: UNreal 5
« on: 2021-06-18, 21:56:32 »
Well, of course. I started with cryengine and back in 2010 I made the gifs attached as part of my research to achieve 3d motion blur, 3d (not post process) depth of field with bokeh, area shadows and other things in cryengine.
I'm still using the old cryengine from 2007. From time to time I check to see what's new in newer versions of cryengine, but it seems they still don't have what I need.
For me equally important would be not only the rendering but the workflow too, and it seems even though so incredibly old, cryengine 2007 had some very good tools built in for nature building and easy objects painting and management and dynamics. Plus it's similar with 3ds max.

But I think with a few more upgrades, the new Unreal will be hard to pass, and could be worth switching to as a new contender app for nature building.
old cryengine gifs and pics (some of them very low res - because they are animated)

3d motion blur,
you could have long distance objects drawing and shadows even in 2007,
nice dynamic vegetation and particles.

General CG Discussion / Re: UNreal 5
« on: 2021-06-18, 00:23:51 »
What's that got to do with anything ?

I only know c4d from youtube tutorials, but it's a program like Maya and 3ds max. While we were talking about Unreal or so called "real-time" programs, or game editors. Right now they are still called game editors, but I suspect in the future they will become more generalized.

I also know c4d has a nice third-party real-time renderer. Maybe similar with Eevee from Blender ?

General CG Discussion / Re: UNreal 5
« on: 2021-06-17, 17:02:03 »
Material Creation is arguably better overall in unreal though it does mix some key features.

Maybe better as in a nicer interface with lots of options - compared to our aging Slate, but I tried to create a simple material double sided for a nice leaf shader, following multiple video tutorials, and after an hour of trying I couldn't do it. It just didn't work as it should. Maybe it doesn't work well in Unreal 5 ? The reflection or even specular did not work properly, same with translucency.
No to mention stupid parts like - needing to constantly press Apply or Save in order to show the changes on the model ? That's worse than in 3ds max or 2007 cryengine.

I also tried both Lumen and Raytracing, even though people said that ray tracing doesn't work in Unreal 5, I managed to make it work, after jumping through a lot of hoops. Real-time raytracing looks nice, with raytraced AO instead of of Screen-space AO but somehow it doesn't look correct. It looks better than a normal video game lighting solution, but not correct. Same with the Lumen.

Also for a much lauded program which aims at environment creation it seems it missing some basic things. For example in 3ds max and cryengine you can just select an object, go 1 kilometer away on that other mountain and press a key and the selected object will "teleport" and snap to where you clicked the mouse. Unreal seems it doesn't have this functionality.

You can probably get nice results with Unreal, but you will probably have to fight with the program a lot and have to learn a lot of new things.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 14