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 - Nejc Kilar

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 72
1
Hello!

If you just enable the fast caustics solver but don't enable the caustics inside the material then you'll only be getting reflective caustics. :)

2
[C4D] Bug Reporting / Re: HDRI's coming in as pure white
« on: 2022-04-21, 10:38:33 »
Is the global exposure found only in the VFB? Just wondering what the workflow is like. Can I see or control it with the Interactive viewport?

The interactive viewport seems to be the only way I can see renders update in real-time as I make changes to the scene. The VFB does not seem to update whenever I make changes (unlike what I've seen in some of the youtube videos). Maybe that's a question for another post.

Howdy!

Exposure settings can be found under Renders Settings -> Camera / PostProcessing -> Tonemapping section (if you're using release 8 you want to click on "Edit"). These are the settings for whenever you are not using a Corona Camera.

If you are using a Corona Camera (any Cinema 4D camera that has a Corona Camera Tag) then you can access the Exposure settings from right inside the Corona Camera Tag. Or the VFB.

And what Romullus said is pretty much the gist of it. Exposure is meant to be tweaked just like it is on your DLSR or any other camera. It totally depends on your scene lighting and whether you're being indoors or outdoors. Exactly the same as in real life :)

Hope that helps!

3
You're welcome and thanks for the question :)

With the Layer shader you need to have the bottom most layer be at 100% because otherwise you're basically lowering its opacity and since there is no shader below it, it'll get mixed with pure black.

So I'd approach it like you did but give the greenish color that is sitting at the bottom 100% strength.

Or, as I mentioned you can also use Corona's Mixture Shader in "Mix" mode. Whichever you prefer.

4
[C4D] I need help! / Re: Mask for light material
« on: 2022-03-21, 11:19:20 »
Have you tried unchecking the Sky (in your case the Light material) from affecting the Alpha? In that case you might be able to use the Alpha channel to mask our your sky. Alternatively, you can also set up an ID mask where the sky will always turn out black - you  can then try using the black color to mask things out.

5
@ShynnSup

I think you might want to give the Corona "Mixture shader" a spin. I think that one will be pretty similar to the examples you've shown us here. Otherwise you can always resort to the Cinema 4D's Layer shader although if you're just mixing two textures I personally prefer the "Mixture shader".

Hope that helps!

6
Hello!

Kind of looks like you are using screen size displacement which is not the best option for animations. If I'm guessing wrong here do let me know :)

Screen size displacement will subdivide your meshes, so that you get that nice intricately detailed displacement, based on the view and the pixel size amount you've set. It's "adaptive". This is especially useful for when you're dealing with still images and you have things in the distance and you don't really want to subdivide them too much because you won't be able to make up the details anyway. Great for still but not the best for animations.

For animations you'll want to switch to world size displacement - that'll do the subdivisions no matter the view point, you'll essentially get uniform subdivisions even if that object is 1px in size and somewhere in the background. Probably not that useful for still images but really useful for animations because the topology will never change hence you won't get any weird geometry popping.

Hope that helps!

7
Hello there!

To piggyback on Cinemike's post, could you also please try rendering out a quick preview with the "Adaptive Light Solver" turned off? You may find it under Render settings -> Performance Settings.

Those squares really shouldn't be there, na-ah. We'll try to get to the bottom of this :)

8
Off-Topic / Re: Space related topic
« on: 2022-02-01, 17:09:42 »
I'm super excited about JWST and just everything space related we humans are doing. Would be nice if we'd be taking better care of the planet we are on but... That's another topic.

Exciting times, hope we'll see some nice space renders in the gallery too, really like those :)

9
That doesn't sound good, nope. Can you guys please try describing what's happening a bit more in detail please? Is it just 3ds Max that gets sluggish, is it the mouse cursor as well, is it just the rendering performance or is the whole system (Windows included) just a lot slower?

10
I apologize if I'm not understanding your question correctly but in Corona you currently cannot have the camera "inside" the VDB cloud - it won't render properly if you do. Same goes for volumetric effects that aren't global. So if you have a box with a Volume MTL applied to it you won't be able to position the camera inside that box and get proper volumetrics going.

We are aware of this limitation and we're keeping track of the requests so thank you for getting in touch!

11
[C4D] I need help! / Re: Volumetric's like I'm 5
« on: 2021-12-23, 13:53:12 »
Haha, I'm still laughing at the title, well done sir!

So what I'm about to write down is supposed to be taken as mostly oversimplification but hopefully it'll be a bit useful to you.

You can perhaps kind of think of absorption as a parameter that will affect how deep the light rays will go inside the volume. The deeper they go (and depending on the setting) the dimmer they'll become. So eventually after traversing through the volume for a certain distance, they'll be smothered. So kind of like saying after a certain distance the ray will completely "disappear". If you add color to the absorption then you know it's a similar story except only a certain light wavelength (color) will bounce back to your eyes.

So thinking about it like that the absorption will mainly only result in things becoming dimmer. (again, trying to oversimplify things).

Then, when you add scattering you can think of adding some "substance" to the volume. Tiny particles that will cause the light to scatter and not just pass through the volume in a straight line. Now once the light starts scattering that's when the visual magic happens because then you'll get the "god ray" effects going and all those fun things.helpdes

Emission then sort of adds some kick to the light as it travels through the volume. So light as it passes through the volume it will gain emissive properties (think glowing plasma effects).

Again, I'm trying to oversimplify things here and I'm not sure its entirely helpful but... Hopefully it helps :)

12
So 3990x is still the choice for me I guess. Do you think is there any possibility that the price drops after the new AMD releases? It $6,000 right now in USA 😭

Yas, I'm noticing pricing upticks in European stores as well although the cheapest 3990x deal I was able to find is still 4000€ which is on point with the MSRP (100€ more seems downright trivial compared to all the price hikes lately lol).

@Hurrycat
I wonder if that is because we're getting new parts and the old ones might get discontinued? Although that seems unlikely since there's only Pro Threadrippers seemingly coming out in the next 6 months.

On the topic of new Threadrippers, new leaks!
https://videocardz.com/newz/amd-ryzen-threadripper-pro-5000-specifications-have-been-leaked

Based on the leak above the 5995wx will get 200mhz extra on the single core and -200mhz on the all core boost. I don't doubt it won't be faster than the 3990x but if I may think out loud the 3990x might still be completely competitive. Although it is true that we still don't know whether these will be Zen 3 parts or Zen 3 V-Cache parts plus who knows if the actual boost clocks will end up being like that anyway. Let's see if they really do unveil these at CES :)

edit:
Didn't properly read the specs. If those leaks are true then these aren't fitted with V-Cache, not that it should matter much because it's been widely speculated it wouldn't help much outside of gaming and a few niche(r) tasks.

13
Aaaaand this is just in... https://videocardz.com/newz/amd-confirms-threadripper-pro-5000wx-series-through-sata-io-filing

So given the chatter it might actually be that we get Zen 3 Threadrippers in Q1 next year but if these are indeed going to be Pro models I think it might be smart to be thinking about a noticeable price increase compared to say a non-Pro 3990x.

14
Well, there's gossip about the Zen 3 Threadrippers coming out but apparently the leaker community is split on what we can expect - if anything at all. From the looks of it there might be Pro Threadrippers coming out like for example the 5995wx and the like but with those I'd personally expect a higher price tag - so the perf per dollar proposition might get worse. Especially so considering that the 3990x and 3995wx (Pro) have a grand and something between them already. If you don't need the Pro features (more PCI-E lanes is one thing) then I think the price tag might be quite steep.

Then again there seem to be some consensus that we might not get any Threadrippers at all until the next next gen. That's how it goes with "leaks" I guess, hard to plan things :)

Above is just my personal view and speculation obviously. It might just as well happen that we get Non-Pro Threadrippers that'll cost less than the current parts although I think we can all agree that in the current chip shortage climate that'd be kind of... Near impossible? :)

Just my 5 cents.

edit:
Not hearing much about Sapphire Rapids in early 2022 although I might be completely wrong. If these are planned for say Q3 and Q4 then they'll kind of have to compete with Zen 4 Threadrippers potentially and based on Zen 4 Epyc those _might_ go up to 96 cores but that's a problem for tomorrow. If Sapphire Rapids aren't scheduled for 1H 2022 then you know... It's a bit further down the road :)

15
I'd just like to say that Jan summed it up perfectly with this sentence "we do not want users to use the material incorrectly". It's not so much "taking away options from you" as it is "ensuring your materials make sense".

You'll notice similar behavior when you'll try to create a Metal material that has Volumetrics. Metals don't exhibit these kinds of properties so the Physical MTL will grey out that option for you because enabling would be incorrect / not physically realistic.

Edit:
And if we are being even more specific, Translucency itself is basically SSS with the main difference being that Translucency is designed to be used with "thin" meshes. For SSS to work you obviously need thickness and there are so many cases where having actual thickness on the model would be impractical (think high quality tree leafs, if you add thickness you're like 2x-ing the poly count that can already be super high to begin with) so that's where Translucency will take that "thin" mesh and simulate the SSS effect like the mesh has some thickness to it. Obviously, for objects with "noticeable" thickness you'll probably want to use SSS or Volumetric Scattering but for things like leafs or pieces of paper... Translucency!

And so now that we know that I think understanding the behavior where you can't use Translucency if you don't have "Thin shell" enabled makes more sense. Why would you want to enable Translucency for objects that have thickness? That would be incorrect usage of the functionality - Hence, it is greyed out when you aren't dealing with a thin mesh.

Hope that helps!

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 72