Chaos Corona Forum
Chaos Corona for 3ds Max => [Max] Feature Requests => Topic started by: nowosek on 2023-06-01, 09:45:29
-
Hi,
is it possible to make mapping source option for Corona Bitmap like V-Ray? Its nice to have "one texture to rule trhem all" and do not have to change dimesions for every texture.
Thanks,
Mark
-
This is done in Corona 10 for MappingRandomizer, Triplanar, and ColorCorrect via accepting multiple inputs and sending out multiple outputs.
-
Yes, but my approach is different. Let me explain. If I have 3 textures like base color, bump and reflection, and every texture is set to real world coordinates with the size 200 cm in x-axis and 400 cm in y-axis and I want to change the size of these 3 textures I must change it for every texture itself. But in V-Ray, I'm able to do it with mapping source with plugging blank V-Ray Bitmap into mapping source of these 3 textures a then change it only there. Maybe the screenshot describes it better than me.
-
Once mapping randomizer gets multiple inputs, you will be able to do just that in Corona as well. Its UI is quite different, but i think it's just a matter of getting used to it.
-
Once mapping randomizer gets multiple inputs, you will be able to do just that in Corona as well. Its UI is quite different, but i think it's just a matter of getting used to it.
Can you illustrate it please? I am not sure it's the same. In my opinion the multi input/output would coexist well with mapping source node.
-
Well, triplanar lets you control texture offset, scaling (tiling) and rotation. I think that covers like 90% of what one typically does in bitmap node. Unfortunately it does not have any controls of filtering, blurring, cropping and some other features that bitmap node has to offer, so maybe mapping source can be more preferable for some. IDK, i'm not against it, it just seems weird if devs will replace the feature with multiple inputs in some nodes and introduce it again as a separate node. Feels somehow inconsistent, but if that will improve users experience, then why not.
-
Triplanar completely overrides UVW mapping. It's fully exclusive with use of Mapping Source.
The UVW controls of Triplanar are useless if I want to use mesh UVWs.
I am lost why this is lost in this thread :- ). I mean Vray already has it anyway, what would be issue for Corona devs to just take it? Every other renderer including Unreal is using it in same way. In fact, Mapping control being done inside BitmapNode is rather unique to Max and Cinema perhaps, since they didn't use nodal network from get go.
Mapping source is not alternative to any existing Corona node, Tom is wrong about this. It's replacement for Bitmap node controls. A vastly superior one.
Yes, it's needed. BUMP + 1
-
Re-reading Tom's answer just shows there is confusion what the MappingSource is, even though it's right in the name.
OP mentioning one-node to rule it all, in this specific context, means one-node to rule all parameters of Bitmap. I.e Tiling, Offset, Blur, Crop, Filtering, etc..
It does NOT mean controlling anything other.
Triplanar, CC, and MappingRandomizer are their own separate nodes, they don't replace any parameter of BitmapNode. It's completely different category of Node. None of them are "controllers". MappingSource is maybe weird name chosen by Vray, other softwares usually called it "UV Coordinates" which illustrates it's just detached Bitmap control centre.
I mean it's ok for Corona Devs to disregard requests because they don't think they need it. But at least try to understand what is being requested.
-
I don't know why i wrote triplanar in my last message when of course i was talking about mapping randomizer. Sorry for the confusion. While i tend to agree with you that mapping source map arguably would be more convenient to use, i still stand for my opinion that mapping randomizer fully covers its "UV coordinates" part and only some additional features are missing, which may or may not be important to the users. I would say, let's wait till multiple inputs will be implemented in mapping randomizer and see if that's good enough, or if we need another map that's partially duplicated in offered features.
-
Triplanar completely overrides UVW mapping. It's fully exclusive with use of Mapping Source.
The UVW controls of Triplanar are useless if I want to use mesh UVWs.
I am lost why this is lost in this thread :- ). I mean Vray already has it anyway, what would be issue for Corona devs to just take it? Every other renderer including Unreal is using it in same way. In fact, Mapping control being done inside BitmapNode is rather unique to Max and Cinema perhaps, since they didn't use nodal network from get go.
Mapping source is not alternative to any existing Corona node, Tom is wrong about this. It's replacement for Bitmap node controls. A vastly superior one.
Yes, it's needed. BUMP + 1
+1
-
It's more confusion on what functionality people want rather than on what mapping source does - the biggest request that we've seen is to control the tiling in one place, and there is now a solution for that. For controlling things like offset, filtering, etc. we've not noted many requests to be able to do that. We can leave this here for consideration with 11, as it is too late to add it in for 10 :) Meantime folks can tell us how many of y'all want/need/would like controls for those other bitmap parameters.
-
It's more confusion on what functionality people want rather than on what mapping source does - the biggest request that we've seen is to control the tiling in one place, and there is now a solution for that. For controlling things like offset, filtering, etc. we've not noted many requests to be able to do that. We can leave this here for consideration with 11, as it is too late to add it in for 10 :) Meantime folks can tell us how many of y'all want/need/would like controls for those other bitmap parameters.
+1 for wanting, needing and would liking. Nothing more frustrating than making the same exact changes multiple times for the same material. I'd imagine there aren't many requests because users are just used to doing it the laborious way
-
That could be it :) We do now have it as something to be considered for 11, with the enhanced understanding that it is more than just uv tiling that people want to control in one place. Cheers!
-
+1
Anything to get us closer to fewer nodes.
Not sure why yet, but I feel that;
- Connecting one UV node on the left side of several bitmaps,
instead of
- Connecting several bitmaps into one UV(ish) node on the right side,
is more natural to do. And would probably look more tidy if used in more than one material
Plus it has the added benefit of probably making it easier for converters to other render engines, seeing as this is how it works in several of them already.
Since Corona isn't the best at all sides of Archviz, converting from and to is a must sometimes. (But I guess USD and Material X could help with this down the line)
-
+1
+1
Anything to get us closer to fewer nodes.
Not sure why yet, but I feel that;
- Connecting one UV node on the left side of several bitmaps,
instead of
- Connecting several bitmaps into one UV(ish) node on the right side,
is more natural to do. And would probably look more tidy if used in more than one material
Plus it has the added benefit of probably making it easier for converters to other render engines, seeing as this is how it works in several of them already.
Since Corona isn't the best at all sides of Archviz, converting from and to is a must sometimes. (But I guess USD and Material X could help with this down the line)
-
Triplanar completely overrides UVW mapping. It's fully exclusive with use of Mapping Source.
The UVW controls of Triplanar are useless if I want to use mesh UVWs.
I am lost why this is lost in this thread :- ). I mean Vray already has it anyway, what would be issue for Corona devs to just take it? Every other renderer including Unreal is using it in same way. In fact, Mapping control being done inside BitmapNode is rather unique to Max and Cinema perhaps, since they didn't use nodal network from get go.
Mapping source is not alternative to any existing Corona node, Tom is wrong about this. It's replacement for Bitmap node controls. A vastly superior one.
Yes, it's needed. BUMP + 1
+1
-
I just found that multiple outputs is already in daily builds, so i made quick test with it. My findings are that all is working pretty well. The setup is quick and easy, especially if you work in 3ds Max 2024, UI is arguably less intuitive than it could be with dedicated mapping source node, but definitely not a deal breaker. One advantage of multiple outputs vs mapping source workflow is that former method lets you connect same textures to different materials and have different mapping on them - less nodes in the editor, easier to understand things. There are few disadvantages though, first, you lose correct material preview in viewport, second, mapping randomizer does not have controls over advanced bitmap features, like cropping, filtering, blurring, etc, and third, multiple otputs setup is taking slightly longer to setup, since you need to additionally lock from and to spinners in mapping randomizer, which is not an issue in 3ds Max 2024, but can be quite tedious in previous versions. The last issue could be easily resolved by Corona devs if they would add additional lock option in mapping randomizer. Anyway, i think it's pretty workable solution which i will be incorporating in my future materials.
-
+1 Always annoying having to adjust parameters of multiple bitmaps for a PBR material.
I would add that it could be useful if this node could be applied as either an override mode OR a multiplier of sorts.
i.e. if i have a material set up with differing tiling settings WITHIN the bitmap nodes, this node should either override the bitmap option OR act as a multiplier and keep everything in the correct relationship if the bitmaps dont necessarily all have identical settings but you want to control all of them in one place.
-
+1 Always annoying having to adjust parameters of multiple bitmaps for a PBR material.
I would add that it could be useful if this node could be applied as either an override mode OR a multiplier of sorts.
i.e. if i have a material set up with differing tiling settings WITHIN the bitmap nodes, this node should either override the bitmap option OR act as a multiplier and keep everything in the correct relationship if the bitmaps dont necessarily all have identical settings but you want to control all of them in one place.
+1 to the possibility of it also acting as a multiplier of underlying bitmap nodes. Would save so much time