1
Gallery / Re: Chair - T
« on: 2023-12-05, 12:32:48 »
Really loving the photographic feel. How'd you achieve it? I'm thinking the blurry edges and the soft highlights
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.
This is how it works in 3dsmax, always been this way, not related to Corona specifically.
Hi,
Yes this is annoying I know. I face the same issue using Corona 10, but I didn't know other rendering engines don't produce this issue.
Actually I thought it was a 3ds Max related bug, and not Corona related, but maybe I'm wrong here I don't know.
I found a workaround for this: I use a small script that enables me to delete the path where render elements are saved so that, after completing a render with 'Save file' unchecked, render elements don't overwrite any files that have been rendered previously.
I am going to ask the developer their permission, and if they agree, I'll post the script here.
It's probably the "compositing mode" For me it was always up to 10times slower than without.
Because it's so slow when I need only white-sweep, I rather use Distance map in opacity Slot of regular white material.
Of course, that doesn't help for true shadow-catcher need like this or automotive.
I hate to admit that I’ve been using Corona for C4D for several years now and I have yet to achieve any quality renderings. I’ll spend hours changing materials, render settings, and post-production to no avail. I always end up with a murky, gray, hazy result (example attached) – not the crisp clear images others are producing. This is a link to the type of images I hope to produce:Also, remember to set all maps that aren't diffuse, to gamma 1.0. I think that should make them look more like what you see in substance
https://rebusfarm.net/blog/3797-the-making-of-bedroom-by-white-balance
To say the least, after so many years this is disheartening…
I am quite familiar with Corona as I’ve been using it for so long (obviously incorrectly). I won’t need anyone to go through the basics. I’ve also been a C4D user for almost 20 years, so I know my way around the software and am quite familiar with various rendering engines. I was a Vray user prior to Corona and achieved the same subpar results.
It has only come to my attention recently that I can increase material values above 70% and that you’re in the “safety” zone if not exceeding 90%. I’ve been using this 70% cap as I was taught incorrectly when Vray was first introduced to Cinema 4D. To make matters worse the earlier versions of Vray for C4D were glitchy in the way materials and light were calculated – as some users may remember.
As our firm creates mostly kitchen and bath design, we work in inches. I have often wondered if Corona isn’t converting the units correctly as some of the light settings need to be lowered substantially to avoid over-exposure. An example would be having to set under cabinet lighting to 50 lumens or less in an LED strip span of 5’ which is not realistic or 25 watts of fill light blowing out the entire scene. Further, none of the PBR materials I create in Substance look the same as they do in Substance. I always must adjust glossiness/roughness and base color considerably.
Due to my suspicions of the units not converting correctly, I would at the very least appreciate someone trying the scene for themselves. I will upload upon request.
I am looking for a C4D user who is capable of stunning results to tutor me. I thought it would be a good idea to use the file from which the attached image was produced as an example scene – hopefully having someone walk through/dissect the scene and tell me where I’m going wrong. I am willing to pay well for your time. Please PM me if you’re interested. I work from home so I can be flexible with the hours. Thank you.
Hey team,
I would like to have very realistic powder or sand and have animal footprints in the sand. Image is to be viewed very upclose
How should i go about this. I read in this forum of a post dated 2017 suggesting using actual geometry to replicate the particles.
I have attached a jpeg of the how i intended the sand/powder to look
Yeah microdetail is always problematic. Reduce filtering in either map (native or Corona, or bumpconverter node) and you get possible artifacts. Don't, and your detail is very much angle and resolution dependent. I don't like any filtering (I don't do animations though) but Bump/Normal can stop functioning without filtering. I've also been interested in Vray's elliptical filtering mode.Very interesting. What do you consider high-res, 6k+?
A solution that worked for me is to render quite high-res. You don't need to multiply your render-time in order to do so, down-sampling of noisier high-res files to lower resolution clears some of that noise. Also, denoised high-res file for most part looks better then undenoised lower-res file.
Possible solution for accurate detail vs animation smoothness is to use Devel/Debug menu override between these modes. There is no filtering option which can be default for stills.
I also don't use native max noise in bump, or much at all. I rather triplanar noise bitmap for more consistent result across resolution. The F-Storm is using its own noise map for good reason.