Messages

211

[C4D] Resolved Bugs / Re: shift in displacement and texture map

« on: 2022-05-04, 00:56:19 »

Hi, yes the texture is by Petersen from the material Kolumba K55:
https://en.petersen-tegl.dk/kolumba/products/k55
that's the product page. Click on "Texture" to download the textures petersen-k55-tilable-mask.jpg and petersen-k55-seamless-texture-dark-mortar-2020-05.jpg

I never had this problem before or noticed it.
It happens when the object/material tags are scaled ( in this case to 5%) and set to cubic as in the post before where I added a screenshot of the setup.

I can also send you the file. I don't know how though. The textures are about 35Mb and 2.8Mb but are the same dimensions in mm.

212

[C4D] General Discussion / Re: Mac Studio Experience?

« on: 2022-05-01, 11:40:25 »

Hi, just got a new Studio Ultra 128ram / 2tb.
Runs fine with v9. CRv9 is more buggy than I experienced before. Especially some materials are behaving weird, in the preview as well as in the renders.

I noticed that calculating displacement is a one core thing. So time to first pixel depends very much on displacement settings. CR renders at 1950% when workload is heavy but at smaller files I noticed that it renders at 1850%. Maybe it has to do with performance cores being used or not.

My previous computer was an 32Gb ram iMac from lat 2015. So this is a lot better. But I also noticed that the way models are made makes a huge difference in render and viewport response. I am now working on a rather sloppy model from a co-worker which is very slow in every way. My own models are far more efficient in terms of instances and geometry. I think this is something to consider. No matter the hardware the files need to be up to speed as well.

Well, I just got this Mac Ultra Studio so maybe more later.

213

[C4D] Resolved Bugs / shift in displacement and texture map

« on: 2022-05-01, 01:36:10 »

Hi,
I noticed that in daily build 9 there is a shift between the displacement mapping and the texture mapping in the base layer of a physical material.
See attachment. This is a brick wall where the displacement does not follow the texture mapping. it only happens when  the texture tag is set as cubic and when the scale is reduced with the length U and V. At 100% the displacement and texture maps fit perfectly well.

I hope this can be fixed since I use a lot of brick textures rescaled and mapped as cubic instead of as a UV in C4D. I did not notice this before in versions 8.

Mac Studio Ultra 20 core, 128gb. OSX C4Dr26. CRv9(21april)

214

[C4D] General Discussion / Re: Evaluating Corona vs. Octane (vs. Indigo)

« on: 2022-04-25, 15:01:45 »

Surface spread is great but Chaos Scatter is more straightforward. The key ingrediant here is camera clipping. In Chaos scatter you can have the render-camera clipped. In SurfaceSpread you need to assign a camera which is not practical if you have many different camera's and scenes.

Anyhow, camera clipping makes all the difference when working with lots of vegetation.

Chaos scatter also scatters over different surfaces with a set factor for how much on each surface is scattered. I don't think Surface Spread has that.  Laubwerk is very slow developing new stuff and hasn't produced much new vegeatation the past years. I have found new and more refined resources for vegetation at Graswald & Maxtree icw Chaos scatter.
Redshift is much better integrated in C4D R26 then before. But resources are a bit less than for CR and lack stuff like Chaos scatter and Cosmos. The resources provided by Maxon are basic compared to what you get from Chaos or the market in general.

Speed is something else indeed. For me the whole interactive process is much more important than actual renderspeed for the final images. I do mostly architectural design work. Time to first pixel is important to me and it seems that renderengines don't differ much in this aspect.

215

[C4D] Daily Builds / C4D S26 supported ?

« on: 2022-04-20, 21:30:58 »

Any idea when S26 will be supported ? Or is it already ?. I haven't tried the current  installer and rather wait for instructions by Chaos.

216

[C4D] General Discussion / Re: Corona for Apple Silicon M1?

« on: 2022-04-04, 10:36:53 »

Tx, thats good to know indeed. I would hate to switch to PC and see the most of my daily work slowed down by 50% just to have final renders finish somewhat faster.  Those final renders are about 2 to 4 images every two weeks. They render at night or in the weekend.

When you need to do animations I understand its a whole different thing. Lumion on a PC might be a far better option as I see here at the office. Animations though are very time consuming to set up compared to stills regardless of the hard-software used.

217

[C4D] General Discussion / Re: Corona for Apple Silicon M1?

« on: 2022-04-03, 13:36:38 »

Scene parsing on the Threadripper is 3s and the Mac ultra 2 sec looking at the post here. May mean nothing for this test but my scene parsings on much bigger files take minutes on a late 2015 iMac and are the biggest bottleneck for me to get work done. If I am not mistaken render to first pixel is basically scene parsing.

Since most designers need fast feedback the Mac Ultra might just be 50% faster than a Threadripper. That would be huge. To set up a Mac Ultra with 128Gb ram/4TB SSD and have all my textures on the internal SSD is totally fine with me. I see a lot of testing done looking at final render times at SL +100. But for me as a designer only scene testing and finetuning materials is important. It would be a lot more interesting to me to see how interactive rendering is performing and the time to first pixel. I have not found any reviews or tests on that. Once a scene is fully tested and ready for a final image,  the work is done,  and render times less than a few hours a non-issue these days.

218

[C4D] Feature Requests / Re: Corona scatter & camera cone

« on: 2022-03-23, 16:49:30 »

Tx, that is very good news. Without it I need 128Gb ram for sure and in my experience 64 is more than enough with "frustum culling" by Surface Spread.

I don't know however if it really makes a huge difference per se. Does Coronarender by itself not already only loads en renders geometry in view ?

219

[C4D] General Discussion / Re: Corona for Apple Silicon M1?

« on: 2022-03-20, 20:58:11 »

No idea if this is fast. Grainy after two minutes at low res.

220

[C4D] Feature Requests / Corona scatter & camera cone

« on: 2022-03-14, 12:48:15 »

I hope corona scatter will have a setting for the camera cone to be used for reducing the amount of clones. Surface-spread by Laubwerk does this incredibly well. It reduces render times, viewport speed and need for ram a lot.

221

[C4D] Daily Builds / Re: New Tone Mapping issues

« on: 2022-03-14, 00:35:46 »

same here

222

[C4D] General Discussion / Re: Apple's new M1 Studio

« on: 2022-03-10, 17:11:38 »

I had a look at the Redshift forum and saw a discussion on time to first pixel. One of the most important bottle necks for editing scenes. The discussion went on to mention that the more gpu's the slower the time to first pixel. Would it be the same for a m1 Studio 20 cpu cores and  64 gpu cores. Slow to the first pixel and fast in the final render.
Anyhow, I wonder if this also applies to more cpu cores and coronarender. Would corona render be slower in time to first pixel with more cpu cores. Otherwise I might be better of with a 10 core m1 Studio and 24 gpu cores. Rendertimes to final render are less of a concern to me. Once I am ready for the final render I can render overnight or on a farm.

223

[C4D] Daily Builds / Re: Chaos license server

« on: 2022-03-09, 18:16:01 »

Ok, tx. Thats the first time I enter this address and can indeed download a license server (version march 1 2022).
Do you mean that with this license server the latest daily build v8 should work properly on a m1 mac. Before I try let me know.

224

[C4D] General Discussion / Apple's new M1 Studio

« on: 2022-03-09, 12:01:49 »

I am about to order a new m1 Ultra.
Just wondering what specs are best.
I think 128Gb ram, 2Tb disk and I wonder if the GPU cores mean anything from 48 to 64. Maybe for Redshift but for Coronarender it probably does not make a difference.
I assume a big harddisk is good for quick access to resources whan starting a render. Biggest bottleneck I experience is starting a render like a 100 times an hour to finetune settings.

Anyhow, I think that Coronarender now is the best render engine to go for in Apple's world. With the latest hardware most likely fast as well. Since my work is about modeling (vectorworks & C4D)  for over 75% of the time and 25% rendering a new M1 ultra is probably faster all together than any PC. I think Apple is one the right track.

I hope the problems with the license server (daily builds v8) are soon fixed.

225

[C4D] General Discussion / Re: Thin shell transparency settings v8

« on: 2022-03-09, 11:51:35 »

Hi,
look at the video and you will know it all. Its a bit of a long video but I learned all I needed to know. The reason why vegatation looks darker is because the transparancy setting by conversion is way to high. For vegatation it needs to be around 15 to 20 % instead of 50%.
Another thing is that the image texture should be put in color and not at fraction.

Also the glossiness is important. But basicly its very simple to set the texture for a thin leaf right without loosing brightness.