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.


Topics - Juraj

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4
31
[Max] Resolved Feature Requests / CoronaLight as Projector
« on: 2016-01-08, 01:52:34 »
I thought the IES slot can be alternatively used as texture but seems it only takes IES profile.

I would like to map regular texture (caustic bitmap in this case) into CoronaLight just like VrayLight can do. Is there any other solution currently outside of mapping light material to geometry or using 3dsMax standard spotlight ? Not fan of either..

32
Gallery / Travelling Essentials
« on: 2015-12-14, 14:13:22 »
I am posting this work on behalf of my girlfriend Veronika. I did very little help in lighting this piece but this is her spare time project done over few hours for past days.
With exception of Zenit camera (courtesy of 3dSky) she did all the designer objects herself. This started when client asked as to model the boots for current commercial project. She added few more :- )

The work is also on Behance : https://www.behance.net/gallery/32084935/Travelling-essential

To watch Veronika's latest artworks but also her fitness booty, if that's the kind of thing you are into :- ) Watch her instg:
https://www.instagram.com/vero_ni__/

(This is 2560px downscaled from 6000px original. Yes, there are some mistakes that surfaced after render but maybe in future, note: Always add scratches to models you haven't done yourself, never enough turbosmooth, go crazy)



33
Anyone checking on this ? I am absolutely impressed.

http://forums.chaosgroup.com/showthread.php?84980-Altus-denoiser/page6

1 min render (need two of them)



1 minute Altus pass and voila




LeLe's test. 30 second render, 18 second Altus pass:





Another Vlado's scene:











34
Saw this @polycount and surely fits this domain too :- ) Pretty cool.

Not only will this be really useful in texture creation ( I know tons of cross-polarized, scanned and other high end sources are coming up, but in every day work, we often have to make miracle out of googled/calculator-photographed shit), but also to form reference.
Simply imagine stripping lighting information from your favourite photography to roughly get idea how it's lit. And so many other things.

Nice Adobe, please go on..


35
[Max] I need help! / Internal resolution question
« on: 2015-10-20, 00:02:58 »
Does internal resolution smooth the image even if highlight compression is set to 1= linear ?

I have some mental echo it downsampled from tone-mapped result, but maybe I confused that with something else ?

36
[Max] Tutorials & Guides / Vegetation shader
« on: 2015-10-14, 16:09:36 »
I posted this in my wip thread, but might as repost it here if it's ok, more people may come across it here. This is quick start into how I do my vegetation, but most of it is bit old (it desperately needs vertex colors and instance variation),
so I might learn and update it during this project and then do a full video on it.





37
This pertains to 1.1, since I will only update in the upcoming week once I finish current project, but I still just want to ask if someone encountered this issue.

Every time I open saved scene, water level, which I don't use and was unchecked, get's checked in. Repeatedly, upon each opening of the scene again at my side.
Though interestingly, the scene that gets sent to Rebus renders correctly and Rebus has to open it as well so...might be something on my side perhaps.

38
As topic, when set render to Region, it will terminate during(or right before) Secondary GI (Set to UHD default state).

"4/10/2015 8:33:49 AM;  CORONA: Computing secondary GI
4/10/2015 8:33:51 AM;  An unexpected exception has occurred in the network renderer and it is terminating.
4/10/2015 8:33:51 AM;  Error rendering frame 0: An unexpected exception has occurred in the network renderer and it is terminating."


39
[Max] Resolved Bugs / HD success rate percentage
« on: 2015-03-21, 23:25:18 »
Maybe I don't understand how this now works, but if I rise the precision amount the rendering gets far slower, and reported percentage is shown in extremely low numbers, 1-2 perc as opposed to 60-80 I get when using default 1.0.

The new precision is former maximal error thus ? And precomputation is automatic now ? Just wish to clarify as I set that to 99 like i had precomputation before but that's obviously wrong.

The hint on this parameter suggests it only trades off precomputation time. But since rising this parameter slows down the rendering as well, that doesn't seem to be the only case.

40
I had this issue some time ago, but it seems to reappear on random basis. Any material, any angle. Sometimes it goes away automatically..

Anyone had similar encounter ? It's not because of specular maps, the bug appears (although in smaller fashion) even if only diffuse is used. Third screenshot shows it on completely matte surface.


41
Not sure if this is bug or feature, but if it's feature, I don't find it very consistent. Or maybe this is just something that I am making up, because I am not 100perc. sure.

So all maps are now on scale from 0 to 100, perhaps to keep consistency with Vray or to avoid decimals for comfort of use. Except for bump ?

The bump still seem to work the same, 1 seems like 100perc. and 100....like..I don't know.

Anyone any input on this ?

42
I wish you could just hire this guy. Another interesting implementation. Little things, but so cool.

http://www.shlyaev.com/rnd/37-cpp-category/60-diffuseshaders


43
Gallery / Forest & Ocean
« on: 2014-10-17, 16:07:04 »
{{ Each images is around 2-3MB, so it will load slowly for those will slow bandwitch, fast version is on my Behance here https://www.behance.net/gallery/20585117/Forest-Ocean }}

One of our smallest projects this year showcases cooling product by Evening Breeze, quite nice, modern and ecological gadget. We prepared 3 environments, from tropical forest, city to ocean to showcase its placement among varied places in homes.
Full set design and visualization by us. Imagery was rendered in 8k (7680px width)

This was technically rather small and "fast" project, although I've spent considerable time to think through how to conceive the interior sets. It's one of those "make everything as you wish, just follow the rules what to show" projects, which isn't so easy I think.

I have uploaded the originals (but still compressed...) to this forum because I can't to any other place (not even dropbox shows it unless you download it, like...why do we even have hi-res monitors and fast internet if there is no option to show hi-res stuff?)

Cheers

44
So the default amount is quite small, and amounts to usually 20perc. horizontal stripes if you do 2.5k render, is this not to hog the network ? (I presume what is transfered is .exr?)
I feel like I could lift this is up, and instead compensate the update time, as those stripes aren't much helpful anyway in visual feedback.

Or are there other reasons for the set default ? Can this be set to 'unlimited' (0; so it always sends full image) ? I have almost finished 10Gbe network so I guess that's not issue.

45
[Max] General Discussion / Glossiness behaviour
« on: 2014-09-08, 02:32:02 »
I wanted to start a small discussion on behavior of glossiness parameter.

How the model currently works, is not unique to Corona, but is equally shared by Vray and MentalRay and is more a trait of the specular/glossy shader model legacy.
And since both Maxwell engine, and currently various real-time renderers integrated Disney's PBR model, where this is instead, swapped to "Roughness" parameter.

On paper: Roughness=Inverted Glossiness. Almost. The big difference between these two, is that while in Specular/Glossy shader model, glossiness is purely a subset of specular reflection,
a value (numeric or texture driven) that defines how spread out the reflection appears (and being in-line with energy conversation, more spread out obviously appears weaker),
Roughness defines the surface property both in how the specular reflection spreads but most importantly, how much of the grazing angle reflectance (white 1.0 for non-metals, white or tinted 1.0 intensity for metals)
becomes visible.
And in line with that behavior manifests the following difference in practice:

Spec/Gloss:    0.0 Glossy (matte)= Visible specular sheen, or rather overlay of grazing color.
Roughness:    100perc.    (matte)=100perc. lambertian shader, or rather, diffuse color for non-metals, and base specular reflectivity for metals becomes fully visible with no overlay of grazing color at all.

Why the roughness model is more logical and easier to use with photorealistic materials in my opinion:

 Consistency: Polished wood (not laquered!) and rough,matte wood is the very same material. The only difference is microscopic in its surface. Both have the same reflectivity, which is IOR 1.52, or rather, 0.04 base reflectivity, and 1.0 grazing reflectivity.
   The only thing you need to change to achieve either, is change the roughness parameter. Since its linear value, its same across all engines (from Maxwell, to Unreal Engine 4 and many others soon) and is absolutely easily eye-balled from reference.
   We are only changing one value.

In Spec/Gloss (Vray,Corona,MentalRay,etc..) to simulate identical behaviour, we have to "guess" the reflective value. Because full reflectivity, but zero glossiness produces visible sheen, and overlay of our 90 degree value (white by default). And they don't go against each other in linear fashion, i.e, we can't just set it to 30perc. glossy, and deduct 70 from our reflectance value,i.e 0.3. There is no such direct relationship, so we are juggling 2 values, and at any step, we can't be sure if this is actually physically correct material. The fact that it looks "right" to us, doesn't change anything about the fact that it's more complicated and much less logical.
Biggest problem for most users here is, they often end up with incorrect albedo, because they have both too high specular reflectance and diffuse (which is also 'reflectance'). Corona recently introduced small algorithm that "corrects" this for you in background (by dimming your diffuse if your specularity is too high).

Physical correctness=/=physical correctness. This term quickly became buzzword for markerting and is in such fashion used by all major renderers. But all it means is basically, they follow physical laws. You are still allowed to create material wildly differing from its real-world counterpart. That is actually good, the problem is, you don't know when you crossed that line.


Some random illustrations:

1)Vray: 0.0 glossy produces very strong, velvet like sheen.
2)Corona 0.0 glossy produces weaker sheen but exhibits similar behavior.
3)Corona with 128 grey material and Red 1.0 reflection, 0.0 glossy the overlay is quite visible
4)Roughness chart (this one is from Maxwell website, but its always the same). On left, 100perc. roughness (=0.0 glossy) = ideal lambertian surface, zero overlay of grazing angle color (which is blue)


End: Nothing :- ) Not actually saying I want this strongly right now or anything. It's not really any sort of request. I just wish to talk about your understanding of this issue, and generally, what you think.

Me personally, I am big fan of the pbr approach, as you see me joining all the tidbits here and there in forum. It's small, but revolutionary thing, something I am much bigger fan of than
features everyone else already has. In free time, I am creating stuff in Unreal4 (and no, it's not going to replace off-line rendering at all, it won't even become popular in archviz...trust me ;- ) not any soon),
and boy...I am having so much fan using the material system. It's vastly superior imho.

Cheers, all in good faith:- ) !

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4