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 - RecentSpacesSam

Pages: [1] 2
[Max] Feature Requests / VFB Save button default path
« on: 2024-04-11, 10:18:56 »
Hey Devs!

Currently it seems the VFB's save button defaults to the same path as the max file that you're working on.
Would it be possible (or beneficial?) to use the current render output filepath instead?
I sometimes will disable "save render output" for test frames and still want to save out a test to the same location.


Hey all, we're currently looking into using render element compositing/back-to-beauty workflow as a means of being able to swap out textures on a product without having to re-render.

The issue that we're running into is that we can't get a "clean" diffuse component element (i.e. purely lighting, no texture information) to work with as the CShading_RawComponent (set to diffuse) still includes the texture detail.

Comparitively, the VRayRawLighting render element only includes lighting information and can be multiplied over the diffuse filter element to obtain a RawLighting element (or the math works backwards too).

Am I missing a trick here or is this just the way that Corona is set up?

For reference I'm setting the comp up in Blackmagic Fusion with 32bit exr's. Attached is a sample of the comp layout.


Hi, we've noticed on some assets that Corona is displaying the error "Render had to be aborted because a bitmap on disk changed and is being reloaded".

It seems to be isolated to 3DS Max standard bitmaps when they are loaded in the material editor (slate and compact) during IR.

Where is the best place to upload the problem scene?

3DS Max 2024.2
Corona 11.1



We've been playing around with AgX as mentioned in some other posts and would ideally like to make use of it in Max's color management instead of the current solution using LUTs, however Corona currently doesn't support the "OCIO - Custom Config File" option.

[Max] Feature Requests / Memory usage breakdown improvements
« on: 2024-01-26, 16:50:33 »
This tool is fantastic for helping to narrow down the objects with unnecessary displacement/crazy resolution textures etc. but would be even more helpful if there was an option to select the objects listed/put the material into the material editor, resize textures.

[Max] General Discussion / Tile rendering issues
« on: 2023-12-12, 14:55:17 »
Hey guys,

For a while in the studio we've been using "tile" rendering to divide large images into smaller jobs on the farm but recently we've run into an issue where there are lighting discrepancies at the border of the each tile. We initially thought it was down to the UHD cache being read incorrectly but after some testing it seems the issue is coming from elsewhere.

3DS Max 2024.1
Corona 10.1
Pulze 2.2.6

It's worth noting that the issue only started appearing after we upgraded from Corona 9.1 to 10.1 so I believe the issue has come through that update. So far we've tried:
- setting secondary GI to UHD Cache, 4k Cache and Path Tracing
- bloom and glare disabled
- caustics disabled
- use legacy environment map filtering (this was already on as the scene was originally created in 9.1
- disable adaptivity

The issue is mostly visible in the Direct/Indirect/Reflect elements (and of course beauty)

I'll see what we can do about getting a test scene over to you guys too.


Hey guys,

I've had a scene regularly crashing on me - I initially thought it might be due to a bad downloaded asset but since dropping in another one the issue persists.

The object renders fine using the material the object came with but crashes after around 20 passes or so if I insert a CoronaColorCorrect or a CoronaMultiMap into the material tree.

Minidump attached.


Hey, we recently updated to max 2024 and Corona 10.1 but for older projects have kept our Max 2022 install on 9.1.

We've noticed that some scenes are getting an error of "Missing DLL: optix.6.5.0.dll" in Max 2022

Is it possible that the installation of Corona 10.1 has removed this from the Max 2022 installation, or that both versions are installed to the same location and 6.5.0 has been overwritten by a newer version?


We recently discovered that when you use a UVWRandomiser in conjunction with real-world map sizes it produces some strange looking results.

In the attached image both squares have a similar material applied. The one on the left is using a UVW modifier set to 130cm box and the bitmaps are set to 1:1 tiling.

The one on the right is using a UVW modifier set to "real world map size" and box, the maps are then set to real world size 130cm (or tiling of 0.008)

Both sets of maps are being run through CoronaUVWRandomiser maps with the following values:
U Offset - from -1.0, to 1.0 step 0.0
V Offset - from -1.0, to 1.0 step 0.0
W Rotation Offset - from 0.0, to 360.0 step 180.0

Randomise each tile: Y

Everything else is default.

What I believe is happening is that the UVWRandomiser is randomising at the boundary of each UVW mapping tile (1cm in the realworld UVW case) rather than the boundary of each texture. Whilst the functionality is "corrrect" the ideal scenario for realworld map sizes is that the offsetting is done at the texture boundary - at least where rotation is concerned.

When offsetting is zeroed out and only rotation is used the issue is less noticeable but still present.

The issue is not present when using triplanar, although I noticed the blend line seems more hazy/lacking in contrast.

max 2022.3.10
Corona 9.1

Now that photogrammetry is becoming so widely used it would be awesome if we could define a low poly mesh for CProxies to display rather than "full mesh" or "point cloud" modes.

Megascans in particular offers multiple LOD's of their models so it would be relatively easy for the user to download multiple "resolutions" of an asset, export one as their "high res" to be used at render time and keep the other purely as a viewport display if such an option were available.

Perhaps with enough user support Epic could be encouraged to automatically set this up in their exporter too :)


Title sums it up.

If you enable "Invert Colors" on the Corona Color Correct map, then increasing the exposure makes the map darker and decreasing exposure makes it brighter.

Hi, not sure if the title describes this properly but currently if you use the render mask include/exclude then anything inside a fog volume renders black if the fog volume isn't being included but if the fog volume is added to the include list, then the entire fog volume is rendered.

For me personally, the ideal scenario would be that for any fog volumes not added to the render include list would be rendered, but the objects within the volume would still be used for pixel masking.

Some renders are attached to show what I mean. Lets assume that the "client" is happy with the overall image, but wants to change the material of the sphere.

01 - shows the full render of a sphere contained within the fog.
02 - if I add the sphere only to the "render selected" list then nothing renders, because the fog is being excluded
03 - adding the fog volume renders everything seen through the fog, this would require extra effort to drop into a psd and requires masking
04 - if I hide the fog, then I get the mask of the sphere but it now renders differently to the original render
05 - this would be the ideal scenario, achieved in PS, where the fog does not need be added to the include/exclude list but everything inside that is added to the include/exclude list still renders.

The standard include/exclude can work well in most cases but falls short when you have objects in XRef Scenes.

I would love it if I could include/exclude objects by layer for material override/lights/caustics/masks/render selection etc.

Example 1:
"Artist A" is working on the lighting of a scene and wants to see the cladding of a tower block that is in an XRef, whilst "Artist B" is still working on the model in the XRef.
Artist A either has to work without being able to see the material, or merge the XRef into the scene and manually update once "Artist B" has finished - losing one of the advantages of XRefs

Example 2:
A landscape file including plants is being shared by multiple artists and looks great in most renders, however in one scene some lights are affecting the foliage in a way that doesn't look great
The artist working on this shot wants to exclude those plants so that the rest of their shot can stay the same but remove the lights from the plant and knows that they are on a specific layer.
Once again they would have to merge the XRef into the scene in order to achieve this.

We've noticed that when loading exr's into the Corona Image Editor they look different to when being loaded directly into Photoshop.

The cause of this is that the ACES OT is being applied to the image, even if that render had ACES OT applied in 3DS Max.

For us at least, the ideal scenario would be that the render looks the same wherever it is opened, without any additional effects/changes being applied unless the user changes them

[Max] Feature Requests / Region improvements
« on: 2022-11-15, 14:20:17 »
Hey guys

Something we often do when rendering single objects (e.g. minor updates to a material that don't require a full render) we often find that the render goes faster if we put a corona region around the object in question in the frame buffer rather than letting the entire thing render. Not sure why - maybe something to do with the noise level calculation?

Anyway, for super-duper noise calculating speediness the tighter this region is to the object in question the better.

I would love it if you guys could add something similar to VRay's render mask texture (where you basically draw an alpha of what to render) or perhaps implement some kind of subtractive region?

I'd love to know if others would find these features useful too, or if it's just me.

Pages: [1] 2