Messages

181

[Max] General Discussion / Re: Vray Next vs Corona 4

« on: 2019-05-21, 17:52:30 »

Any chance of sending the scene? Could be something odd about normals, or some sort of material override going on. Does it happen too with, say, a simple sphere?

Simple sphere looks primarily the same, little difference on shading falloff. Where do you want me to post the scene, don't think I can post publicly because the tree is a paid asset. If it was the normals wouldn't all other renderers render the same.

The private uploader sends it just to us, just for testing purposes - https://corona-renderer.com/upload

TY in advance for sending in the scene :)

Okay I sent the scene. Thank you.

182

[Max] General Discussion / Re: Vray Next vs Corona 4

« on: 2019-05-21, 16:49:53 »

Any chance of sending the scene? Could be something odd about normals, or some sort of material override going on. Does it happen too with, say, a simple sphere?

Simple sphere looks primarily the same, little difference on shading falloff. Where do you want me to post the scene, don't think I can post publicly because the tree is a paid asset. If it was the normals wouldn't all other renderers render the same.

183

[Max] General Discussion / Re: Vray Next vs Corona 4

« on: 2019-05-17, 19:50:18 »

Hi. What exactly do you mean when you say reflections is off? Is reflection gloss set to 0, or is reflection level set to 0?

If reflection gloss is set to 0 while reflection level is set to 1, then in Corona there'll still be some slight reflection when IOR is higher than 1. The only way to turn reflection off effectively in Corona, is to set reflection level to 0.

I mean reflection level is 0, so no reflection.  But diffuse still seems to render with what looks like specular highlights in Corona.

184

[Max] General Discussion / Re: Vray Next vs Corona 4

« on: 2019-05-17, 18:34:43 »

Isn't this something about tone mapping? It looks like in Corona you can see the highlights and in the other example they are clamped.

Maybe, It just seems like Corona has highlights in the shader even though it's diffuse. Here is another example.

185

[Max] General Discussion / Re: Vray Next vs Corona 4

« on: 2019-05-17, 03:24:30 »

What exactly does Corona do with it's shading?  You can see here I used a diffuse shader on Corona vs Redshift and for some reason the corona one looks more detailed, but it also looks like it has specular on even though reflections are off.  Vray renders just like the Redshift one also.

186

[Max] General Discussion / Re: Vray Next vs Corona 4

« on: 2019-05-16, 18:06:05 »

Of one of the guys came up with the strangest solution to this problem: Apply UVW map in box mode and it works. I tried it, and it does... Weird!

yeah just saw that, lol. Weird solution, but quite the issue for a leading renderer. Hopefully they fix it.

187

[Max] General Discussion / Re: Vray Next vs Corona 4

« on: 2019-05-16, 15:34:19 »

@dfcorona: Can you send you scene to the developers over in your thread at the Chaosroup-Forums? I am curious what comes out of this, because this seems to be a bug.

I did post the scene yesterday in the forum, maybe I should also send to there support email.

188

[Max] General Discussion / Re: Vray Next vs Corona 4

« on: 2019-05-13, 19:23:42 »

Reflect on backside was on (I always toggle this to evaluate results with glass).

You also need fog to be active to be able to get (total) internal reflections.

Never new you need to have fog enabled for accurate internal reflections, is that so even for Corona?

kosso_olli, Here is a render side by side to show how Vray advance doesn't render Normal Maps correctly, but Vray RT does. This is with Normal map loaded with gamma 1.0

189

[Max] General Discussion / Re: Vray Next vs Corona 4

« on: 2019-05-10, 01:23:23 »

Well the Vray GPU seems to render the Normal map correctly, but not the CPU Version.

190

[Max] General Discussion / Re: Vray Next vs Corona 4

« on: 2019-05-10, 00:53:35 »

Okay kosso_olli, this one should work or I give up.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/15vdOrfUGX1XbT3gRC0oEllHV3JcKatsn/view?usp=sharing

191

[Max] General Discussion / Re: Vray Next vs Corona 4

« on: 2019-05-08, 16:54:34 »

Yes, I have.
But sadly I can't open the file, because we are still on Max 2017. We do not use any newer version in production, because we do not update yearly for pipeline integrity.
Most recent version I have installed would be 2018. Can you save with backwards compatibility?

Here is 2017 version:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1aeA5Z8rfh0U2_iBp6PuOYU15N3UrT8AZ/view?usp=sharing

Dammit, I saved as 2017 then I archived it to zip. Unless 3dsmax resaves as 2020 when it archives.

Erm, I still can't open that one up. The last file from your download, vray material tests 2017.
Did you make sure you saved with backwards compatibility to Max 2017?

192

[Max] General Discussion / Re: Vray Next vs Corona 4

« on: 2019-05-07, 23:58:36 »

Yes, I have.
But sadly I can't open the file, because we are still on Max 2017. We do not use any newer version in production, because we do not update yearly for pipeline integrity.
Most recent version I have installed would be 2018. Can you save with backwards compatibility?

Here is 2017 version:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1aeA5Z8rfh0U2_iBp6PuOYU15N3UrT8AZ/view?usp=sharing

193

[Max] General Discussion / Re: Vray Next vs Corona 4

« on: 2019-05-07, 15:44:17 »

I tried to download your scene, but it seems I have to request permission for this?

sorry, you should have permission now.

194

[Max] General Discussion / Re: Vray Next vs Corona 4

« on: 2019-05-07, 05:03:44 »

kosso_olli, Did you figure out the Vray normal issue?

195

[Max] General Discussion / Re: Vray Next vs Corona 4

« on: 2019-05-04, 17:46:40 »

You can tell that Redshift does heavy clamping by looking at the highlights in the glass. In the Corona version you get glare through the refraction, in Redshift you don't. It is one of the engines which cut many corners to gain render speed. You decide if that's the right way...

Okay here is a new render at 25 subsampling intensity.  Looks good to me now and the weird thing is it actually rendered faster, 5min 24sec opposed to 5min 44sec.  What do you think?