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.


Messages - Juraj

Pages: 1 ... 286 287 [288] 289 290 ... 317
4306
[Max] General Discussion / Re: PBR kinda materials
« on: 2014-06-03, 17:07:32 »
So it's just about having more choice for the specular reflection model? Because that is literally the only difference between the new GGX (etc) materials and Corona's material.

No, that's like 1/10 of it...but it's the easiest feature to implement. Already does a big difference to me.

Maybe Vic's original post seemed confusing because he linked PBR very closely to real-time (Marmoset), where is greatly integrated but it's not really tied to it in anyway.

This is my favourite article on it which I keep returning to, maybe that better describes it ?

http://disney-animation.s3.amazonaws.com/library/s2012_pbs_disney_brdf_notes_v2.pdf

4307
[Max] General Discussion / Re: PBR kinda materials
« on: 2014-06-03, 16:20:48 »
YES

YES and YES !

Real-time engine nowadays (Unreal 4, CryEngine 3.6.4 EEAS, I use both at the moment) have so much better material system than offline rendering has, that offline rendering looks like prehistoric legacy almost :-).
(with exception of VFX houses of course, both ILM, MPC and all the big boys already using this new model).

I already asked Keymaster if he's willing to implement advanced BRDF models (like GGX, ABC or ShiftedGammaDistribution, currently all as plugins by Sergey Schliaev, although GGX is already integrated in Vray3.0).
I understand he has little time and there might be more important things (not to me heh), but imho it's much better to differentiate from others than slowly add features that all others already have. I don't want a better clone, I want revolutionary product instead if I could choose.


Btw Maru, the shaders still respect any sort of look, even completely stylized or unrealistic, they just make the creation of it vastly easier, and more natural. At the moment, it's absolutely odd eye-balling, where I dare to say, 90perc.
of users do not even no what value should actually be in reflection slot or how to even create TRUE metallic shaders. Quite frankly, all metals and plastics out there look like shit to me.
Did you even look at those shaders ? It's not harder, it's not scientific. It's logical and superb.
IMHO it's definitely a time for revolution, I don't understand this harkening to original concepts and still using the same material as Scanline. It bothers me so much than I contemplate just sticking with real-time by end of this year. To
me it's already evolved enough and it's evolving by master space speed.

Did you guys read the original post ? Did atleast 5 minute of research ? Every single post seems somehow off-mark to me.

Well for me Corona materials are already using this kind of knowledge.
Not really...not in any way Vic outlined.

but setting the limit and restrictions would hurt the creative process of special effects.
There are no limits or restrictions. How did you guys translate it into this conclusion ?

Well, skilled artists use canvas & brushes and are free to do whatever expressionism they want ;)

And it's working amazingly for everyone.. I hoped the "it's the artist, not the toolz" days are long gone.
We could have just stayed with Scanline.

My idea would be like a separate, experimental shader to use alongside.


4308
Of course 32gb is mainstream

CGI Hipsters :- D no really, this lifted my mood.

Well, as others said, no qualm between Corona and exteriors.

I would just add that, there are still considerations one should take into account. Basically, any scene that will render under XYZ, should render just fine here, but, if you're coming from rather well developed, tweaked biased engine,
you might be doing things that more strict renderer like Corona (or any other path tracer) is not so forgiving. Where previously, you could interpolate some detail into mush, or adaptivity would solve it, mistakes here could lead into stuck noise,
but it really isn't fault of the renderer, it's the fault of user in such cases more often than not. (i,e. 1000 unnecessary lights, hidden/obstructed by complicated geo, caustic glass where not needed,etc..)

4309
Gallery / Re: cecofuli [Gallery]
« on: 2014-05-15, 17:48:44 »
I would recommend not touching controls of sun/sky, and instead lowering exposure to about -5

But the intention is to create different ratio between Sun:Sky, so one has to alter one or other. If I use sun, I also use it purely in much much weaker position, no need to simulate alpine strong light.

4310
General CG Discussion / Re: ΑWESOME!!!
« on: 2014-05-14, 22:49:08 »
Agree, this one is specially impressive to me:




(to be nitpicking, some of the other image examples could have taken a bit attention to AA issues, or maybe it's intentional ?)

4311
Gallery / Re: Personal project - Apartment
« on: 2014-05-07, 15:10:21 »

Thank you very much! Sure, I actually used a HDR from Cg-Source (might have written wrong before, sorry about that), but the sky I used is called "cloudy_sun44deg_0086-01".

Heh, I wondered if it was typo....because CGSkies is like the...worst trash possible, while CG-Source is heavenly. In fact, no other should even be considered at all, if CG-Source was 10points, everything else would be 1-4 top, not more.
And I've tried every on the market, hundreds...

4312
Gallery / Re: MS house living room
« on: 2014-05-04, 21:27:14 »

- The Big bang picture is not scaled correctly ( circle )

Sorry, couldn't help :- D Maybe it's intentional typo :- )

Good critique though, agree.

4313
[Max] General Discussion / Re: Corona elements on photoshop
« on: 2014-05-02, 01:31:20 »
I am not compositing myself, but when I do work in linear space in post, I didn't honestly notice a difference between doing so in Photoshop and AfterEffects. For compositing lineary you need either Photoshop Extended (I think CS4+, although I only ever had CS6 from start) or Photoshop CC, both which allows layers in 32bit mode(only time PS will allow you to load Linear RGB color profile, and will do so automatically if opening linear file, .exr/.hdr). I don't see why any problem would arise after than.

4314
Gallery / Re: Icelandic coastal house
« on: 2014-04-30, 18:04:46 »
Every small freelancer who ever bought Boxx is idi**,...ok, person who hates his money. Check some threads on cgarchitect.com forum, HW section, we discuss it there with Dimitris and bunch of guys to death quite often. There you can find almost 20+ virtual builds for any sort of budget from 800 euros to 8000 euros, just suit yourself :- ) Budget is the only limiting thing. To be honest you can built excellent workstation for as low as +/- 1400 euros and you would be completely satisfied compared to what you currently have.

Always buy only what you need :- )

4315
[Max] General Discussion / Re: Corona VFB color mapping UI
« on: 2014-04-30, 01:35:29 »
I thought I would see some proposal of yours in this thread, but watching your 2D skillz more closely I think it's good you leave it to the comittee :- )
Wonder what's gonna up.

4316
[Max] Resolved Feature Requests / Re: 3ds 2015 + Corona
« on: 2014-04-29, 15:41:57 »
Is anyone brave enough to do that jump :- ) ? With zero plugins support ? I contemplate to skipt 2015 and get maybe 2016 instead, for which 2015 plugs will be compatible again, so no hassle.

4317
[Max] General Discussion / Re: Doble-sided material
« on: 2014-04-29, 14:57:17 »
Not know how to do something, calling it bugged.. well You sound inpatient.
Do you get angry a lot?

This is the weirdest language barrier effect I have yet seen.



Shell is the best option here, theres also an option with alphamapping and AE, but thats the least efficient way.

Most book papers use 80g/m2 or less for pages, the thickness is literally irrepresentable with physical units in CGI, because it's sub <0.1mm. Sure, carton boards (400+ g/m2) are different league.
Regardless, thick papers would be nightmare to animate in flipping fashion.

Rawalanche's advice is sound. Still, 2sided material is convenient way to have completely different material characteristic on each side, but, not any sort of priority for anyone I guess.

4318
And here I thought Corona was quite sufficient in this regard, because the transition between 0-1 in glossy seems "slower". In Vray, with Ward mode, 0.99 is like completely blurry suddenly.
Maybe this is something that could be alleviated altogether with more advanced ior model, or maybe blend two materials with peak reflection being 1.0 glossy, or simply use some slight scratch map in specular slots
instead of glossy value to give the off-blurry look.

4319
Work in Progress/Tests / Re: Do these books look OK to you?
« on: 2014-04-28, 11:33:41 »
Is it me, or these books are missing something? ;]

Since most people (including me) just buy these books to never read them I think they are ok ? The important thing that makes them look good on cheap Ikea Expedit/Kallax is there ;- )

4320
Work in Progress/Tests / Re: Do these books look OK to you?
« on: 2014-04-27, 20:38:08 »
These looks good already. I'd just add subtle bump to them.



Will you make softcover books too?

Nice. I love how subtle surface imperfection brakes down reflections. Much much nicer that currently over-used effect of using drastically contrasted dirt/concrete map in reflection/glossy slot//russian style.

Pages: 1 ... 286 287 [288] 289 290 ... 317