Messages

1516

[Max] Feature Requests / Re: Disable DOF calculations for objects backplates/geometry with ShadowCatcherMtl

« on: 2015-12-17, 11:11:34 »

Bumping the thread to ask if this is on the horizon. It would make working with photographed plates a lot easier.

1517

[Max] Resolved Feature Requests / Re: Include/Exclude Lists behavior improvement suggestions

« on: 2015-12-17, 11:08:56 »

An addition to the above request:

- please add a 'Select Objects in List' option. (I have setup some RGB ID passes in an older scene and it turns out to be impossible to find out which objects are within a selection set in a simple way. With bigger scenes it's pretty difficult to go through several lists containing hundreds of objects and recognize what's what.)

Thanks!

1518

[Max] I need help! / Re: Corona and virtual reality content

« on: 2015-12-15, 17:40:26 »

Sounds great, I'd love to play with 360° VR content, looking forward to any news on that.

1519

[Max] Resolved Feature Requests / Re: AO - both inverter and non-inverted normals

« on: 2015-12-15, 16:24:51 »

I think the problem is that they react differently to spread and directionality, I found that in most cases you really need different values for each AO type. It's only going to be useful and effective if each type gets separate controls.

1520

[Max] I need help! / Re: motion blur problem. I want to achieve blur like in vray but I can't.

« on: 2015-12-04, 18:31:09 »

If the motion is linear for the whole range of motion blur/shutter speed range then it definitely looks wrong. Did you try to increase the segments in the motion blur settings? If this doesn't work, try slowing down the motion and compensate with a slower shutter. If this looks better than you may have hit a motion blur limitation which can occur with *very* fast moving objects.

1521

[Max] Resolved Bugs / Re: Reflection bug - ugly distortion

« on: 2015-11-19, 19:21:39 »

What if you move the whole scene 50 meters up in Z-axis? Silly idea, I know, but who knows...

1522

[Max] Resolved Bugs / Re: Reflection bug - ugly distortion

« on: 2015-11-19, 14:47:40 »

I came across this in a scene with a very flat looking camera where reflections of a car's wheel looked really strange but thought it's just the way reflections in Corona works. Never thought of recreating this with a simpler approach, though.

Would like to know whether it's expected or a bug.

1523

[Max] I need help! / Re: Gamma Correction in maps for monochrome maps

« on: 2015-11-17, 22:40:18 »

Please try the same with the ColorCorrect Map from Cuneyt Ozdas (get the link from maxplugins.de), I seem to remember this worked fine there.

AFAIR the underlying problem is that color and bump are handled independently through different channels and maps that are designed to do color transforms will work only on the color channel and dismiss bump. Hence the bump amount paramter in the maps output controls, that's the only one affecting bump. It would be great if this would be finally changed but then again they should update and improve the whole output/CC section.

1524

Gallery / Re: Solaris Temple Renders

« on: 2015-11-17, 18:08:29 »

These are awesome. Congrats, great looking work!

1525

[Max] Resolved Bugs / Re: Memory consuption in 1.3

« on: 2015-10-30, 20:06:28 »

I may be wrong on this but I remember that the 'low memory' option was introduced in one of the recent RC builds, maybe this one would help?

As for the page file, are you aware that it's going to take a lot longer to render? Once memory is written forth and back to the page file it will really slow things down since it has to pass through some bottlenecks on its way to HD and back.

1526

[Max] Resolved Bugs / Re: Saving in RC5 opening in 1.2.1 Multiplies Bump Map value by 4x!

« on: 2015-10-30, 14:03:31 »

Not sure about absorbtion, but bump changing between 1.2 and 1.3 is not a bug. It's made for backward compatibility - bump strength was increased in 1.3.

Wasn't this the case when going from 1.1 to 1.2? Is this changed once again for 1.3?

1527

[Max] Resolved Feature Requests / Re: We have a sun, could we have a moon and night sky?

« on: 2015-10-30, 13:19:46 »

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/De_revolutionibus_orbium_coelestium
;)

Haha, this paper is out for a while now.  We can only hope the final sky model will include The Dark Side Of The Moon as well :D

You mean with the nazi bases?

Absolutely! I guess all the Kryptonite they hid will affect the moon's atmosphere considerably.

Kidding aside, I tend to think the moon's lighting will behave very similar to the sun's, it'll be only a lot dimmer. The moon's disc has almost the same visible size so even the shadows will match.

1528

[Max] Resolved Feature Requests / Re: We have a sun, could we have a moon and night sky?

« on: 2015-10-30, 12:27:57 »

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/De_revolutionibus_orbium_coelestium
;)

Haha, this paper is out for a while now.  We can only hope the final sky model will include The Dark Side Of The Moon as well :D

1529

[Max] Resolved Bugs / Re: Interesting Matedit and Viewport performance behaviour - please test

« on: 2015-10-28, 14:48:07 »

Tested and can't reproduce anymore, playback is same for both Scanline and Corona.

1530

[Max] Resolved Bugs / Re: Interesting Matedit and Viewport performance behaviour - please test

« on: 2015-10-27, 18:36:39 »

Ok, will test tomorrow.