Messages

1

Gallery / Re: Saturn's Ice Rings

« on: Today at 14:04:08 »

Rendering space stuff is fun and can be so complicated to do at the same time. Loving it!!

2

[Max] Corona Goodies - User Contributions / Re: AgX in Corona

« on: 2024-04-29, 13:21:29 »

But when importing exr's from corona to fusion, there is a extra gamma applied (1.2?) because the image in fusion is much darker than in VFB. And then you need to specify the float gamma thing to have the same result in vfb and fusion ?

AgX luts for Corona from this thread are made for default Corona behaviour regarding gamma transforms in VFB. by default VFB has hidden 2.2 transform after the TONE MAPPING stack and effects. it also has hidden gamma transforms in every LUT operator.
if you are using my AgX luts there is no need for string option changing VFB's gamma behaviour ("float gamma thing").

Wait, so for any LUTs from outside Corona install we need either the string option or a gamma operator @0.45 before the LUT? I remember trying some LUTs from other sources but gave up thinking they were not the right type.

3

[Max] Feature Requests / Re: Motion-blur support when using map sequences / animated textures

« on: 2024-04-26, 15:12:59 »

An idea - what if the devs would add "advanced motion blur hack" checkbox somewhere in the UI, that would automatically do what Marcin described here, i.e. split the selected time range in multiple sub-frames, render them out in sequence, then merge them all and output result to VFB. I think that would be simple enough to implement solution that would be very useful for so many users, at least until devs could figure proper changing topology MB support.

This is not about changing topology (I don't think we'll ever see that btw...), it's about animated textures, which would be useful on its own.

But I fully support the 'under-the-hood' automated hack. It would make things way easier for all things that don't support motion blur. Quite a good suggestion, actually! Doing it manually is a no go for animations (imagine the amount of work needed), so anything that allows for this to be automated would be very welcome.

4

[Max] Feature Requests / Re: Motion-blur support when using map sequences / animated textures

« on: 2024-04-26, 11:43:46 »

But that workaround is only for long-time exposure and wouldn't work for 'normal' motion blur like the usual 0,5 frames and fast moving objects unless you stretch all your animation to something that you can render out. Or you would need to offset frames in the camera by tiny bits.

Motion blur for textures is such a nice to way to trick your way around certain problems, please try... (same for Distance Map)

5

[Max] Feature Requests / Re: Motion-blur support when using map sequences / animated textures

« on: 2024-04-26, 10:35:30 »

+100 here. I requested this before, too, it's a must have (just like motion blur support for Distance Map).

6

[Max] General Discussion / Re: Gamma Correction Tone Mapping Operator Removed - Bring it back!

« on: 2024-04-24, 14:16:38 »

For what it's worth - Gamma operator lets you use lut files in Image Editor in the same manner as in every other software. just makes things simpler for the time being.

And that's already enough a reason to bring it back imo.

It looks like the Corona team is trying to protect the user from any wrong direction in postproduction, omitting the fact that some users might know exactly what they're doing or need that functionality.

7

[C4D] Resolved Bugs / Re: CoronaSky with projection dome broken ?

« on: 2024-04-16, 12:06:48 »

Hi,
I want to use the dome projection with a hdri and strange result here. Can you confirm a bug ?
Thanks

With dome mode you have to keep the radius/camera values somewhat realistic. A too small radius may end up looking like what you have, try increasing it.

8

[Max] General Discussion / Re: Gamma Correction Tone Mapping Operator Removed - Bring it back!

« on: 2024-04-16, 11:35:22 »

Same here - I don't get it. There are cases where this is useful, technical or artistic, removing it just doesn't make sense. On the contrary, it was something that was missing for some users and requested, please bring it back.

9

[Max] I need help! / Re: Node to rotate a texture?

« on: 2024-04-12, 12:18:11 »

Surprisingly difficult problem :D
I thought BerconMapping Map could help but it doesn't work on environment maps, only 2D/Object/Screen.
UVW Randomizer does funny things, too.

10

Work in Progress/Tests / Re: Juraj's Renderings thread

« on: 2024-04-10, 18:57:29 »

Man that's some impressive work, I wouldn't know how to do some of the materials displayed there. Insanely good and beautiful.

11

[Max] I need help! / Re: Tile map displacement mapping on displaced edge.

« on: 2024-04-10, 17:37:15 »

I see you are using meters, maybe change to cm would help ?

This might be not practical. Most archviz scenes or anything showing real world scenarios of larger scale will have to be setup in meters. At the same time, a tiles map might be one of the most useful things to have for archviz especially. If there are limits to how small values can get within the tiles map then this needs a second thought, some users just have to work in meters.

12

[Max] I need help! / Re: 3DS MAX 2021 - Bake to texture - PBR ?

« on: 2024-04-10, 16:39:14 »

I'd like to follow up on this - having a way to bake to PBR would be so beneficial. We lack a way to bake some material channels right now and it needs either workarounds or is just impossible due to the setup and work needed.

13

[Max] I need help! / Re: Whats better FFD or Scaling the object ?

« on: 2024-04-05, 17:30:57 »

When scaling on object level you need to keep in mind that the scale factor is inhibited by any children hierarchy linked to it, which is especially problematic with animations and non-uniform scaling but generally with anything further down the road - controllers, procedural map scaling, modifiers etc. Let's say you scale a plane to 25%, that way units in modifiers (for example shell thickness) is also 25% of what the value actually is (so now, 10 mm in the modifier become 2,5mm in actual thickness on the plane).
When scaling, either scale in sub-object mode or use an XForm modifier, that way scale on object level still remains 100%.

14

[Max] I need help! / Re: Exposure Control vs. Linear Output

« on: 2024-04-03, 17:01:41 »

Yes, using Exposure only is still linear - but since you're linear you can set the same exposure in whatever app you're going to comp in later (and just disable tone mapping in the VFB), it should produce the same result wherever you take it.

15

[Max] Bug Reporting / Re: BUG - ShadowCatcher + Env in Dome Mapping mode -> something's really wrong here

« on: 2024-04-03, 15:09:52 »

Thank you for your effort, Pokoy! This has to be one of the greatest bug reports ever made.
We already have a similar report (Report ID=CMAX-251), but I will double check to make sure it's the same issue.

Glad you like it :D
Seriously, I wish I had tested this sooner, did lots of jobs that way and sometimes the results were strange, for some reason I never sat down and tested it with a simple straightforward case.

Glad it's reported already and hopefully a fix is coming soon.