Messages

1936

News / Re: List of supported 3rt party plugins/renderfarms

« on: 2014-04-01, 11:04:46 »

f-edge can be used as a bump map but it's also a more general map. It paints a gradient (user defined width and color) on edges - either all edges, edges in a selection set or sharp edges based on smoothing groups. Sharp edges is the most interesting option since it can be used for masking to get a worn out edges effect etc.
I guess you could also extend the Corona Edges Texmap to support this.

It is NOT the same as AO in invert mode.

1937

News / Re: List of supported 3rt party plugins/renderfarms

« on: 2014-04-01, 09:30:51 »

A6 works fine with MultiMapID2 (tested in max 2012, there seems to be no 2013/2014 version of the map):
http://rpmanager.com/otherGear.htm#multiidmap

Support for f-edge would be cool. It's probably easy to code by yourself but as long as there is no built-in alternative it would be great to support it:
http://www.ddag.org/products.html

1938

News / Re: Shadow catcher mtl added

« on: 2014-03-20, 13:53:30 »

Bummer, I hoped for this addition for a long time. Will there be an update to A6 or is this scheduled for the final commercial release then?

1939

News / Re: Development blog launched, A6 release date announced

« on: 2014-03-18, 10:07:13 »

(OT) Yay to all the Brazil folks! Long time no see ;)

Can't wait to see A6 in action, timing couldn't be better!

1940

[Max] General Discussion / Re: Shader reflection "options"

« on: 2014-02-21, 10:09:19 »

In A6 it will be possible to exclude any material globally from all reflections in other objects

Any way it could also support excluding certain objects from a material's reflection/refraction? Excluding materials all the way is way too general imo.

1941

[Max] General Discussion / Re: Typical decomposition into render elements

« on: 2014-01-14, 14:24:59 »

I think the initial formula sounds good... but where's the shadow element? It's missing in each formula posted so far.

1942

News / Re: Interactive rendering early prototype

« on: 2013-11-08, 19:09:00 »

The preview looks great, the region feature is fantastic. Great to see some innovation in this field, very promising :)

1943

[Max] General Discussion / Re: Gamma in Alpha 5

« on: 2013-08-07, 19:19:39 »

Control/Flexibility is always best. :)

It is sometimes not easy to explain, bug gamma does not offer any control or flexibility. It is simply a difference between displaying output correctly or not. If pictures with gamma 2.2 look wrong to you, then you should use post processing to adjust them to your liking, or use less than 1 HL compression value as i said.

Sounds like you're understanding gamma as an post-render thing only, while it actually has to be considered pre-render, when textures are handled with a correct de-gamma correction so they look correctly when rendered. That's why you tell max what gamma you're using so input values are passed correctly to the render engine. Am I getting this wrong?

Keymaster, I for one actually would want gamma to be a 'variable' throughout the whole renderer, otherwise you can prepare for seeing 'bug' reports because people actually need flexibility in all kinds of different workflows. While I realize the above posted paradigm is good (!), flexibility doesn't automatically exclude this from being achievable :)

1944

[Max] General Discussion / Re: Gamma in Alpha 5

« on: 2013-08-06, 10:28:41 »

You should never touch gamma. We should have that value locked. ;)

I also think that you absolutely NEED to keep the value adjustable (there are people who either need or like to work in something else than 2.2), and that it should be exposed in the common renderer properties and not be hidden.
I for one always work in 1.8, going with 2.2 always looks wrong to me even if it's technically correct...

1945

[Max] General Discussion / Re: Vote for new Corona logo

« on: 2013-04-22, 19:21:11 »

A mix of 3 and 7 maybe, with a preference for 7.
I like the general appearance of 7, simple and good. Well done!

1946

[Max] General Discussion / Re: Corona Alpha4 Benchmark scene

« on: 2013-04-10, 21:35:50 »

quizzy! Nice to see you here, finally a nice exile for us fellow Brazilians :D

1947

[Max] Resolved Feature Requests / Exclude/Include lists for reflections/refractions in Materials

« on: 2013-04-05, 15:14:36 »

I guess this might be complicated, but it's a very nice option to have the ability to exclude/include objects from/for reflections and refractions in the material. It's  possible in Brazil for example (fRender too...?) and is something I'm missing every time I mess around with Vray.

Hope it is possible to implement!

1948

[Max] Resolved Bugs / Re: Scene scale affecting refraction behavior

« on: 2013-04-04, 18:44:53 »

Ok. The pane rendered correctly with the other object being somewhere at 2500-3000, so it should be safe around 1:1 000 000.

Is there an internal setting for this you could expose to the user, similar to a ray cutoff threshold?

1949

[Max] Resolved Bugs / Re: Scene scale affecting refraction behavior

« on: 2013-04-04, 18:17:17 »

Yes, Corona misses the other face of the glass because of selfintersection protection from numerical imprecisions.  You should not use such small details that far away from the scene center, Corona works in single precision, so this is not easily fixable without slowing it down.

I see, thanks for the info. I know about inaccuracies that may occur far from the origin but never had similar problems in the past (Brazil user), that's why it triggered a 'bug alert'.
Would be good to know when you're leaving the 'safe zone' with scene scale, is there any rule of thumb? I sometimes need to create large objects far away for all kinds of trickery.

Yes, if the scene is far from the center of the world, then there are errors and not only that, there are also other errors, but the problem is not Corona renderer, this problem of 3ds Max. And  Vray will can make errors in such cases (see vraylog).

What other errors exactly? Would like to know to avoid them in the future.

Thanks!

1950

[Max] Resolved Bugs / Scene scale affecting refraction behavior

« on: 2013-04-04, 16:20:58 »

Alpha 4, max 2012

I am seeing a strange bug with large scene scale or if an object is far away from the origin, where objects with refractions (in solid mode) seem to miss their backface and render as if they were single sided.

Here's an example:



The car's glass pane is a thin double sided object with a refracting material in solid mode.
There's an object in the scene located 7000 meters away from the camera. Moving the object to somewhere at 2000 meters solves the problem and everything renders fine:



Notice the headlight also rendering differently (correctly).

Scene units are meters, display units too. The pane is around 0.003 meters thick.

I guess it should be easy to reproduce, if not I could try to supply a part of the scene or another example scene.