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.


Topics - Cinemike

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 7
1
[C4D] Daily Builds / Daily Build 2021-06-05: question
« on: 2021-06-07, 22:21:50 »
Is there a description about how IOR vs Specular works for non-metals?

CU
Michael


2
Some ideas about the reworked Corona Physical material:

With the addition of the Complex IOR, Corona finally has lost its innocence (sounds a bit less conspicuous than "virginity" ;)).
Corona was always meant to have the simplest GUI (material and render settings), and I truly believe it lived up to that promise - and it still does.
Getting more (advanced) features is a good thing and losing one's innocence is part of growing up. But I think now it's also time to consider adding more features that MIGHT clutter the interface, yet add to the value of the app, like Nested Dielectrics or a shading modes menu (with GGX, Blinn, Ward and whatever else). The first deed is done, don't stop there ;)

Back to the matter at hand, the Complex IOR and metals.
It's a bit lost back there in the Advanced tab, I think it should go in the Base layer with the Edge color. It were nice if, with radio buttons, we could choose between "Edge Color" and "Complex IOR", preferably the now not needed GUI elements would collapse/be hidden.
Of course, the presets in "General" would now have to apply either the correct edge color settings or the proper "Complex IOR" settings, because I doubt people know such settings by heart  (especially the Complex IOR settings).

Leaving the Complex IOR settings in Advanced is a bad idea (in my humble option only) because activating them means "lights out" for half o the Base layer settings - confusing. If you get such material and have no idea there's a complex IOR hidden somewhere, you might be scared and go back to Standard render (what an awful thought!).
On the other hand, if we create a pure Dielectric material, "Edge Color" could collapse/be hidden. It would mean a further return to the good old Corona Render philosophy of a clearly readable GUI.

Now to an issue I'd actually call a bug. Create a new Physical material and apply a "Copper rough" preset. Go to advanced and enable Complex IOR (and now you see why it should be in Base layer and linked to the presets) and your copper turns golden.
Now apply a glass preset. All is fine, the Complex IOR is inactive. And finally apply a Chrome preset. Yellow chrome, nice! And all because somewhere deeply hidden the Complex IOR is still active. The preset should handle this "somehow".

Another issue:
I think it were be better if applying a preset would clear the texture slot of the metalness setting.

Thanks for listening,
Michael

3
[C4D] Bug Reporting / More Projector shader trouble
« on: 2021-04-09, 00:52:19 »
Compare the render result of the upper torus (projection applied to directly in the tag) and the lower one (projection applied to via Projector shader).
Trying to get a reasonable result, or a result at all, fails with Cubic, Spatial or Flat (set in the Projector shader node). The rest is more or (mostly) less reliable.

Michael

4
[C4D] Daily Builds / Physical material presets
« on: 2021-03-31, 21:21:59 »
The presets for the physical material "suffer" from extremely high value/saturation settings (which I would not choose for a material I setup myself). Is there some reason behind it that I don't see at the moment or are these settings simply oversights?

As for the Plastic PVC Opaque setting, "Refraction" is active and set to 0% - is there a purpose for "Refraction" in this preset?

I really like the new/old Translucency settings and am going to play with the intersting metal settings (edge color) now.

5
[C4D] Feature Requests / Nested Dielectrics ...
« on: 2021-03-23, 00:31:16 »
... would be a nice feature.

6
The legacy material can do it with a click, please add this option to Physical, too.

CU
Michael

7
Please add a checkbox for translucency, it's an optional feature like bump, but contrary to that, it has none yet.
It would make test rendering scenes with a lot of foliage easier, for example.

I would not mind an additional render setting option to disable/enable translucency and/or displacement either.

CU
Michael

8
The Thin Film shader that used to work well with legacy isn't doing much (good) with the new physical material.

I'm refering to the attached scene and the image rendered with it:
Top row (please forgive the exaggerated settings to prove my point ;)) shows metals, left a legacy material metal with thin film straight and undiluted in the reflection color.
The next two are physical materials, one with thin film straightly put in the color slot again, the other one with thin film in the clearcoat property where I thought it would make more sense.
In both cases, nothing really happens, thin film-wise.

Bottom row shows dielectrics, left legacy again, next to it two physical materials, one with thin film in the reflection color, the other one with thin film in clarcoat, something happens here, but the result is rather ... unexpected.

Win 10, C4D R23.110, Corona latest available daily.

9
[C4D] Feature Requests / Add solo node option
« on: 2021-02-20, 21:29:17 »
It's nice and even supported by the native node materials to solo a node and only get its result on the objects in the viewport.
For example, adjusting single textures of a compound would be easier, especially when you have to combine them with the notorious Projector shader node.

So, please add this feature to Corona.

10
[C4D] Feature Requests / Bump/Normal switch
« on: 2020-12-19, 00:38:14 »
While you are about implementing the new Physical Material, you could add a switch/checkbox to choose between "Bump" and "Normal" in the specific area of the material.
Checked, it could add a Normal node all by itself (or in the non-nodal material view insert a Corona Normal shader). It would make material creation (a lot) faster.

11
I have a plane and am distributing clones on it. With a falloff I fade out certain clones by scaling them to 0.
Now they may be gone in the rendering but they still are recognized by the Distance Shader and cause an effect.
Could the Distance shader, for a later version, have an option to not evaluate objects that have a scale of 0?

Thx,
Michael

12
[C4D] I need help! / Distance Shader, Clones and Fields
« on: 2020-10-29, 23:04:07 »
I have a plane and am distributing clones on it. With a falloff I fade out certain clones by scaling them to 0.
Now they may be gone in the rendering but they still are recognized by the Distance Shader and cause an effect.

Does anybody know how to prevent this AND keep the setup parametric? I don't want to use any correction deformer tricks either, the actual mesh is really high poly and it would take tons of RAM and time with this deformer.

In case there is no recent solution: Could the Distance shader, for a later version, have an option to not evaluate objects that have a scale of 0?

Thx,
Michael

13
Win 10 Pro 20H2
R23 latest
Corona V7 daily Oct. 23

When I render this scene in the viewport with IR, it goes through all 12 frames, goes back to "parsing scene" and crashes.

CU
Michael

14
The distance shader creates a grayscale map, thus should be working in a shader effector to scale clones.
In the example scene, the clones don't seem to respect this map when I use a noise in the Distance scale, the distribute as if the slot were empty.
Am I doing something wrong, is there a general misunderstanding or is it a bug?

Thx,
Michael

15
Win 10, Corona V6 Release, C4D S22

In this setup where a Distance shader in a shader effector is to scale clones, these clones are not rendered at all in IR as render instances (render instances usually render fine even with IR).
Switched to default instances, they render.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 7