Messages

1471

[C4D] Resolved Feature Requests / Re: Mix textures mapping

« on: 2017-03-29, 12:59:12 »

Hi, basically, this is a duplicate of https://forum.corona-renderer.com/index.php/topic,15193.0.html , right?

1472

[C4D] General Discussion / Re: How you handle large amounts of grass in your scenes?

« on: 2017-03-29, 12:52:21 »

I am not a CGI expert, but coming from computer games industry, have you tried something like instancing + LODs?

1473

[C4D] Bug Reporting / Re: Weird behavior of displacement with subdivisions

« on: 2017-03-29, 12:45:39 »

Your scene crashes my Cinema apon render. lol

That's interesting. I saved the scene in R17 and with our internal version of the plugin, so maybe that's the problem. Anyway, the scene is more for us to be able to debug it :-)

1474

[C4D] General Discussion / Re: Motion Blur and PLA / Cloth

« on: 2017-03-29, 12:39:44 »

Hi Mike, so far, we're still working on support for motion blur for changing geometry. Both PLA and Cloth simulation work by changing the object's geometry, so motion blur won't work with them for now.

Thanks for your patience!

1475

[C4D] Resolved Feature Requests / Re: Could we have the ability to uvtiling a bitmap without using c4d projector?

« on: 2017-03-29, 11:26:49 »

Everytime I want to uvtiling a bitmap must put the map inside a projector effect,when the map is just few,that's all right,but when deal with layer mix textures this really noisy and wasting lots of time,could we just have the ability to uv tiling it inside the corona bitmap node?that will be pretty cool!

Victor, the official way to do it is indeed through the projector shader. It's actually not that cumbersome to work with it: Did you know that you can add the internal shader into the shader slot first and then override it with the projector shader? Then the projector will automatically take the previous shader as its subshader, so it's just two extra clicks with a mouse. All the other clicks and UI interactions you'd have to do anyway, even if the projection was inside the Corona bitmap UI.

Also, Corona for C4D optimizes the projector shader, so that it does not slow down the execution of the internal shader.

1476

[C4D] Resolved Feature Requests / Re: layered material : blending modes ?

« on: 2017-03-29, 11:17:18 »

The energy conservation argument is common, but would adding clamp to the whole thing internally as the last step not help ? (or this would not avoid loss?)

Juraj, what do you mean by clamping? I'm afraid it wouldn't work too much. If the base material has albedo of 90%, the clearcoat would have to be clamped to 10%, making it pretty much invisible. If you reduce the albedo of the base material on the other hand, you have a darker material, which is what the OP didn't want.

1477

[C4D] Resolved Feature Requests / Re: layered material : blending modes ?

« on: 2017-03-29, 11:14:52 »

thx for your replies .

[...]

well , my simple example was just to show that we can't "add" effects in the current layer system in a non destructive way . Of course my example could be done in one mat , but when you'll need to build several reflexion/specular layers over the diffuse(s) layer(s) etc that's the goal . When you say we break the 'energy conservation' by adding a layer instead of mixing it .. as we can add it in a simple material , this has no sense for me sorry ( or this means that a simple material with a reflexion added inside is wrong so ?  )

Blender Cycles is a pathtracing engine if I'm not wrong too  ( sorry I'm not an expert with that so maybe I 'm saying mistakes) , and can allow building shaders by mixing and adding 'layers' ( "horisontal layers" / nodes ) .

( In fact I'm dropping Octane because of this lack of possibilities :) ( and still no hair shaders too ) . So I look arround the other render engine to see how they work and their limitations ;) . )
thx

The thing is, you can "add" effects, but you cannot simply add the light that is reflected, because it would not be the physically correct way as far as energy conservation goes. Imagine the base material itself having an albedo of 80% - that means it reflects 80% of the incoming light. Then the clearcoat reflects 70% of the incoming light. If you added these two together with additive blending, you would have material which reflects 150% of the incoming light, meaning that it intensifies the light by 50%. You effectively created a light-multiplying material. Imagine having two planes with this material opposing each other - you could have a ray bouncing between these two planes with increasing intensity with each bounce - not good (I'm simplifying the way the renderer works here a bit). Or take it this way - the renderer is built around the fact that each material's albedo is less than 1, including some advanced optimizations. If this physical fact wouldn't hold, the code would suddenly break.

To put it into yet another different perspective, look at the attached real-life photo. Clearly, the clearcoat's application reduces the amount of light reflected from the bottom material, reducing the overall lightness of the material in non-specular areas, which is exactly what happens even in physically-based renderers.

So to conclude this reply, you simply won't be able to find a strictly physical renderer, which does what you want.

1478

[C4D] Resolved Bugs / Re: I solve a bug :)

« on: 2017-03-29, 10:50:34 »

no problem :-)

1479

[C4D] Resolved Bugs / Re: I solve a bug :)

« on: 2017-03-28, 18:18:19 »

Ok, let's close this. I don't understand either. If you still think this is a bug, please report it again, leo3d, but describe it a little bit more please :-)

1480

[C4D] Bug Reporting / Re: Weird behavior of displacement with subdivisions

« on: 2017-03-28, 18:16:16 »

I split this topic from A5 bugreports. Let me just add that I tried it too and there is a difference between a displacement map applied to an object and the same object with subdivided surfaces. See the attached pictures and scene.

1481

[C4D] Resolved Bugs / Re: A5 Bug reports

« on: 2017-03-28, 18:08:43 »

Hey guys! Thanks for all the bug reports. Because we have version A6 now, I will move this topic to closed. All the bugs here seem to be closed now, but let me go over all of them just to make sure:

• DOF seems to be working, as Ales explained.
• Depth mask is working (I tried myself)
• Colormapping seems to work fine (I tried myself)
• Shader preview is not working and it's a known issue (thanks, Gnorkie!)

The only thing remaining is displacement, which does behave a little bit crazy together with the subdivision... I will spawn another thread from this problem and close the rest.

1482

[C4D] Bug Reporting / Re: Bitmap loader not working on material preview (4096x4096 images)

« on: 2017-03-28, 17:46:13 »

Moreover, if I load a bump texture without bitmap loader it doesn't have effects on render.

The shader preview not working is indeed a known issue.

As for the "bump texture without bitmap loader", what exactly do you mean? In any case, try it in A6.3 now, as we fixed a lot of issues related to bump-mapping.
https://forum.corona-renderer.com/index.php/topic,15419.0.html

Thanks!

1483

[C4D] Bug Reporting / Re: Team Render cannot render the textures of legacy Xref object

« on: 2017-03-28, 17:40:01 »

Hi and sorry for such a late reply. We will be looking at all the issues with the TR soon. Could you maybe elaborate the bug report a little bit more? It is not obvious from the pictures what the problem is. Thank you :-)

1484

[C4D] Resolved Bugs / Re: Z Depth

« on: 2017-03-28, 17:36:25 »

I just tried this in A6.3 with no obvious issues. If you still experience this bug, please create a new bug report. Thank you

1485

[C4D] Resolved Bugs / Re: Proxy Coords

« on: 2017-03-28, 17:26:38 »

Ok, since this seems to be resolved, I'm closing it. In any case, if it returns, please open a new bug report!