16
Gallery / Re: 3D Renderings of Brainergy Hub - Innovation in Jülich
« on: 2023-07-10, 10:44:09 »
I'm also curious about foregrounds! Regardless whether they're 2d or 3d - these images are very tasteful. Good job!
2024-05-23, 09:16:14
News:
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.
17
Gallery / Re: LOST HOPE - Short Film Cinematic - Corona Renderer
« on: 2023-07-05, 09:22:52 »
Amazing work, it's refreshing to see something outside architectural or automotive rendering from time to time :)
18
Work in Progress/Tests / Re: Juraj's Renderings thread
« on: 2023-07-03, 15:39:00 »
Ahh, understood. Thought it was some sort of "driver" for Xeon processor that optimizes CPU for faster rendering :)
And I'm also waiting for gpu denoiser, hopefully that will come along one day. Isn't it already coming with the Vray 6?
And I'm also waiting for gpu denoiser, hopefully that will come along one day. Isn't it already coming with the Vray 6?
19
Work in Progress/Tests / Re: Juraj's Renderings thread
« on: 2023-07-03, 12:23:24 »
Very cool videos Juraj, thanks for sharing. Regarding Intel oneAPI, how much faster would you say it renders with this toolkit? And does it only work with Xeon processors? Would be interesting to try it out.
20
[Max] I need help! / Re: River material
« on: 2023-07-03, 10:40:04 »You get a Phoenix license with Corona Premium, just saying. :)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Lqhz8aAwuY
If you don't want to simulate the whole river, you can also try with the Ocean Texmap (it works with Corona):
https://docs.chaos.com/display/PHX4MAX/Ocean+Texture+%7C+PhoenixFDOceanTex
I've tried OceanTex and I just couldn't get any satisfactory results with it, no matter how much I played with the settings and the mapping. And as mentioned previously, simulating such river would most likely take days to compute and is simply not a viable solution for such project.
21
[Max] I need help! / Re: River material
« on: 2023-07-03, 10:38:40 »I am glad I don't have to do river animations because I would have meltdown.
That's exactly the issue here - seems like the only way to get realistic river results is to simulate river. However, the kind of river I'm trying to replicate here is a slow and calm river so in order to get this from a sim I feel like I would have to let the simulation run for days until it fills up the river bed and finally stabilizes into a calmly running water. Simply not viable given the scale of the project.
And I'm also very surprised such issue hasn't been raised by many before - we have tools for pretty much any kind of water look except for such rivers.
22
[Max] I need help! / Re: River material
« on: 2023-06-30, 14:35:56 »
I'm aware of the river bed and everything that goes under the water but for me the challenge is water displacement. River water is quite irregular, needs to have a slight hint of stream direction, have different size ripples and have this "turbulent" look where it looks like it's going faster in the middle and slower to the sides (that could probably be done with distance map but I'm not quite there yet).
23
[Max] I need help! / River material
« on: 2023-06-30, 14:08:22 »
Hey everyone,
I'm trying to recreate a river material like in attached photos and I just can't create that kind of texture with procedural maps (the river will also have to be animated so needs to be procedural). I've tried Noise, Smoke, ProSimplex maps as well as OceanTex and combining them together, it just doesn't look real enough. Has anyone have any experience with this kind of material?
I'm trying to recreate a river material like in attached photos and I just can't create that kind of texture with procedural maps (the river will also have to be animated so needs to be procedural). I've tried Noise, Smoke, ProSimplex maps as well as OceanTex and combining them together, it just doesn't look real enough. Has anyone have any experience with this kind of material?
24
[C4D] I need help! / Re: Crisper renders
« on: 2023-06-09, 13:23:09 »
Interesting. Do you still fiddle with Image Filter setting even though as you said it doesn't really give you required sharpness, or leave it at default and mostly play with vfb settings?
I haven't experimented much with other types of image filtering, would anyone with more experience mind sharing the results? I assume since HQ filter is default it's because it's the best in most scenarios.
I haven't experimented much with other types of image filtering, would anyone with more experience mind sharing the results? I assume since HQ filter is default it's because it's the best in most scenarios.
25
[C4D] I need help! / Re: Crisper renders
« on: 2023-06-09, 10:21:04 »The stock Anti-aliasing filter (called "HQ Filter") is 2px wide and that's quite softening and rather noticeable in lower resolution renders (like less than 3000 px wide image). Modern digital cameras don't even have AA filters anymore, though I am not sure if that would work in CGI, and I don't remember ever testing in Corona :- ).
Higher-res renders downscaled in post-production (using for example Bicubic Sharper method) for internet publishing will contain more detail and look sharper.
And most importantly, sharpening in Framebuffer or post-production, same as with Photography.
Speaking of sharpening settings in VFB, is there some sort of standard that most people use to get a nice looking sharpness on images or is it very much depending on the scene? I remember some time ago dubcat posted a screenshot with Sharpen amount 7, Sharpen radius 0.05 and Blur radius 0.25 and a comment that "these radius settings are at 1k, multiply k by whatever resolution you're using". I've been using this as a base and adjusting when I need more/less sharpness but I will admit it still looks quite "artificial" if you crank it up, and quite blurry if you just leave it at that.
Or are VFB sharpness settings just not good enough compared to some post-production tools and plugins and people ignore it and deal with it afterwards?
26
Gallery / Re: Sunday Morning
« on: 2023-06-02, 14:16:25 »Hello thanks!) I would say it's a combination. I always use ACET OT, filmic mapping and some lut
I like the part 'some lut' ;) a true magician never reveals his secrets!
I find ACES OT a bit too contrasty on the blacks, and found success with Marcin Piotrowski tonemapping luts, in combination with filmic mapping as well. Maybe it's time to experiment a bit more with tonemapping settings and new luts.
27
Gallery / Re: Sunday Morning
« on: 2023-06-01, 12:46:57 »
Wow, these are crisp! Any magic going on with tonemapping settings or simply thorough work on materials and lighting? Love the contrast and color vibrancy - something that gets 'washed out' when making renderings, then doing posts etc.
Well done.
Well done.
28
Gallery / Re: Lysfaere Renderings #1 Corvette Stingray C2
« on: 2023-05-08, 14:01:05 »If you wait few days, I will change the free set on the website into Free Set + 3dsMax scene (Tonemapping, Shadowcatcher, CoronaSelectMTL with all backplates). And shortly after, a tutorial on how to use it all.
Great timing with this, I was already trying out the freebie you got on your website. Thanks for giving us a chance to try it out and will check it again once you upload a more extensive version - always love to play with these samples :)
29
Gallery / Re: Lysfaere Renderings #1 Corvette Stingray C2
« on: 2023-05-08, 10:35:51 »
These are absolutely beautiful, well done!
I see you mention in your website that all of these will come with custom LUTs for easier grading - very excited to try these out. Any idea when will they be available?
I see you mention in your website that all of these will come with custom LUTs for easier grading - very excited to try these out. Any idea when will they be available?
30
Gallery / Re: The Roof | CGI
« on: 2023-02-02, 15:32:25 »
Is the person in last rendering 3d or a cutout? Can't figure it out...