Messages

4471

[Max] I need help! / Re: Corona skipping UHD calculation phase!

« on: 2018-11-07, 21:24:17 »

Thanks! As a note, it may not be possible to reverse engineer it to work with Corona 2. I would definitely try resaving it from the latest RC in case that makes a difference, and we'll try and take a look in case there's a bug - but even if it's a bug, it might not be possible to undo it in your scene. Definitely one of the reasons why a production scene shouldn't use a non-final build if planning on going to a farm. You might also talk to Rebus to see if they'd consider installing the Corona RC for you.

4472

[C4D] General Discussion / Re: Your experience with teamrender

« on: 2018-11-07, 21:21:47 »

Are the machines the same processor, memory, hard drive etc? Or maybe just give the results from each machine using the Benchmark, as there was no info given on their relative performance.

One thing that makes a difference is the size of the packets sent at once - the larger the image you are rendering, the more it may benefit from a different packet size (rather than using automatic). What resolution are you rendering to?

Cheers!

4473

[Max] I need help! / Re: Corona skipping UHD calculation phase!

« on: 2018-11-07, 19:59:56 »

Oh one thing though, this was created and saved with Corona 3? Then tried to be rendered using Corona 2? That may well have an impact on things for sure. The scene would be handy still.

EDIT as an aside, I'd say it's probably not a good idea to use an unreleased build, even an RC, to create a project when you plan to render on a render farm, as the chances are the farm won't support it until it becomes an official final release.

4474

[Max] I need help! / Re: Corona skipping UHD calculation phase!

« on: 2018-11-07, 19:59:20 »

Not heard any other reports of this - as ever, a copy of the scene would be very useful (since there are no other reports, it will most likely be very hard or even impossible for us to duplicate by creating our own scene; so getting this scene would be very handy indeed!)

4475

[C4D] Resolved Feature Requests / Re: light area not visible in reflections when using IES lights

« on: 2018-11-07, 19:12:08 »

I believe it is that "Prevent Black Appearance" is only for direct visibility from the camera angle, and that the prevent black appearance doesn't have an effect on the angle from the reflecting surface. I believe that's a limitation at present (devs can correct me if I am wrong :) ), in that the prevent black appearance is only taken into account for the camera view and not reflected views (so that a narrow angle of IES would mean no light from the light source reaches the surface it would be reflecting on, and so no reflection). We'll see what future plans are in this regard!

4476

[C4D] Resolved Feature Requests / Re: light area not visible in reflections when using IES lights

« on: 2018-11-07, 18:42:53 »

The same thing happens in Max, so it looks like a limitation (or something that is physically accurate even)

4477

[C4D] Resolved Feature Requests / Re: light area not visible in reflections when using IES lights

« on: 2018-11-07, 18:36:46 »

It depends on how wide or narrow the IES is, as to whether it reflects or not. So it would seem to be similar to the Prevent Black Appearance for the direct visibility (that is, since the IES is narrowing the directionality of the light, it may be so narrowed it doesn't show up in reflections).

Interestingly, it can show up in reflections of reflections even when that first reflection doesn't show up to the camera (presumably due to how the angles all inter-relate - scene attached but you'll need to add your own IES, I was using the ones that come with the Corona install).

I can't say if this is physically correct, expected, or a bug at the moment. A workaround in any case would be to have two light sources, one to cast the light, one to show up in reflections.

4478

[Max] I need help! / Re: Any documentation or helpdesk articles on the volume material?

« on: 2018-11-07, 18:09:10 »

Yes, in this case C4D is ahead of Max in having more documentation and help :) EDIT - however the info and settings should carry across exactly.

4479

[Max] Daily Builds / Re: Daily builds version 3

« on: 2018-11-07, 18:02:56 »

Awesome, thanks! This always helps out a huge amount :)

4480

[Max] Daily Builds / Re: Daily builds version 3

« on: 2018-11-07, 16:52:54 »

Any chance of uploading that scene? There is the private uploader - https://corona-renderer.com/upload

Having a known example, rather than trying to create a scene and hoping we replicate the problem, is always incredibly helpful for developing and bug fixing :)

4481

[C4D] Feature Requests / Re: Tilt & Shift

« on: 2018-11-07, 16:16:22 »

This is already requested and being tracked internally :) (It was me who asked for it lol)

4482

[Max] I need help! / Re: Any documentation or helpdesk articles on the volume material?

« on: 2018-11-07, 16:14:12 »

https://help.c4d.corona-renderer.com/support/solutions/articles/12000035577-how-to-use-volumetrics- (the volume material settings are the same in Max and C4D)

https://coronarenderer.freshdesk.com/support/solutions/articles/12000045276-how-to-use-the-corona-volume-grid-

4483

Gallery / Re: Yamskoye Pole 28

« on: 2018-11-07, 13:48:31 »

Got to ask, how did you do the people in the video? :)

4484

[Max] Resolved Bugs / Re: Max VFB output with artifacts with sharpen/blur enabled (CIE output is fine)

« on: 2018-11-05, 22:45:48 »

The sharpening here in the example file is pretty extreme, set to 7 (I didn't see any obvious difference with a quick test scene with the default values). Of course even when extreme, I'd expect VFB and CIE to give the same results :)

4485

[Max] Resolved Bugs / Re: Max VFB output with artifacts with sharpen/blur enabled (CIE output is fine)

« on: 2018-11-05, 20:47:24 »

Seems to happen regardless of format - I tried TIFF, PNG (24 bit and 48 bit), and even JPG, and the same "dark haloing to the edge" was visible on brightening in Photoshop (Brighten adjustment layer, Brightness to 150) for VFB saved images vs CIE saved versions.

EDIT - including the JPGs here in case the banding in them, which is also different from CIE and VFB, might be a clue? Not that the banding is there, that's expected, but rather than the VFB and CIE are giving different results :)