1
Gallery / Re: Tel-Aviv
« on: 2025-01-30, 20:00:21 »
cool renders
טוב לראות עבודה מושקעת כזותי בשטח שלנו
כל הכבוד
טוב לראות עבודה מושקעת כזותי בשטח שלנו
כל הכבוד
Having trouble verifying your license? If you are seeing a license verification message or are unable to access your Chaos products, please follow these simple steps to fix sign-in issues. If you have already tried this and are still unable to access your Chaos products, please contact Support.
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.
Hey guys,link please
I've seen this asked before in the forum. I also requested years ago btw. Yesterday I made a script that does it and with the features I need most but I can put it for sale for a symbolic value on Gumroad if there is interest.
Key Features:
Quick camera selection and viewport switching
Custom resolution override per camera
Aspect ratio locking system
Batch render all Corona cameras with one click
Selective batch rendering with multi-selection dialog
Automatic render output folder creation
Resolution settings are saved per camera
Automatic update on camera list when new cameras are added or deleted
I don't know if forum rules allow this or not. If not please delete the post.
I have to say, wither you regard it as a step forward in material creation, physical accuracy or anything else, it is a huge step back in workflow and usability. Converting almost all materials to metals and a load of materials to max physical materials is totally useless and makes it completely unusable.
The old converter was excellent, and to say if you are not including a converter for legacy materials because it is not the way forward it is incredibly arrogant. We need the tools to do our jobs so get it implemented so we can work, and then when you get a working Corona 7/8 converter phase out the old one if you have to.
I have very little interest it converting from corona 6 to 7 or 8, we wouldn't render jobs across 2 different versions. What we NEED is a quick and reliable way to get models from clients and get them in a state where we can start improving them. Not re-texturing them from the start.
Please put your users first not your ideals.
Rant over
thanks :)
It could be 3ds max problem more than anything else - some helper types are known to slow down viewports.
As Tom says, lights can be hidden in the viewports and still render with the 'Render hidden lights' option checked in Corona's renderer setting.
Are these Corona Lights, and does the same thing happen with default Max lights? As a note, LightMtl renders as quickly as a Light with the exception of spherical lights, so guessing these are spherical lights? Is hiding the lights in the viewport an option since this seems to be viewport performance that is affected?in most scenes for urban views spherical light sources are used as a priority/
Hi There,problem with gamma
I am facing an issue while saving render. The saved render is different than the VFB.
Please help me out.
The title says it all. I know that you can turn off reflections and refractions on sky and it effects the entire scene but you cant target a single object to not be effected by the sky like you can the sun. Whats the best method to exclude a single object from the skys reflection?may be will try
I could render the object in a separate scene and overlay but id be doing about 200 product images and want to avoid extra photoshop editing if possible. any suggestions?
After Effects--for example. how they work in all normal studios.
I think also for freelancers:)
Same filters-same color grade-same compositions-same resolutions--only update image from renders--0.5 sec of working time:)besides, it never happens that your post process is 100 percent satisfied with the customer. and a lot of things that simply cannot be added to raw renders.
absolutely in any case a third-party application is used
You are biased AF dude. Fact that probably all bigger studios work this way doesn't mean they are the "normal" ones and those that don't use it are somewhat ... I dont know ? Worse ? Not normal ? One might thinkt that is what you suggest.
Up until recently there was no other way of doing this as renderers focused on producing basic raw image or would let you tonemap it with bullcrap reinhard inside in a limited way and that's it. Specialised software existed to push things further. This also exists because large studios are big structures not as elastic with their pipeline as the smaller ones where changing pipeline is a matter of day(s) unlike the biggies with tens of artists.
As everything evolves there is no need for that workflow with fancy software for people who want to push things just a little behind the line without the need to resolve to soft as AE, Davinci and the sort.
You're assuming that this is the only organic way of growth - want to postproces better - do it external. It isn't. More controll here would totaly sufice many many people. And I see what I get instantenously while I develop it. Without the need to shuffle in and out of max and VFB and opening it in external soft. Sort like the move from buckets to interactive. From Grant Warvick multilayered materials to simple GGX.
We also regularly work with clients in live preview sessions - how do you expect me to show them the final result if I have to go through fifty additional steps to show them the finished image ?
Thins are going WYSIWG way in many fields.
I don't need super advanced pipeline with 5 softwares inbetween a render and finished image. My profile does not force me to incorporate one and more and more people dont need it. I need more controll inside the VFB.
They way you're using this software isn't the only way. The purpose you're using it isn't the only one for which it can be used.
Do not try to invalidate other peoples feature requests only because you do not need them. Other people do and judging by the "most wanted features" thread many people want to get this upgraded.I bet there is no one more motivated than the corona team to get tone mapping out. It really looks like they are taking it seriously and trying to do something exceptional, witch often means things taking much longer than expected.
I'm sure whoever is working on it is taking it seriously. No doubt about that. The question is how many devs are assigned to Corona for Max these days, and their seniority. It looks as if there's only one person working on this and he isn't Ondra or Maru.
This. Valid point. We suppose to get features. Turns out some are postoponed undefinitely for release after a release, some most highly anticipated like tonemapping after finaly getting to be worked on seems like might take almost two years to get to final stable release (not mentioning time people were vigorously discussing it on the forum). We have a team of developers, Meanwhile Fstorm is developed by just a single guy and I understand that some might argue that it is still not production ready and whatnot but still, one guy.
Here no communication. Zero explanation as to why. Silently removing a feature to next release.
After Effects--for example. how they work in all normal studios.Edit 2: And let's be honest, who thought they could do a new physical material AND a new tone mapper for the same version?
They said they will. People might or not make decisions based on that. If they do not introduce new tonemapper then what the hell took 10 months here ? Half the new sky system was done in previous release. Not taking into account mat library as this is not coding. That leaves us with displacement optimizations and basically new shader.
v8 release is expected in Q1 2022, that potentialy leaves the door open for people that need a stable environment and can't fiddle with dailies to get the new tonemapping in worst case scenario in march 2022 ? It is another 9 months from here ! Wrapping up almost two years !Edit: On the other hand we're getting Aerial perspective and an improved sun & sky model, which I haven't seen yet but hope it will be great.
Awesome reasoning. I ordered a Mercedes, they deliver Dacia for a few months as a substitute. Well nothing happened, it still has wheels right ?
Not to mention that Reworking tonemapping is next to GPU/hybrid and new shader voted as the top 3 most wanted features in the forum.hi,
I am a little bit surprised by this strong demand for improvement of "tone mapping". I'll be curious if a lot of people use Vray's new "ACES" workflow which seems like a gas factory to me. I do not really believe in ready-made solutions because what matters in the end are the images produced ... After obviously all improvements are welcome but I do not believe too much in the revolution of "tone mapping" for the architectural image ... but that's just my point of view ...
mienda
totally agree. anyway task
"do absolutely the whole post-process" in Frame Buffer
I personally find it completely unrealistic and unnecessary because there will always be certain applications that make more accurate corrections and post-processing. yes of course it can make the work easier also in post-processing and possibly get a more attractive look, but what has been done now in Vray in this direction is just ridiculous. just try to play with all these bells and whistles with a resolution of 8-k in Frame Buffer with huge heavy scene in 3dmax/[:
And this advocating in form of "why do we need that feature, it can be done in other software"... Sure it can, but imagine a situation where you render dozens of images per project and you need to provide absolute consistency. Why would I import it to other external software to do postprocesing when I can do it straight in the VFB and not waste any more time ?
This workflow is as valid as the one with postpro in external soft. Your arguments are not in any way superior.