Messages

1

[Max] Bug Reporting / Re: CoronaTileMap and Real-World scale.

« on: 2025-03-11, 18:29:45 »

FWIW I feel like that is the intended use of the ctile map. More often than not I would plug triplanar maps into the various slots for the ctile and use that to help drive texture size (with the cbitmaps plugged into that or into a mappingrand node then into triplanar remaining as RWS disabled, scale: 1x1).  If I need the texture to be a specific size, I would rely on the ctile dimensions, in this case 15x15cm.

I'm curious as to what I'm missing. Maybe if a texture had to be 20x20cm but the tile was a different size or various sizes, but even then I'm confused about the end goal and why 1x1 not-RWS is not acceptable if the tile itself is 15x15cm..

2

[Max] Bug Reporting / Re: CoronaTileMap and Real-World scale.

« on: 2025-03-08, 21:50:21 »

I personally haven't had an issue with the tile map and RWS, but it depends on what your ultimate end-goal is. I use metres for both my system and display units. If I may a Tile map set to 0.15x0.15m with a 0.005m gap, and then plug a coronabitmap into the tile slot, the texture fills the entire tile. The Cbit is set to RWS as well but defaults to 1x1m (which is the same as 1.0x1.0 if RWS was disabled).

In  the tile map, I also set the Tile Mapping to Per Tile and Text. Placement to Crop (defaults I think). If I set the tile to 0.15x0.3 and then deviate the Cbitmap to 0.15x0.15, then yes, we get the dense repetition.  But if your tile is driving your texture size, why set it in the Cbitmap as well?  If you set the Tile mapping to original, then you will have the UV mapping of the bitmap within the tiles, as if the coronatilemap was a black and white mask multiplied on your texture (black being grout, white being tile).

If you could elaborate why you need both the tile to match the coronabitmap, I may be able to help further.  But leave the bitmap as 1x1 and you should be golden.

3

[Max] General Discussion / Re: Saving images into history from Pulze with Batch render

« on: 2025-03-06, 14:08:38 »

I second this. I believe it used to work with Corona 10 or 11 but stopped at 12.

4

[Max] I need help! / CG-Source Multitexture to CoronaMultiMap Converter?

« on: 2025-03-06, 13:21:40 »

Hello forums!

I merged an asset from an older file recently in Max 2024 and found that the bitmaps were no longer linked. When I opened that original file itself, the bitmaps were there but there was a blank spot where the node would've been and I realized it was CG-Source's Multitexture plugin that was missing. I downloaded it and sure enough my materials are set up appropriately now.

But a question remains: is there a way that can help me convert materials using Multitexture and convert it to CoronaMultiMap or a combination of MultiMap and CoronaColorCorrect so that I don't have to rely on Multitexture moving forward?  The need for a script will also help me with updating 70+ materials automatically rather than going through it one-by-one.

Any help would be appreciated!

Cheers,
Tanner

5

[Max] I need help! / Re: Custom Corona Tile

« on: 2025-01-15, 16:18:43 »

Hi Romulus. I'm not sure what scale you're using with your pattern but is it safe to assume its 0.15m instead of 0.6m? And then each whole number in your pattern is multiplication scales of that base value? 

Also, how did you know about the row separator (I couldn't find anything in the doc about that)?

I did include an example of the intended pattern in my original post if you're trying to see what I'm aiming for.  The values you provided and adjusting my base tile size to 0.15x0.15 yielded this result, which may be close.  I think I need to adjust the pattern further though.


If it helps, this is the pattern, written out (WxH):

Row 1: [0.3x0.3] [0.6x0.3] [0.3x0.3] [0.15x0.3] (this row is offset by half)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Row 2: [0.15x0.6] [0.3x0.6] [0.6x0.6] [0.3x0.6]

Edit:

I think I figured it out, based on what you shared.  Setting tile width and height to 0.6, this is the pattern I used:

Code: [Select]

.25 .5 .5 1 .5 .25 | 0 1 .25 .5 1 .5
Attached is the result. On the left is raw from VFB; on the right is what it will end up looking like once I figure out the masks.

6

[Max] I need help! / Custom Corona Tile

« on: 2025-01-15, 14:15:12 »

Hello,

Quick Summary: Need help creating a two-row tile pattern where one row is offset. The two rows work separately but adding them together pattern breaks the intended layout. Is this possible with Corona Tile Map's custom mode?

---

I'm trying to create a custom tile pattern using Corona Tile Map's custom mode but running into some challenges with the pattern definition.

Pattern Description:
- Base tile size: 0.6m x 0.6m
- Pattern uses variations: 0.3x0.3m, 0.15x0.3m, 0.3x0.6m, 0.15x0.6m, 0.6x0.6m
I have posted an example from a recreation in Excel, showing the single pattern and how it repeats. (Image 1)

The intended pattern alternates between two rows:
1. Offset row (offset by 0.5):
   - 0.3x0.3m, 0.6x0.3m, 0.3x0.3m, 0.15x0.3m (then repeats)
2. Non-offset row:
   - 0.15x0.6m, 0.3x0.6m, 0.6x0.6m, 0.3x0.6m (then repeats)

What Works:
The non-offset row pattern works correctly with:

Code: [Select]

0 .25 1 | 0 .5 1 | 0 1 1 | 0 .5 1
This creates the correct sequence of tall tiles: narrow (0.15x0.6m), medium (0.3x0.6m), square (0.6x0.6m), medium (0.3x0.6m).

The offset row pattern also works alone as:

Code: [Select]

.5 .5 .5 | .5 1 .5 | .5 .5 .5 | .5 .25 .5
This creates the sequence of shorter tiles: square (0.3x0.3m), wide (0.6x0.3m), square (0.3x0.3m), narrow (0.15x0.3m).

The Challenge:
When trying to add the offset row pattern on its own row:
+ Attachments and other options

Code: [Select]

.5 .5 .5 | .5 1 .5 | .5 .5 .5 | .5 .25 .5 | 0 .25 1 | 0 .5 1 | 0 1 1 | 0 .5 1
The Tile Map appears to interpret the second part as a continuation of the same row rather than starting a new row in the pattern.
When combined, you can see it combines everything into one large row and repeats that pattern, rather than creating the intended alternating row pattern. (Image 2)

Question:
Is there a way to properly define this alternating row pattern in Corona Tile Map's custom mode? Or is this a limitation of how the custom pattern syntax works?
While this might be a limitation of the custom mode syntax, I feel like what I want might be possible using nested TileMaps or by generating both patterns separately and combining them with a simple mask differentiating rows (set to 1.2x1.2m) Edit: This will not work as it requires that one row to be 0.3m tall plus gap.

Thank you.

7

[Max] Bug Reporting / Re: Linked controllers changing units on clone (Corona 11)

« on: 2023-12-18, 22:51:44 »

Thanks Aram.  I can confirm removing the RWS controller fixes the issue but this started with 11, versions 10 and older never had the issue. Fingers crossed it's fixed with HF1.

8

[Max] Bug Reporting / Re: Linked controllers changing units on clone (Corona 11)

« on: 2023-12-18, 14:20:12 »

I'm glad to hear its not just me.

9

[Max] Bug Reporting / Re: Linked controllers changing units on clone (Corona 11)

« on: 2023-12-18, 13:43:20 »

romullus, Does your issue rectify if you make a separate duplicate like mine or does it stay stuck with the incorrect value?

10

[Max] Bug Reporting / Linked controllers changing units on clone (Corona 11)

« on: 2023-12-18, 12:25:35 »

I just updated to Corona 11 this morning and found a potential bug that I don't recall having with 10.2.  I often create bezier and linear float controllers when making my materials, so if I need to enable real-world scale or change the UV scaling of all my bitmaps, I only need to change one node to affect them all, or as I have it laid out.  The issue I'm having is when I link the UVWscale to a Point3 XYZ controller and then I make a duplicate of that coronabitmap node so the controller links the two or more nodes together, it reduces the scale values I've input, almost like it's changing the internal scale of the node.

I'm using a System Scale of Metres, Display Units of Metres, 3ds Max 2020.3.6.

As an example, when I have a coronabitmap node set to 4.8m x 2.7m (A) and then I shift+drag to copy the bitmap node (B), those values drop to 0.2083m x 0.3704m. If I make another duplicate (C), the numbers go back to 4.8x2.7. If I duplicate again, it drops.

All in all its not terrible but there are times where I have specific values set and may forget them while making these duplications and setups.

11

[Max] Bug Reporting / Re: SME Very Slow on Corona 10

« on: 2023-10-05, 16:37:04 »

I did and I must say it works like a charm. I've only tried with a box but there's been zero stuttering or lag, even when combining a UV Rand and Triplanar together.  I also took romullus' suggestion and set the viewport texture resolutions to 128, 4096, and 4096.

So, thank you for addressing the issues in a hotfix and not leaving it until v11 - its very much appreciated!

12

[Max] Bug Reporting / Re: SME Very Slow on Corona 10

« on: 2023-10-05, 16:05:30 »

I am not sure if it's related, but we have just released a new daily build of Corona 11 with a fix for Triplanar map performance issues. You can find it here:
https://forum.corona-renderer.com/index.php?topic=40442.msg217142#msg217142
 
Please test it and share your results with us.

Thanks Maru! I finally found an excellent opportunity to reinstall 10 and the timing of this hotfix couldn't be more perfectly well-timed. I will test and post back here if I face any additional issues.

13

[Max] Bug Reporting / Re: SME Very Slow on Corona 10

« on: 2023-08-24, 20:15:24 »

Interesting... Maybe I'll have to give it another go once I'm done my current project.

14

[Max] Bug Reporting / Re: SME Very Slow on Corona 10

« on: 2023-08-24, 20:07:36 »

Is there any updates on this problem. Its nearly impossible now to tweak materials that are using triplanar and such, because every time you move the color slider one step you have to wait a minute.
Nm, chaning resolution in display performance to 1024 helped quite a bit

It does help but it doesn't alleviate the issue. There are a number of instances where I need the high-res viewport display. Because it hasn't been addressed by a hotfix yet, I have stayed on 9.3. But the Devs are aware and that's half of the battle.

15

[Max] Bug Reporting / Re: SME Very Slow on Corona 10

« on: 2023-07-25, 17:33:29 »

Yes. The issue - like with others - only arose when you added the feature of applying several maps to one node such as Triplanar or UVWRandomization. And the slowdown only happens when those nodes are applied to a material that is active in the scene. There isn't a stutter if a material hasn't been applied yet. The issues aren't present in any version including 9.3 and older.

And it isn't like my computers aren't up for the task, this has been reproduced on a Dell mobile workstation (i7-8750H, 128GB RAM, Quadro P3200 6GB) and a BOXX workstation with dual Xeon E5-2630v3, 256GB RAM, Quadro M4000 8GB).