1
[C4D] General Discussion / Re: Tone Mapping not saving to final image
« on: 2017-03-30, 14:48:52 »
Can confirm that VFB on my W10 machine is accurate. So it looks like a Mac issue.
2025-06-24, 05:19:42
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.
Pages: [1]
2
[C4D] General Discussion / Re: Tone Mapping not saving to final image
« on: 2017-03-22, 17:15:53 »
Curious to hear if there's any more feedback on this.
I'm starting to suspect it's more of a Gamma issue than anything, but I can't figure out what settings I might be missing. I'm attaching a simple scene file here for your perusal.
I'm starting to suspect it's more of a Gamma issue than anything, but I can't figure out what settings I might be missing. I'm attaching a simple scene file here for your perusal.
3
[C4D] General Discussion / Re: Tone Mapping not saving to final image
« on: 2017-03-16, 23:02:45 »
Looks the same in yours as far as I can tell... but you haven't applied any contrast / highlight / shadow adjustments to be able to judge.
4
[C4D] General Discussion / Tone Mapping not saving to final image
« on: 2017-03-15, 22:28:24 »
I have not noticed this issue until today. You can see a clear difference between what's in the VFB and the final product in the picture viewer. Looks like the tone mapping is not coming through.
It's not just happening with the background saturation, but also with the filmic shadows and other tone mapping settings I applied.
Regardless of what format I save in, the same keeps happening.
Any thoughts?
It's not just happening with the background saturation, but also with the filmic shadows and other tone mapping settings I applied.
Regardless of what format I save in, the same keeps happening.
Any thoughts?
5
[C4D] General Discussion / Re: Infinite floor/background look? (HDRI Studio Rig look)
« on: 2017-03-15, 17:05:27 »
I'm not sure if this was ever solved, but I found somewhat of a workaround.
Following a similar concept to how HDRI Studio's infinite floor works, the key is to have the floor be a large disc shape with a circular gradient on its Corona Material's opacity channel.
Two skies:
one working as lighting
one working as background
Make sure to use the Corona Compositing tag to hide the lighting sky from camera on render. Prevent the background sky from lighting, etc.
It's not 100% perfect. The shadow catcher would definitely be a better way of approaching this. But... it works.
Following a similar concept to how HDRI Studio's infinite floor works, the key is to have the floor be a large disc shape with a circular gradient on its Corona Material's opacity channel.
Two skies:
one working as lighting
one working as background
Make sure to use the Corona Compositing tag to hide the lighting sky from camera on render. Prevent the background sky from lighting, etc.
It's not 100% perfect. The shadow catcher would definitely be a better way of approaching this. But... it works.
6
[C4D] General Discussion / Re: TurbulenceFD and corona render for c4d compatibility
« on: 2017-03-02, 05:55:14 »
As far as I know, not yet. I'm really hoping TFD and X-Particles support will come sooner than later. Extremely crucial.
7
[C4D] General Discussion / Re: Node based material editing in beta 2 road map!!
« on: 2017-02-17, 14:40:36 »
I think there's just little details that make Cycles4D node systems really great. Like for example, color coding (for both, nodes and their inputs), intuitive grouping, auto-snapping of connections, ability to preview individual node output, etc.
Again, little things. But they really add up.
Plus it's just a really feature-rich node system. I feel like there's a node for almost anything I can think of needing. I've created a number of materials with Cycles4D that i haven't been able to build with any other renderer. And that's a powerful thing.
Again, little things. But they really add up.
Plus it's just a really feature-rich node system. I feel like there's a node for almost anything I can think of needing. I've created a number of materials with Cycles4D that i haven't been able to build with any other renderer. And that's a powerful thing.
8
[C4D] General Discussion / Re: X-Particles support?
« on: 2017-02-17, 14:27:17 »Hi, not sure about specific plans regarding this, but we definitely want to support most of the widely used options/plugins for C4D. I'll ping the dev team, and return to you once I have any news.Thanks, maru.
I think it would be amazing. I really am enjoying how well Corona integrates into the C4D material structure, and I think x-particles support is crucial. Otherwise, those (many) of us who use XP consistently would find ourselves having to use another renderer most of the time. It would be a big missed opportunity.
Looking forward to updates!
9
[C4D] General Discussion / X-Particles support?
« on: 2017-02-15, 22:07:34 »
Hi,
Does Corona support X-Particles? If so, how? I can't find any Corona tag that would do this the way I'm used to (Arnold, Redshift, Cycles4D).
The only way I found to do it was to use an X-Particles Sprite Generator and apply the Corona Material to that, but this is extremely inefficient and slow, especially in comparison to how the other engines handle it.
A huge chunk of C4D users rely on X-particles so, unless I'm missing something, this leaves a big gap in your potential customer base.
Does Corona support X-Particles? If so, how? I can't find any Corona tag that would do this the way I'm used to (Arnold, Redshift, Cycles4D).
The only way I found to do it was to use an X-Particles Sprite Generator and apply the Corona Material to that, but this is extremely inefficient and slow, especially in comparison to how the other engines handle it.
A huge chunk of C4D users rely on X-particles so, unless I'm missing something, this leaves a big gap in your potential customer base.
Pages: [1]