Actually, that's wrong. The material should get dimmed, because it passes some energy through instead of reflecting it back to camera.
Well, there is the problem. What goes on, in real life is that the surface absorbs all light, it then scatters within the object, before exiting the object. The light that exits the object either goes 100% back to the surface (no translucency) or 50% back (full translucency). The value in both vray and corona for full translucency (within thin objects) can never occur in reality, because the backside of the object becomes brighter than the lit front side.
As I said before, my view is that of a 3D artist, and not a programmer, so I'm sorry I can't explain it better. What I did in the discussion with Chaos Group was to set up a real life study, and then try to recreate it in rendering. So far, all attempts have been unsuccessful. ;)
I've set up a similar scene for Corona, which I'm including to this post. The setup there is just to illustrate the different translucency values 0, 0.5, and 1, and how they look when lit from the front, and the back.
I'll also include a photo I took of how things look in reality. From a rendering point of view, I think it's interesting to note that a thick stack of paper will look exaclty the same as a single sheet of paper, when lit from the front, even though the stack lets hardly any light through.
I hope someone manages to beat me here - I'm not here to prove Corona wrong, just for the sake of it - I'm just here to shed som light on the problem, and try to find a solution.
The .rar-file contains a max2015 file with the scene, and the textures used. The weird black line in the render is simply the corona light seen from behind. ;)