material editor SLOW - i think its a CORONA issue?

[TomG]

I think this one will work https://chaoscorona.ideas.aha.io/ideas/CMAX-I-23 , let me know. I think the previous link was one that only worked for admin folks (we're still learning out way around the Portal :) ). The only login required would be the Chaos ID (so long as you are already logged in at chaos.com, it shouldn't even ask you for a login on the Ideas Portal, in case you want to ensure you are only filling in your Chaos credentials on a Chaos site).

[TomG]

Sorry to hear that Tom. I don't mean to downplay or dismiss other feature requests and updates, but in my opinion, having a smoother experience with the material editor and the ability to smoothly tweak materials while IR is active would be a significant improvement for everyday workflow and would enhance productivity for all Corona users.

Speaking of the new release, could we get a sneak peek of what's planned? There haven't been any updates on the Trello roadmap.
Thank you!

I completely agree on the importance of this, slowdowns like this are not good for the experience. It will have to wait until the next version is out though as the next version is already well underway, with no way to fit this in (and do it properly), so the delay is not due to a rating of how important this is, just that the ball is already rolling down its path, plus a Qt rewrite is a big thing so even if we stopped something else (or several something elses!) there wouldn't be time to complete it for the next release.

Should be able to update the Trello next week or later this week :) Thanks!

[pokoy]

I think this one will work https://chaoscorona.ideas.aha.io/ideas/CMAX-I-23 , let me know. I think the previous link was one that only worked for admin folks (we're still learning out way around the Portal :) ). The only login required would be the Chaos ID (so long as you are already logged in at chaos.com, it shouldn't even ask you for a login on the Ideas Portal, in case you want to ensure you are only filling in your Chaos credentials on a Chaos site).

Yes, that one works - sent me straight to the Idea page (I was already logged in earlier today) - thanks!

[TomG]

YW and ty for letting me know! I didn't realize grabbing the link from an (admin) view of the list of ideas would give me some super-sekrit version, and that I had to copy the link from the regular portal. Good to learn these things lol!

[Juraj]

Update from my testing:

- Show Textures in Viewport ON/OFF = No difference (using standard ShadedViewport, no HQ)
- Materials applied to scene or existing only in material editor = No difference
- Type of material, amount of textures = Some influence?

I have very optimized Windows setup. No ControlFlowGuard, Ultra-performance mode, higher-process priority for 3dsMax, no network setup (all files local, full-path mapped. It's nothing to do with this.
I have zero plugins in 3dsMax. It's not that either.

It's Corona/Corona materials.

I can replicate ultra-slow material editor with single object and two materials in material editors. Since to me even fresh resetted scene just swapping two default Corona Material Editors are like 1-2 seconds to switch.
It's nothing to do with my Windows or PC, 3dsMax Physical material take 0.0001 second to switch. It's instant. It's just Corona material that is immensely slow.

And once I start IR, it's just catastrophe. I don't remember if it was always like this.... but I've been on big PCs (Xeons, Threadrippers) for so long that the issue might have worsened with that, or with just later Corona versions. I don't know, I have no frame of reference. But it's massively frustrating.

[pokoy]

Win32 UI definitely *is* the bottleneck, no doubt here as well. Other factors might have an effect but nothing comes with a toll that heavy.

[alexyork]

I remember when Autodesk announced their major "Small Annoying Things" 3dsmax campaign, where after years of angry commenting from customers they finally understood that we wanted all those small but workflow-slowing bugs, weirdnesses, or lack of vital tools to be fixed/implemented. They held various user group meetings with their department head(s) (I was at one in London) to actually get this feedback 1:1. It never quite hit the mark fully but it was a great period and had a very noticeably positive impact on 3dsmax, and I think the attitude has carried forward there ever since. Naturally, the issue nowadays over there is a massive lack of innovation within 3dsmax, so it could certainly be fairly argued it's gone too far the other way!

Anyway, it's something to think about. I've often wondered if Corona development would be better handled by making existing-feature improvements, bug fixes just like this happen to point version updates/hotfixes e.g. 12.1, 12.2 etc. and saving the new feature updates for major versions (and not necessarily every major version). In that way perhaps it would be possible to delay major new features being worked on and pivot development to addressing sometimes very serious bugs within the current major version in a hotfix - as many as needed - maybe 2, 3 or 4 x. In recent times there have been instances where potentially show-stopping bugs have had to be left for some future major version update because it's too late to shoehorn it in, causing frustration in the userbase (reasonably so...). As a studio, we have completely skipped 2 or 3 major versions of Corona (maybe 8, definitely 12) because of this situation. And if that reminds anyone of how many of us work with 3dsmax then I'm not surprised! Since 3ds max 2008 or so we have ignored every other version, because it's pretty well-known that the odd-versions are usually where the bulk of new features are introduced, and the even version is where they're bug-fixed and optimised... in a production environment that's critical stuff.... We don't and can't work with flakey software. C12 has proven a bit of a nightmare judging by many accounts on this forum, so we've skipped it. Not something we want to have to do, ever.

[shortcirkuit]

this is my experience 1000000%.  its 2024 and i feel like im using a pentium machine from 2002.

Update from my testing:

- Show Textures in Viewport ON/OFF = No difference (using standard ShadedViewport, no HQ)
- Materials applied to scene or existing only in material editor = No difference
- Type of material, amount of textures = Some influence?

I have very optimized Windows setup. No ControlFlowGuard, Ultra-performance mode, higher-process priority for 3dsMax, no network setup (all files local, full-path mapped. It's nothing to do with this.
I have zero plugins in 3dsMax. It's not that either.

It's Corona/Corona materials.

I can replicate ultra-slow material editor with single object and two materials in material editors. Since to me even fresh resetted scene just swapping two default Corona Material Editors are like 1-2 seconds to switch.
It's nothing to do with my Windows or PC, 3dsMax Physical material take 0.0001 second to switch. It's instant. It's just Corona material that is immensely slow.

And once I start IR, it's just catastrophe. I don't remember if it was always like this.... but I've been on big PCs (Xeons, Threadrippers) for so long that the issue might have worsened with that, or with just later Corona versions. I don't know, I have no frame of reference. But it's massively frustrating.

[Ink Visual]

As a studio we naturally delay updating to latest release of any software for couple of months until all the bugs are fixed (and the right moment in production timeline arises).
In the past we were always pretty confident with Corona updates though, getting any new release very quickly on board. This is not the case anymore, just like Alex said, we skip more an more updates reading about issues/experiencing them ourselves.
As far as I remember we had to skip C10 and we are definitely skipping C12 now. I guess it's hard to keep the balance between innovative features vs stability/optimization but atm we definitely feel like Corona would benefit more from the latter.

I remember when Autodesk announced their major "Small Annoying Things" 3dsmax campaign, where after years of angry commenting from customers they finally understood that we wanted all those small but workflow-slowing bugs, weirdnesses, or lack of vital tools to be fixed/implemented. They held various user group meetings with their department head(s) (I was at one in London) to actually get this feedback 1:1. It never quite hit the mark fully but it was a great period and had a very noticeably positive impact on 3dsmax, and I think the attitude has carried forward there ever since. Naturally, the issue nowadays over there is a massive lack of innovation within 3dsmax, so it could certainly be fairly argued it's gone too far the other way!

Anyway, it's something to think about. I've often wondered if Corona development would be better handled by making existing-feature improvements, bug fixes just like this happen to point version updates/hotfixes e.g. 12.1, 12.2 etc. and saving the new feature updates for major versions (and not necessarily every major version). In that way perhaps it would be possible to delay major new features being worked on and pivot development to addressing sometimes very serious bugs within the current major version in a hotfix - as many as needed - maybe 2, 3 or 4 x. In recent times there have been instances where potentially show-stopping bugs have had to be left for some future major version update because it's too late to shoehorn it in, causing frustration in the userbase (reasonably so...). As a studio, we have completely skipped 2 or 3 major versions of Corona (maybe 8, definitely 12) because of this situation. And if that reminds anyone of how many of us work with 3dsmax then I'm not surprised! Since 3ds max 2008 or so we have ignored every other version, because it's pretty well-known that the odd-versions are usually where the bulk of new features are introduced, and the even version is where they're bug-fixed and optimised... in a production environment that's critical stuff.... We don't and can't work with flakey software. C12 has proven a bit of a nightmare judging by many accounts on this forum, so we've skipped it. Not something we want to have to do, ever.

[arqrenderz]

We are on the fence too about upgrading to Corona 12, too much unresolved problems on the forum vs no useful features for us and our workflow.

[shortcirkuit]

probably not a popular opinion on what im about to say - but the latest VFB, for me atleast, is slower.  I used to be able to copy and paste the render (while rendering) and paste it into photoshop.  It was never so laggy.  Now, its extremely laggy while rendering.  I find the tone mapping setings are also.

[davemahi]

We have also been skipping releases, and will be for this one as well. Bizarre what is going on with the updates in my opinion.

[lupaz]

We skipped version 12 as well. First time we skip a version.

[shortcirkuit]

probably worth a try - i havent tried yet but will later this evening.
https://cganimator.com/csgpuhittest/

Here is an extract from the page:

"So, what the heck is GPU hit test?

When navigating the 3ds Max viewport, 3ds Max often needs to determine what is underneath the cursor.

For example, in 3ds Max, when you hover over an object, it shows the object’s name under the cursor. When zooming or panning, 3ds Max must calculate the cursor’s 3D position. Similarly, when selecting an object or sub-object, 3ds Max needs to determine what is underneath the cursor.

This process is called hit testing. 3dsMax cast a ray from the cussor point and detect that the ray hits. So, as you can expect, the more object and polygon you have, the more time

Around 3ds Max 2014, when the development team was focused on improving hit testing performance, they created a GPU-based version of hit testing. However, this approach had some issues, and since 3ds Max still had a software driver mode that relied on CPU hit testing, the team decided to improve the CPU version instead. Eventually, they achieved similar performance with the CPU, and the GPU version was gradually forgotten.

However, the code for the GPU version was still present, and it could be enabled using Maxscript.
Now, in 3ds Max 2025.2, there is a bug in CPU hit testing, and enabling the GPU version can be used as a workaround. Interestingly, after a decade of GPU advancements, it also appears to deliver better results."

[pokoy]

No, this doesn't interfere with the material UI in any way. The 'trick' (which is a workaround for a bug really, and only for a few Max versions where this was added) only applies when you hover the mouse pointer in a viewport and get close to geometry, it tries to determine where to put the orbit center, not related to UI performance for the material editor.