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.

Messages - maru

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 664
to the devs:

Finding - using the latest daily - i noticed one of my current scenes (a simple bathroom scene) took 18 hours to complete (5K render on a Ryzen 3970)....  baffled me why it took so long when other renders take between 2-4 hours for this size.  I then started to diagnose the issue and narrowed it down to the UVWrandomizer.  The high quality blending takes the longest while without this checked, its a little better but still longer than without using the UVWrandomizer altogether.
When i removed this UVWrandomizer, the scene rendered in just under 4 hours.  I realise you tooltip says it takes longer to computer (double in the worst case scenario), however in my case it was 4x longer.

Just a heads up. more feature I will not touch then, good warning. Is this the case only when UVWRandomizer does the blending to avoid tiling, or also the Version5 basic features like simple offset/scale ?

@shortcirkuit - could you please send us a scene like that?

@shortcirkuit and @Juraj - we currently have a similar report. It seems that the Blending option affects performance even if its effect is not visible in any way (it is enabled, but there is no random tiling). This will be fixed, but still the more reports we receive, the better.

(Internal ID=532780798)

Gallery / Re: Norwegian houses
« on: Yesterday at 14:36:30 »
Its really cool .

It's looks very cool. Literally.

Gallery / Re: Rock scans showcase
« on: Yesterday at 14:35:20 »
These look pretty bloody amazing, I have to say. Very convincing...

Careful though, this post looks a bit like an ad

In my opinion it's fine. The post is started by the author of the assets and it is properly named a "showcase" with a link to the website where the assets can be purchased.

the error is not corrected 07_07

It is not. If a bug is fixed, we explicitly state this in the changelog -

I need help / Re: Render exposure
« on: Yesterday at 11:59:38 »
In your screenshots you are showing and overburnt image with exposure 0 and a normal looking image with exposure -2. This is expected. If you render an exterior scene with exposure 0 lit by Corona's sun and sky, it will always appear like that. You simply need to lower your exposure.

I need help / Re: CShading_Shadows
« on: Yesterday at 11:22:26 »
I don't fully get the arguments here. I would need a few examples of where it makes sense for you to negate the shadows, and where it does not.

1. CShading_Shadows cannot be used to subtract from tonemapped images, i.e. linear workflow only
This is a general rule because of the way blending operations work (adding color values, subtracting them, etc). I don't think there is a way to overcome this.
As a workaround, you can save your post settings in a CONF file, then reset tone mapping, then compose your image in PS or other app, save to EXR, open in CIE and apply your CONF file.

Here are my thoughts...

Let's say we are rendering an image like this:

The object on the wall is casting a shadow from direct light. This is easy.

The object on the floor is casting a "shadow" from indirect light (bounced off the left wall).

If we want to get rid of the direct lighting shadows, that's easy:

Now I am trying to imagine what you would want to achieve by getting rid if the "indirect lighting shadows".

You would either end up with a fully black screen (if you would remove indirect lighting whatsoever).

Or you would end up with a fully black screen with direct lighting on top of it (if you would remove indirect lighting and keep direct lighting), which is basically the CEssential_Direct render element:

Or you would end up with something like pure diffuse color without any shading (if you would negate the indirect lighting in a similar way as the direct lighting shadows are negated, leaving only indirect lighting):

Or you would end up with something like pure diffuse color without any shading with direct lighting on top of it (if you would negate the indirect lighting in a similar way as the direct lighting shadows are negated, leaving only indirect lighting, and then you would add direct lighting on top of the result):

I don't think any of the above examples is desired. Could you maybe try "simulating" the effect you are after? For example, render an image, and do some adjustments in Photoshop to showcase what your desired end result would look like? (or just mark in red the lights / shadows that you would like to remove or adjust in some other way).

I need help / Re: [RESOLVED] Corona Bump Converter - Theory?
« on: 2020-07-08, 15:18:43 »
Here is the answer from the dev team:
The bump vector is computed from the input map derivatives/local difference. It evaluates the map in several places and computes the difference of the values. Larger difference in given direction (e.g. along X-axis) means stronger bump in the same direction.
It is a standard approach when computing bump from texture/height map.

Feature requests / Re: Parsing Scene more detailed ??
« on: 2020-07-07, 17:14:40 »

(Internal ID=532334849)

If you have ideas what exactly could be logged (e.g. displacement, scatter, proxies, textures, ...) and what exact information would make sense, please do share those.

To test:
- slate material editor
- compact material editor
- max 2015
- IR on / off

Update: happens in max 2015, does not happen in max 2020, 2021

Update 2: seems to be 3ds Max issue, moving to resolved, might try to fix

Hi, are you having this problem often, or on a large number of materials? If so, I think this should be fixable with maxscript, however we don't really have any maxscript expert aboard.
I will see what exactly could be done here, as it also looks like something that should be improved in V-Ray <> Corona interoperability.


Overall all scenes seems to render 2 times slower than VRay used to, thats a big problem.

Render times to acceptable quality may differ between V-Ray and Corona. They are simply two different renderers. One scene may render faster in Corona, another one may render faster in V-Ray. The issue may be however caused by some incorrect setup (either in the scene or in render settings), so taking a look at the scene and inspecting it would be the best idea.

Beside that we have a lot of issues with DR. A lot of times happens that parsing scene lasts forever and also a connection fail loop and it was evberything working nicely on VRay. We have 3 licenses with 4 DR nodes each license, but we are thinking to go back to VRay if theres no solution to this slow renders. As around the web we cant find solution for our problem im here to ask for help so we can keep using this engine that i actually love the workflow but its extremely slow when compared to VRay renders. Cheers and thanks

DR issues are often hard to diagnose. Please try the following points, which are based on our past user reports. In most cases, they are the easiest way to get the issue resolved.

First and most important thing - provide DR logs -

- Disable any antivirus software you are using on all PCs (including Windows Defender and Firewall) - this is just to check if the issue is related to this software. You can then turn it back on.
- Open your scene, go to Render Setup, deselect the small "lock" icon in the top right corner. Click on any viewport, then click on the viewport you want to render again. Enable the "lock" icon in the top right corner of the Render Setup window again. Resave your scene. Unlocking and locking viewport like this sometimes helps with DR issues.
- Refresh the 3ds Max ENU folder by either renaming or removing it. Note that this will remove all your custom ui settings, keyboard shortcuts, etc, so it is best to leave a backup of the ENU folder.

- If the above 3 points did not help, here are some other ones worth trying:

- Add custom inbound/outbound rules in Windows Firewall.
See: Creating custom inbound and outbound rules for the DR Server application
- Are you using some VPN software? If so, please stop using it and make sure you are using BB/DR on a "classic" local network.
- Do not mix Corona's DR and Backburner. Use only one or the other.
- Make sure on each computer there is only one instance of: 3ds Max, DR server, Backburner. If there are multiple instances running at the same time (for example two 3dsmax.exe processes), some issues may appear.
- Do not render from perspective view - use some kind of camera, preferably Corona Camera.
- Disable IPv6.
- Go to Windows Services list and make sure "Function Discovery Provider Host" and "Function Discovery Resource Publication" are started. Set them to automatic start.
- Make sure you have network discovery enabled.

Other than that, I would recommend contacting us at
That would be simply much more convenient that solving the issue on the forum.

Hi, I just tested this, and it works like this:
- Corona 5 - does not work at all - Corona Sky remains it its "default" appearance, even if I move the sun object around
- Corona 6 18.06 daily - works correctly - Corona Sky automatically updates based on the position of the sun object in the viewport

It looks like we will need further info and/or screenshots or video recording.

Feature requests / Re: CoronaSun Improvements.
« on: 2020-07-07, 16:05:12 »
Not a bad idea at all.

(Internal ID=532267703)

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 664