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 - James Vella

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 6
I need help / Re: Lights issue
« on: 2019-06-27, 09:40:57 »
have you tried turning 'visible in refractions' on?

Corona Goodies! - User contributions / Re: FREE 3d models
« on: 2019-06-22, 19:20:14 »
From my experience ( I‘m not a pro in this topic ) models with quads are much easier to handle if you want to re-sculpt them, for example bed cloth, curtains, etc.
Some single triangles will also sometimes be visible in some areas when rendered. In C4D normally I delete this buggy single triangle and simply recreate it. Works always.
But that’s only my observation.

I‘m sure more experienced forum members will give you a better explanation.

Anything that deforms generally requires quads as it folds better.
Anything requiring sub-d quads make this easy.

Anything else or static requires nothing more. All quads are triangles anyway when you cut them in 2 (which is how real-time engines end up converting them anyway).

General Discussion / Re: rendering large images
« on: 2019-06-16, 21:24:40 »
If you create an 8K render, and calculate it to 17m, you would get 12DPI. That's on the low side, but then again, it's a 17m Banner... That's really big, thus, I reckon 12DPI might be ok. If you wanna be on the safe side I'd go 20DPI= 13300 pixels (long side)

Hope it helps, GRTS

Correct, usually 10dpi is quite standard for billboard sizes.

Theres also some good calculators online that can help you in this regard.

General Discussion / Re: rendering large images
« on: 2019-06-11, 15:15:29 »
I second Juraj on this, ive rendered plenty of billboards never over 8k render size (up to 30 meters wide) and look perfect from the ground.

I too am interested in seeing what else everyone is up to on this topic. I had a bit of fun with the 3DLUT creator using the photo match tool - makes matching reference photography easy and then you can load this into your VFB for further adjustments (or just keep it as an adjustment layer in photoshop).

3DLUT Reference Color Match:

in render settings > scene > environment override > direct visible override put the hdri here

edit: beat me to it romullus :D

I need help / Re: Mixing colour spaces
« on: 2019-02-20, 15:38:16 »
I would personally do as I mentioned earlier, create a document in Adobe 1998 space and import the render into that. Any adjustments you make now (matching colors) will be in this space as thats what the client expects to receive.

edit: Regarding your VFB for Corona, set everything to defaults and pure white environment. If you did as I mentioned earlier your CMYK to sRGB conversion will appear 1:1. This is the base point, anything you add from here lighting wise will shift the result.

Here is an example of what Juraj mentioned in vray using the ICC profile matching. You can see why working straight from Adobe 1998 to Adobe 1998 makes sense in this scenario

Open CMYK document in Photoshop: attached cmyk.jpg

Create a blank document in Adobe 1998 Color Space, copy/paste the CMYK document into the Adobe document and save the file embedding the current profile: attached cmyk_import_to_adobe.jpg

Create Vray Material / VrayICC / Load your Adobe 1998 Bitmap, set the ICC file to Adobe 1998.icc: attached vray_icc.jpg

You are now totally in Adobe 1998 space (for this texture).

Render the file.

You can view it frame buffer in ICC Profile space: attached vfb_profile_space.jpg.

Save the render as exr.

In Photoshop create a new document in Adobe 1998 color space.

Import the render you made.

It will now have the exact same colors as the CMYK colors: attached vray_adobe_output.jpg

I have left the color profiles embedded in the attachments you can check them in Photoshop

I need help / Re: Mixing colour spaces
« on: 2019-02-20, 13:25:27 »
They are providing illustrator files. Is there anything i can do within illustrator to give myself better input data?

If you are going to render with Corona this is what I suggest for your import (other renderers can manage this as Juraj explained):

Export the CMYK document to sRGB space. this way when you load it into Corona as a bitmap its reading it close to its intended space. (you will lose some colors which is explained in the last attached image)

Original CMYK document (download the file you can open it in photoshop its color mode is CMYK): attached cmyk.jpg

If you load this into corona bitmap the colors will become saturated: attached import_cymk_render.jpg

CYMK document exported as sRGB (if you download the file and open its in sRGB space): attached cmyk_export_to_srgb.jpg

Now when you render this file it will appear the closest to CMYK: attached render_from_converted_cmyk.jpg

You can also test this yourself by using the Proof modes available in Photoshop to further check your work for the intended color space/conversion.

As mentioned earlier, its easier to start your post production file in Adobe 1998 as it encompasses CMYK which is easier to convert for press printing (not your digital print shops but I wont go into this...). The attached image shows why its beneficial to go from Adobe to CMYK: attached color_space.JPG. Working now from your Adobe 1998 post file you can overlay the CMYK Proof profile and adjust colors for this space (if they require the output in CMYK of course, otherwise use the Proof profile for their requirements - in your case you can leave it off as you are just providing the final as Adobe 1998 space which you are already working in by this stage).

I need help / Re: Mixing colour spaces
« on: 2019-02-20, 11:28:53 »
Here is a good article on it if you are interested. At the bottom in the QA there is a good explanation of going from sRGB to Adobe. (As well as a video in the link below which goes into CMYK)

I need help / Re: Mixing colour spaces
« on: 2019-02-20, 10:26:51 »
I have clients that I deliver Adobe RGB to. I will just explain the Photoshop part as the 3D part is explained above.

Essentially create an empty Photoshop document in Adobe RGB 1998 Space > File > Place linked - your render into the new document. This document will be in the Adobe space and your render will be still as mentioned above just sRGB which is encompassed within Adobe space. Just be aware all color grading from this point will be in the adobe space so you have a bit more range on green/blue but it doesnt matter if its just for delivery.

If you just want to convert a document to Adobe space just go to Edit > Convert to Profile (never Edit > Assign Profile). But its better to convert from higher profiles to lower ones eg. Prophoto > Adobe > sRGB as you gain nothing from converting up. But the file will be in that color space regardless (as what Juarj explained).


Feature requests Cinema 4D / Re: Object-Masks in Multipass
« on: 2019-02-11, 18:50:10 »
Thanks!..I will check it...but this way I sacrify a mask for glass to get the masks for objects inside?...right?

Correct, However I use the refraction pass as a channel for glass masks.

Yeah the whole thing (CamRaw) is crafty, which is why I lament every time why Adobe just couldn't make it fully functional. It would be blessing to have it work on linear files without any hassle as that would make the post-pro workflow absolutely identical to photography, one smooth process without unnecessary division between "big" changes in linear 32bit, and "small" changes after.

Now you originally mentioned the Affinity and I have to contend that it isn't as good as it appears.. we bought two licences but almost kinda regret it as while it is lot more ambitious (much better 32bit support, simultanenous layer adjustments (super good for textures),...) it's just not even stable. At the moment I am fully back at Photoshop for almost anything. It's not just's the same stuff as 3dsMax, might not be ideal, but still the best choice.

Cheers for the info on Affinity, stability is a concern I might wait it out. Another thing that concerns me is I use lightroom for my photography so the Adobe suite suits my pipeline, as well as the terrific catagorizing/tagging etc and similarities between adobe tools.

Regarding what you said about not being ideal but the best choice, I see you did a test on the ACES workflow using Davinci with dubcat - out of curiosity did you implement this workflow? Are you working in a higher gamut space or just sRGB in post? I ask because I have read the tech papers, did some tests on my own, I also work in Adobe 98 space for my photography on a wide gamut monitor for print (output to sRGB for screen), however for 3D archviz I just dont see any major advantage currently - mostly because Photoshop is the main post production tool (with the limitations we spoke about), easy to swap PSD files with other studios and if its kept in sRGB (even if its a low gamut space - which still looks great even with photography) theres no confusion along the way for input, output, space conversion, color matching, etc. I wont go into print for now, just curious about your view on the topic currently.

 edit: Not to mention I wont be remastering any of my old work, which I doubt many people do in archviz.

Direct access to 32bit file. In previous CC versions (<2018) you could have applied CameraRaw in 32bit mode. ( Of course, it would apply auto-leveling in its default mode, by you could switch to 2013 process and zero it out, and use CameraRaw on actual HDR data).
This can still be done by auto-loading into CameraRaw with "Open As" of 32bit file as .raw file. But no longer as filter.

Applying it in 16bit mode still works just fine, but there isn't much point to it without access to any dynamic range, so it's just different GUI.

Fair enough, I suppose my camera raw method is just as dirty :) Im not doing full dynamic range stuff with it just a slight few adjustments which is easier than white balancing/vignette without extra plugins. I also like the sharpen in camera raw and having the ability to switch it on/off as a smart layer filter, depends on your workflow I suppose.

But over the past two years, Adobe has changed so much how 32bit mode applies, for example excluding direct access to CameraRaw as filter (can by bypassed by direct loading),etc.. that I just concluded to be futile using it at all.

What version of Photoshop are you using? They removed Camera Raw filter?

As you mentioned I usually keep all 32bit render layers in a smart object for relighting and then in the 16bit master file (color grading file) put a camera raw filter on the smart object, you are saying this is removed now?

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 6