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 - oddvisionary

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 13
You need to first understand how it works in real life : It has some kind of LED diodes light inside, the light is being then reflected from the metallic "mirror-ish" material inside and then emitting from inside to outside by going through a orangy glass material.

I would suggest you to : do not make your entire surface full of LED, but only the center, like a real light diodes

The Bloom and glare will give you a much better result this way, as it is more physically accurate. It's a win/win.
You also need to use correct measured light intensities in order to not have a mess of glare everywhere.

Corona Renderer for Cinema 4D - general / Re: car lights
« on: 2018-11-06, 18:09:47 »
Try the same and use Corona materials instead. I did not watched the tutorial but it might work.

Gallery / Re: mediterranean style
« on: 2018-11-06, 18:05:16 »
Beautiful mood (I love mediterranean style, which I'm from), details and lighting. Especially the night shots.

On the day shots (I'm guess the first three ones are day-lighting?) the lighting is not natural. Looks like a white area light/softbox and doesn't feel like the sun.

Any Behance link ?

Feature requests / Re: The most wanted feature?
« on: 2018-11-06, 17:39:14 »
I've said it before, but I think real, realistically usable caustics will actually bring about quite a significant improvement in image realism and aesthetics across CG as a whole, so this will always be at the top of my list.

People just under-rate "caustics" and perceive it as a "fancy rendering thing" while it's surrounding us every day in real life on some daily simple objects.

I paid more attention since I made some study/used caustics in 3D and it's crazy how many times I saw caustics coming out from simple plastic reflection (strong caustics) and of course metallic/glass etc.

Especially in Arch Viz/kitchen but not only. Automotive has it too and not only on wheels or paint. So many exemples....Glad I'm not the only one.

Your welcome. And yes, I totally understand.

I personally am very satisfied with the native fresnel shader for exemple, which I almost use all the time. But sometimes I feel like a custom one can be better, also not very obvious for someone new to the node editor and corona, to know where are all the compatible nodes. They mostly all are anyway.

Ok, I understand now, it wasn't that clear from your first post, because "texture" is just one of the shaders in C4D lingo. But nevermind that, I see what your point is now and I think that the projector shader should do exactly what you want. That said, I just tried it in R19 with Beta 2 and it doesn't update correctly, so that will need to be fixed. But if we put that bug aside, why wouldn't the projector shader suit your needs?

I tried every shader that has an option to resize, including triplanar, nothing worked. I thought I was missing something so I made this post but I should report next maybe. And I requested features as well.

Projector node : it didn't work at all. I  tried just right now it worked, now I don't remember if it was before or after I installed Beta 2 final. But project has a 3 axis resize option and doesn't have a chekbox to resize them all at once. Also, I cannot plug in a float value in the size input since there isn't one. It's a quick way to change the value without scrolling the entire shader.

it also has uncessary options such as projection mode : spherical as default. this option is not changing anything.

This is overall why I prefer custom made shaders, as they are 100% working and compatible with the option the renderer can handle and no external options (in this case, options that C4D handles).

Thank you for your time!

Look at the attached picture. No projector shader is necessary...

Hi Houska,

Please have a look at the Octane attached GIF. This is a per-texture option, not overall material in the material object tag.

I added a request for all missing nodes etc here :

Work in Progress/Tests / Re: Automotive Look Dev
« on: 2018-11-05, 09:38:11 »
Corona Swirls R&D - Look Dev

I tested Bump only and Normal maps only.
It's faster with normal maps but should be easier with bump. Waiting for an improved Corona_bump (too slow to "compute" hi res micro detailed map for now).
The bump value is very very low in case someone is wondering. Pretty much the only thing to know when doing micro surface details such as Swirls.

Still need improvements...

Work in Progress/Tests / Re: dubcats secret little hideout
« on: 2018-11-04, 16:44:14 »
I meant : dubcat doesn't have all the answers yet. He is still figurring some stuff out as I am myself. Maybe confused wasn't the correct term here.

There is hidden informations that he has no access to as well. Anyway. 

I need help / Re: Car Swirl marks
« on: 2018-11-04, 15:35:53 »
(...) and turned down bump strength a lot, like 0,05.

The bump in Corona is weird. I added a very very low value as well. Preview of my R&D (I generated procedural maps myself). Rendering complex tiny bump details with Corona is very painful as it takes ages to compute. I heard they are working on improving it somewhere in the roadmap or the forum. I hope it has to do with how it's calculated micro surfaces...

General CG discussion / Re: octane 4
« on: 2018-11-04, 13:31:04 »
Looks like I'm having a conversation with a fanboy which is the kind of people I'm avoiding on social networks such as FB.

If you don't know what light transport is for, there is no point for me to have this close minded conversation. As I am not here to defend my life on any renderer (they all have pros and cons)...

...I'm out.

I need help / Re: Best caustic pool
« on: 2018-11-04, 13:28:27 »
It will be obviously slower. Caustics or any advanced light transport simulation will take longer time as it is more complex. It's currently not possible to have a production ready light transport than is in real time. But we are getting closer everyday.

The attached image is what should be coming one day in Corona. More news on the discord server, link in my signature.

General CG discussion / Re: octane 4
« on: 2018-11-04, 11:13:32 »
I know. I mentioned Fstorm has optimization if you saw it. Which is great! But doesn't make it a production ready renderer. Octane took a long time before it became one. I would even say that V4 is marking the production ready classification of Octane. Lot of workflow features that are must needed.

Engine wise, Octane is superior, as it's a light transport engine with PT and PMC (similar but not the same, as metropolis light transport) - he has like Fstorm, a very good internal ColorMatrix/tonemapping (Fstorm is a bit more impressive regarding tonemapping). Fstorm has GeoPattern that is very powerful but Octane is not missing a lot of features to be honest. He has a very strong nodal based material system and much more.

It's currently THE best GPU renderer available in C4D. But OTOY has to improve on communication and deadlines/listening the community requests a bit more.

General CG discussion / Re: octane 4
« on: 2018-11-04, 08:43:50 »
I got tired too you know, did not octane for almost 2 years and switched back to CPU/Corona until it gets better on the GPU side.
Well, it is already better on the GPU side. Much better. We are very happy with FStorm and its development. There‘s one guy (!) behind it who actually knows what he‘s doing, making the plugin better with every release instead of a million dollar company fixing one bug but adding five others.
FStorm is superior in every possible way.

„FStorm you say. But the guy stole all the code from Octane and just put a different name on it!“
Nope. He was just one of the key developers for Octane and left the company after getting sick if it.
He created his own engine and, of course, got sued. Because they knew he‘s capable of creating a serious competitor. All of the hilarious charges were made up just to take him down but he won the case in Russia. Otoy - shady company.

I was only talking for Cinema4D...Of course, on the GPU side, there is a lot more solutions, as you mentioned, Fstorm is one of them. List is getting pretty long now.

And I have to disagree objectively, Fstorm is not superior. It has some optimization, fancy features but he is not superior. You don't know how to compare Octane to Fstorm technically speaking. I'm not a fanboy of anything/anyone (as I saw some people are), facts are just here.

And I'm not taking sides on Octane VS Fstorm lawsuite. I don't care much about their fight (now finished). And yes, I know Andrey is the only one for now, but has some people to help him for the rest. As a solo dev, he is very impressive.

PS : Fstorm will join Cinema4D. Andrey announced it unofficially.

Corona Renderer for Cinema 4D - general / Re: Lights C4D
« on: 2018-11-04, 05:17:46 »
@ oddvisionary: Use the SPREAD option in Corona light for more directionality.

"SPREAD", means ? new to me.... I am not seeing any spread option in Corona Light ?

My bad, "spread" is a term used on another renderer but it does / means the same thing. Here it is, in yellow.

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 13