Interior test/Maxwell V1

[CHE]

Hi,

I just wanted to share my first serious interior test using Maxwell V1. I encounter some problems when rendering the alpha channel. I used the new AGS material for the glass (see below). Also, for some reason I could not manipulate the output file. Maxwell crashed whenever I try to refresh the solution with new parameters.

I downloaded the base model from this site: http://www.spot3d.com/vray/help/VRayHelp150beta/tutorials_interior.htm

Ernesto

Maxwell V1. Render time: 24hrs at 1500 pixels. Dual Xeon 3ghz 2 GB ram

01- Maxwell+Resize+Noise filter

02- Original alpha map

03- Original close-up

[olbo]

Hello Ernesto,

 

Thanx for the test, I'm sorry I can't help you with your problem,

but it's an interesting test anyway. I wonder why the alpha channel

seems so noisy ... ?( Is this the result of the AGS? Can you make a

quick test to check if the same happens if you use a "real" dielectric?

As far as I remember the beta rendered out a clean alpha channel very

quickly ... hmmm.

 

Some crits, ... I think some, if not the most materials are to

even, ... missing a bumpmap and or roughness map - they

are a bit to shiny. I would get rid of the guy ... he doesn't

fit into this image. And the cropped image is .... well, a bit

to cropped.

 

Just my two cents. ;o)

 

 

take care

Oleg

[AJLynn]

That's pretty good, but something's still not there. Might be the beta love. I'd suggest a bump map for the wood and a bit brighter exposure - using the Maxwell camera settings or Photoshop.

[CHE]

Yes, V1 is definitively missing something. It does not have the same lighting quality that we came to love from its Alpha/Beta predecessors. I agree that the renderings could use some more light so I will play a bit more with the exposure. Thanks for your comments.

[Devin Johnston]

Is the only light coming in through the window or does the light fixture cast any? I agree with the above comments and it's also apparent that V1 is missing what ever made the beta so attractive. The big question is will NL ever acknowledge that there is a difference and will it ever return?

[Maximus3D]

Weird.. you guys successfully ruined his thread where he wanted to show off his latest work. Good job! if you people are so in love with beta then use the beta and stop nagging about 1.0 *rolls eyes*

 

Anyways, the renderings look good.

 

/ Max

[Fran]

Che, I really don't know what to say about the renders other than they look dark, gray and noisy.

 

Devin, it will never return if NL doesn't admit there is a difference or if it is not possible with the new core. This is what we get in the end - this and some interface bug fixes. I notice that nobody has even bothered to ask about RS2 anymore.

 

This isn't so much a disappointment as it is confirmation of my suspicions about the new core since the first RC releases.

[Devin Johnston]

Weird.. you guys successfully ruined his thread where he wanted to show off his latest work. Good job! if you people are so in love with beta then use the beta and stop nagging about 1.0 *rolls eyes*

Anyways, the renderings look good.

/ Max

 

Max it's not so much a critique of his rendering as it is of the engine that created it. Can you honestly say that V1 has lived up to your expectations, and that the image quality that it has been shown to produce so far is equal to that of the beta?

[Maximus3D]

It doesn't matter what i say on here Devin as it'll be used in one way or another to stab me in the back with on this forum or on the other uncensored one so i will just say this..

 

I have no comments.

 

/ Max

[Fran]

Magnus, look at the title of this thread. In no way does it indicate that Che is "showing off his latest work". Feel-good feedback on test renders doesn't do anyone any good. At CGA, we often give frank assessments of a work and people shouldn't take them personally. And at some point, the limits of V1 have to be taken into account, or else people will be going down blind alleys and running into walls.

 

You can't expect everyone who is dissatisfied with V1 to just shut-up.

[Maximus3D]

I know Fran, and i'm sorry for what i said. Ofourse i'm a fool and i'm wrong. My mistake. Sorry again.. with apologies too.

 

/ Max

[Devin Johnston]

Max I think your taking what has been said the wrong way, I don't think anyone is upset with you personally and no one is saying your a fool. I think there is a general since of frustration from those of us who see that there is something wrong with the V1 engine. The comments on the Maxwell forum are exactly the same no matter what image is posted, my comments aren't meant to bash Maxwell but to point out that I perceive a distinct difference in image quality and I'd like to find out why. If you don't see any problems then all I can say is I wish I saw things the way you do, my life would be a lot less stressful when it comes to Maxwell.

[Maximus3D]

No i'm not taking things said the wrong way, but enough of that. The problem seems to be most people don't understand the materialeditor and that's the root of the complaints about the missing beta look in 1.0, however silly i think that is as it tells me people are too lazy to try to learn the new materialeditor, instead they resort to common complaining as it's easier. From my own experience with the new materialeditor i can say i love the way it works, the simplicity and the ease of use to create complex and good looking materials. I would not want the old simplified beta style materialsystem back as it caps the creativity way too much.

 

Ofcourse i see problems everywhere, but Devin i choose to not let those get in the way of what i do. If they constantly block my view then all i'll do at the end of the day is to sit on forums and cry over this and that instead of using what i currently got at the best of my ability. You're a clever man, you should do the same or similar, noone runs into a brickwall head first on their own will do they.. nor should you Devin. I'm aware of the coop rendering problems you have and so are NL, and about that i do feel sad it's not working satisfactory as you have alot of licenses you cannot make good use of yet. Hopefully in the upcoming patch in a not to distant future..

 

/ Max

[Devin Johnston]

Max I'm glad you’re getting good use out of Maxwell, I've produced some work with it professionally that the clients have loved but that I haven't been totally happy with. You may be right that my own laziness or inexperience is causing my renderings to suffer, however I'm still not sure how the materials that V1 uses are superior to the way the beta handled materials. They may be more scientifically correct but at what cost, there harder to make and unless you totally understand what your doing there probably not going to look very good. I'm going to be the first to admit that I don't fully understand how the editor works, or how to create realistic materials and from the images I've seen I'm not alone.

 

Since you have such a good grasp on materials would you consider writing some tutorials on the subject to help out those of us who are having trouble getting a grasp on them?

[Maximus3D]

You already used it in production, that's good to hear. I haven't even got to that level yet to put it into production but i hope it'll happen soon. And i know that the more complex materialsystem confuses alot of people, but also you could not create any type of material with tbe beta style materials as you can do with 1.0, and to take the most advantage of 1.0 you need to have a more sophisticated materialeditor aswell to give users the option to create materials as they wish, and now for the upcoming patch they're making the beta materialwizard even easier and better to use so that should make you and everyone else who have trouble understanding the more complex editor to create something. Good thing you atleast admit you don't understand how it works yet, no shame in that. I'm sure you'll figure it out soon by looking at examples, tips and tutorials on the forums.

 

About tutorials, yes i might do that later on but before that'll happen i need to repair my computer as at the moment i can't even use Maxwell, it won't render and it crashes as i start it up my cpu or motherboard or graphicscard, or all of those have fucked up sigh. I can only run programs which use very little cpu such as Opera and things like that. It sucks!

 

/ Max

[Fran]

Perhaps us "lazy" people with jobs and children are just not meant for Maxwell.

[chuck]

I have to agree, the images are lacking color and clarity. I'm sorry I don't have an answer to your problem either, but I'd try hiding the glass and rendering the alpha out....it should be fast as stated above. I think your floor needs a bump...It's way too smooth when reflecting the window/light.

 

I downloaded and installed v1 as soon as the servers would let me. Once I realized the material editor still didn't work in max, I gave up....now that's pure lazy. I want to get into animations so I'm shifting my focus back to Vray.

 

Chuck

[arquiteck09]

Weird.. you guys successfully ruined his thread where he wanted to show off his latest work. Good job! if you people are so in love with beta then use the beta and stop nagging about 1.0 *rolls eyes*

Anyways, the renderings look good.

/ Max

 

i couldn´t be more agree, but you guys still ruin his post with your complains about maxwell, come on people, just use the engine that makes the job for you and you client.

 

About the images, they are too dark, i like the reflections, maybe with photoshop you can light it.

[chuck]

no one ruined this post. there are issues with the test images, some of them due to software. the images were meant to TEST V1. i don't think the CG community should just forget about the problems with maxwell. beyond that, i think it's a huge mistake to mislead someone into thinking their images are "great".

 

one of my arch design profs would split up the final critique into two separate blocks. the first group typically had less thought and quality in their designs. the jury that came in for the first group was all around "nicer". they'd comment on what they liked and didn't like, but for the most part it was a surface converstation about the proposed buildings. circulation, materials, form, etc. most of the students in the first group came away with warm, fuzzy feelings.

 

the second group was critiqued by architects that knew design and had a passion for making good architecture. they would lay into those students...but those students came away with an understanding of what where their designs failed and what they needed to do to fix it.

 

best critique line from under grad: "here's a quarter. go tell mom and dad that you're not going to be an architect."

 

chuck

[AJLynn]

Magnus et al-

 

From Ernesto's original post I gathered that he was testing the technical limitations of the software and looking to improve. Developing technique, critiquing images and figuring out tools are some of the "core" activities on this site - it's what we do here, and it's much more effective at making all of us better artists than posting images and congratulating each other would be.

 

The crits of the image were appropriate, and the crits of the software were fair - until NL does something about the crashing and the problem that they've got a material system that nobody understands, which may very well be the reason for the image quality issues, they're going to have a lot of unhappy users.

[Adehus]

best critique line from under grad: "here's a quarter. go tell mom and dad that you're not going to be an architect."

 

I had a design school instructor pass out McDonald's applications with the final grades. Not the coolest thing in the world, but then neither is walking around thinking your work is better than it really is.

 

BTW, did NL fold up? Their site has been down for quite some time...

[AJLynn]

"here's a quarter. go tell mom and dad that you're not going to be an architect."

 

Nice one. My favorite:

 

(Pointing behind a long wall with no windows in a dark place) "And this is where I'd go to kill my brother!"

 

We don't have that at Syracuse, and that's a shame. I get weird looks when I use the phrase "dead cat space". But anybody who's ever had their dead cat spaces pointed out in a review won't have any at the next one.

[Paul Griger]

...the second group was critiqued by architects that knew design and had a passion for making good architecture. they would lay into those students...but those students came away with an understanding of what where their designs failed and what they needed to do to fix it.

 

best critique line from under grad: "here's a quarter. go tell mom and dad that you're not going to be an architect."

 

chuck

Exactly.

 

An individual's growth in architecture is founded on crit. The "WIP" & "Final" forums clearly state that crits are expected. It can be frustrating to submit work and get zero crits. A studio class has the main focus of critiquing student's work. If your lucky, as pointed out, you'll get an honest crit to enable growth.

 

The official magazine for the student branch of the AIA is called "Crit". Maybe those outside of the realm of architecture are just not accustomed to this culture.

 

BTW, I've heard the "quarter" comment as well, pretty damn funny. My professor this semester spent the entire first day telling the class of 400+ students that they are wasting their money at college and should travel instead. He asked how many in class wanted to be architects, and after most of the class raised their hands, he said:

 

"Good luck because most of you will never be architects."

 

It's not a field for those accustomed to "warm and fuzzy" feedback.

 

 

 

..and yes, the M~R images posted in this thread and elsewhere by other competent artists are a let down, not due to the artists abilities, but due to the limitations of the software. Pity that, it has so much potential.

[AdamT]

The lack of complex materials sets the OP's render back more than anything, IMO--primarily the flat, uniform specular reflection on the floor. Simply assigning an edited version of the color map to the roughness channel would make a world of difference.

 

I agree with Maximus that the material system is powerful, but it's anything but easy to use--even if you know how to use it. I was just doing a car render and the lengths I had to go to to get tinting at the top of the windshield were ridiculous; it required six layers and six different weight maps. Probalby took me 40 minutes to do that one material. Not exactly the quick-and-easy setup we were hoping for.

[Ernest Burden III]

An individual's growth in architecture is founded on crit.

 

It's not a field for those accustomed to "warm and fuzzy" feedback.

 

 

I'm not an architect and I didn't go to design school but I have done some crits at design schools, and judged a few competitions. The notion that insults can pass for an acceptable 'crit' is 'crap'. The person doing the crit has a job to be constructive and supportive even when a student has produced a not very appealing design. Faced with that you draw out the person, ask them why they did certain things in the work, try to find where they have suceeded not where they have failed, find areas to suggest they apply themselves. Saying 'you suck, go dig ditches' only points to the failure of the professor. The student get nothing from that. If teachers knew that the old crit insults would get them fired, then they would just have to come up with another way to evaluate the work of, and encourage the growth of, those they are paid to TEACH. Insults only teach that you are an a*hole. It doesn't mean you sugarcoat under-achieving work.

 

Obviously I don't have a future in teaching, though i have been offered a job teaching an architectural drawing class just this year.

 

OT rant, sorry.