HeDaCoM Posted August 15, 2002 Share Posted August 15, 2002 check this tutorial I've found. TUTORIAL nice pictures also in their homepage http://www.jan.brookes.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
matt_vinoir Posted August 15, 2002 Share Posted August 15, 2002 i like that tutorial however pretty complicated. Jan doesn't like using override material, says it bleaches out the image. What does anyone else think about that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nisus Posted August 15, 2002 Share Posted August 15, 2002 I use an override material almost everywhere... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeDaCoM Posted August 16, 2002 Author Share Posted August 16, 2002 yes. I also think it's essential to use the override material as discussed long time ago in this community Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pburgoyne Posted August 16, 2002 Share Posted August 16, 2002 Overide is for special situations only, if you use correct reflectance values and adjusted bitmpas you wont need it most times. If you use it you are breeaking the physically correct lighting and rendering in viz and faking it, you are calculating one lighting and rendering another, the result is reduced dynamic range and reduced detail in images. This was confirmed by discreet, my advice is to get used to setting up physically based materials and lights, your life will be easier and predictable and results much better Peter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
matt_vinoir Posted August 16, 2002 Share Posted August 16, 2002 he speaks the truth. Ask jan he/she ( not sure about that one!) had a lot of experience and really feels stongly about it. By having the ambient black that seems to help but the reflectance values are of course important. if they are double what they shuld be in reality it isn't going to work. its no wonder you have to override everything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nisus Posted August 16, 2002 Share Posted August 16, 2002 hi all, As max works with standard materials (physically incorrect!) I think one would not care about a physically correct lighting and rendering in viz. Imho max/viz is not physically correct anyway like many renders claim but don't do in reality. It sounds like a way to sell their project, but not a real function... rgds nisus Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pburgoyne Posted August 16, 2002 Share Posted August 16, 2002 nisus, viz is physically based, its not 100 percent accurate but pretty good like lightscape. I fyou use the physically based materials and reflectance values you will get good results. I say this on many projects that ive rendered then been built and the results are good. To say its marketing hype is incorrect. Yes the material in viz/max was not built as a physically coreect material but the rad engine interprets the diffuse value as such in the light calculation. The viz material needs fresnel and other effects to be more real. Regardlless of your opinion if you want good result stay away from overide if possible and watch those reflectance values. Peter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pierre-Felix Breton Posted August 19, 2002 Share Posted August 19, 2002 Originally posted by pburgoyne: This was confirmed by discreetCorrect. The override Material is designed to be used in special cases only. Using it all the time creates a workflow that is difficult (too many nested materials) and cheat light levels as opposed to what is rendered. The end result is flat images. Use the reflectance indicator and stay within physically based values, even if the preview ball looks grey/dull -- in fact the material preview does not get affected by the exposure control, that's why it's usually too dark and looks visually bad -- The exposure control will pick everything up correctly at the end of the pipeline. Materials, lights and radiosity should maintain a logical balance and be scaled by the exposure control correctly. This balance is broken when the Override material is used all over the place. Regards, Pierre-Felix Breton Product Specialist Discreet 3d r&d Montreal Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pierre-Felix Breton Posted August 19, 2002 Share Posted August 19, 2002 Originally posted by nisus: As max works with standard materials (physically incorrect!) As Peter mentionned, some aspects are physically correct, others are not. All radiosity related is physically based, as well as exposure control and lights. As for how materialsrender in VIZ, we can split this in 2 categories: 1) radiosity processing == Viz uses the diffuse color only. 100% white == 100% reflectance, 75% white == 75% reflectance etc.. 2)rendering: the "cheating" portion is related to the shader (i.e. how the material reacts/render itself with reflections, specularity etc..). If you take Lightscape for example, the material reflection model is physically based. The materials are automatically raytracing and attenuating reflections. In VIZ, you have to manually "construct" this using many maps (not only diffuse textures). A great start is to use fallof maps with Fresnel effects. But really, you are on your own with that so this is what we can call "not physically based" in VIZ. Hope this helps, Pierre-Felix Breton Product Specialist Discreet 3D R&D Montreal Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ernest Burden III Posted August 20, 2002 Share Posted August 20, 2002 Originally posted by Pierre-Felix Breton: If you take Lightscape for example, the material reflection model is physically based. The materials are automatically raytracing and attenuating reflections. In VIZ, you have to manually "construct" this using many maps (not only diffuse textures). But really, you are on your own...Hope this helps, MontrealHi, Pierre Helps? No, but it's informative. Has Autodesk ever gone on record to say that they have no intention of ever developing Lightscape again? I realize that this is like needing a weatherman to know which way the wind blows, but it would show respect for customers to have the current owner be honest with its customers about their mission-critical applications. I am not opposed to migrating to Viz/Max if I must, but I keep getting signals from Autodesk people that in some ways I will be taking a step backwards, even as I pony up more cash. A few months ago I was advised by one of the top Lightscape people at Autodesk that I was better off rendering an animation in LS than Viz4 (although that had something to do with the fact that I had used LS to set up all the files). I was told the frames would render faster in LS. Does Autodesk have any suggestions for anyone who needs a (nearly) physically accurate lighting system, besides "you are on your own"? Ernest Burden III Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ismael Posted August 23, 2002 Share Posted August 23, 2002 Science Fiction If Lightscape would have been improved further; it would had adversely impacted the sales of VIZ and Max for that matter. It did not make business sense. Then enter into the picture the promise of the new VIZ "Physically Correct" again. Max too followed into that. They fall short because they are built with shortcomings that will warrant a "pay for the next upgrade" scenario. Lightscape is too good. To be made better for us would mean bad news for the rest of the siblings. Also, you had Architectural Desktop which now has a brother in Revit. What for? Well; the CAD offerings of some manufacturers is turning out to be like the soup section in a supermarket (bunch of different kinds of soup-nonetheless-soup). It will come to pass that new entry renderers will implement the "physically correct" bit and give a run to the other vendors who don't support for example true refraction and caustics; among other things like speed, in their supermarkets. Chico Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest penguin71 Posted August 29, 2002 Share Posted August 29, 2002 Can someone tell me how to get the specular highlight on a plastic object or something like this. I tried with the specular level up to 999 but nothing.I can't get the specular highlight on noone of the object in the scenes. PLEASE I NEED THIS HELP. Is it a my error or a bug of the program? Excuse my bad english [ August 29, 2002, 05:58 PM: Message edited by: stefano ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nisus Posted August 29, 2002 Share Posted August 29, 2002 check your shader: is it BLINN? (don't use phong for plastic) rgds nisus Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TAKA Posted August 30, 2002 Share Posted August 30, 2002 hey stefano Try using the "place highlight" button. Ur problem might be simply that ur light isn't oriented to show off a specular highlight. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now