Jump to content
3DCoat Forums

L'Ancien Regime

Advanced Member
  • Posts

    2,169
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by L'Ancien Regime

  1. Not quite the bubble generation I wanted; I couldn't find the tutorial...yet, but I know it's out there. I was looking at it just a couple days ago. It's a more scientific approach to the bubble generation in ice and as we know; sine scientica ars est nihil. This is what I came up with. Somehow the first renders were mushy looking; the diffuse surface roughness had somehow gotten jacked up to .789.
  2. Aha, so I just solved the problem of ugly black worm hole bubbles in ice. The problem was being caused because those bubbles were being turned into holes in the ice cube using boolean subtract thus creating a one way Normal surface that was facing inwards only. They weren't reflecting light out like real bubbles in ice would thus they were appearing as nasty black holes. What to do? Instead of a boolean subtract, make them into beads of glass just sitting in the ice cube with no boolean subtract at all. Nobody is going to go in there and make the micro measurement that it's a glass IOR and not an ice IOR... I'll try it with ice IOR beads instead of glass... Now I've got to figure out a more effective way to distribute those masses of little elongated bubbles in more realistic configurations, procedurally. The thing is, the large numbers of bubbles/beads doesn't seem to affect the render time one bit so you could in principle go crazy and totally emulate those photos from nature. I think this is a much better solution than making the surface of the ice frosty/rough the way the Blender and C4D tutorials do it. Ice cubes are going to be in a drink or melting a bit like when they're in an ice bucket so in all likelihood they're going to not be frosty/rough, but rather wet and smooth as can be. So then you're going to have to find other means of giving them reflective inner architecture or topology to make them look substantial and not just perfectly transparent nullities. Masses of ice bubbles and rough inner crack networks added to a fairly uneven surface topology is the way to go.
  3. So I tried using boolean subract to put bubbles in my ice cube. Nothing doing. I tried tweaking the materials and photon sampling and nothing doing; it wants to make the bubbles into wormholes of darkness rather than shimmering flecks fo silvery light. Those holes look like they're on the surface but in fact they're deeply embedded in the ice cube. Back to the drawing board on that one. And even that guy in the C4D video above didn't come close to getting realistic bubbles in his cubes, as good as they are.
  4. You know if we're going to continue, and make some drinkies, we're definitely going to need some ice, though don't worry. I won't be committing the blasphemy of adding ice to perfectly good scotch. Move Tool and Scrape Tool with a few curvilinear cuts too. Got to boolean some bubbles in there. By the way, do you know what 3D Coat needs? A surface mode plane, a 2D mesh with some various algorithmic distortion tools so you can make boolean cuts to fragment objects, like the crack in that ice cube.
  5. What are you running that Octane on? the RTX 2080Ti? I would have gone that route except they were all dying when they first came out so I got the Radeon VII.
  6. So it only seemed logical to wind up the gilt glass bottle with its own caustic light render. I did it in 4K and it's got some nasty artifacts. It's a pretty rough and ready example but the caustics turned out pretty nice. Once I get a Cintique in a few months I'll completely redo it properly. One word of advice to all of you who want to try your own caustics; you can set up all the lights you need and everything looks great and then you plug in the photon target glass or liquid and son of a gun it all goes incandescent on you like a magnesium fire, especially the fluid. The answer isn't to play with your direct light settings or ambient light settings. And it isn't your photon count. It's the energy level of your refractive light. And that's not the refractive index of the light take note. It's the refractive light. If your liquid or the base of your glass container is blindingly incandescent then look into your glass or translucent liquid material and crank down your Refraction Energy or Refraction Intensity or whatever to one fifth or even one twentieth of the stock setting.
  7. Octane is a good choice. Fast and has great IOR material library. I take it, it's like Maxwell on steroids. It would be good if you did a review of it here sometimes.
  8. And I'm finding that in objects like this, it's not even worth your while to retopo them (AUTOPO or manually) and then extract maps. Just switch them over from voxel to surface mode, do an automatic poly reduction on export and render them as is. After all your render engine is going to take whatever you throw at it, be it NURBS, BREP or SubD polygons with maps and it's going to just winnow them down to mini triangle polys in their hundreds of thousands anyway, so why even bother with all the extra procedures if you're not working with something that requires a lot of maps? This just takes 15 minutes to create, set up, and render. And it's always a good idea to shrink your liquid object a tiny bit so there won't be any artifacts from an intersection between the transparent container and it's liquid contacts that will produce unpleasant artifacts in the render. eg. tumbler's scale; .01 whiskey object scale; .0098
  9. I know the perfect render engine for you to use, ultimately; Isotropix Clarisse. Rocket fast and capable of immense detail on a huge, infinite scale just like in your compositions. I talked to the guy who created it twice. An Iranian who grew up in France, a big guy, super intelligent mathematician/programmer and very friendly. All that runs on CPU. He did a personal demo for me at Siggraph in Vancouver. All that runs just as fast as you see in the videos on just a laptop, a Lenovo ThinkPad, with a ***** GPU. It's all CPU. You can do massive hyper complex intensely detailed landscapes almost to infinity in almost real time. The only thing it didn't have back three or four years ago was caustics and hyper real glass. But it might have improved on that account since then.
  10. © L'Ancien Regime Arts

  11. Am I ever happy; just getting caustics in my glass renders ended up being a lot easier than I expected though I'm sure with work and experimentation I can get better caustics examples than this. But I'll take this for now and be happy with it. I've always loved computer graphics renders of fine glass work, like high end magazine ads for perfume bottles, and now the way is open to have a hell of a lot of fun in the immediate future. And you know, adding caustics and making the carafe, it's stopper and the wine photon targets seems to have done something to it all. The glass has an extra smoothness to it, the wine has a more real quality to it. I suspect adding more photons to the mix will give a purer caustic casting of red light onto the ground than it has now with its blotches of white in there.
  12. The bottle really needed to be twisted more. The wine is sort of meh at this point.[
  13. Glass poses so many problems. I'm going to have to figure out caustics...
  14. That's what I like to see; think big, think on a grandiose scale.
  15. Two years ago? I was talking about 6 to 10 years ago. Two years ago Blender had plenty of awesome modeling plug ins to do the kind of work you posted.
  16. I'm in love. And she's in Montreal. She's the most accomplished of all the ones you've posted so far.
  17. Actually I went back to my installation of Pro Render and it had completely erased itself from my computer, nowhere to be found! Then I went to AMD to download it and reinstall it and they wanted me to form an account. They refused outright to recognize my Protonmail account. I suppose they want an ISP based mail account which is ridiculous. It's a free program. Why the security?
  18. I mean, just look at this; this is just one little detail from an immense section on rendering in Houdini with Mantra and how it's connected with lights, and cameras and materials, ROPS (Render Operators) and SOPS (surface operators) and on and on. (The Diffuse Limit is just one obscure parameter among dozens perhaps a hundred, maybe thousands of parametric adjustments In this example, increasing the Diffuse Limit has a dramatic effect on the appearance of the final image. To replicate realistic lighting conditions, it is often necessary to increase the Diffuse Limit. However, since the amount of light contribution usually decreases with each diffuse bounce, increasing the Diffuse Limit beyond 4 does little to improve the visual fidelity of a scene. Additionally, increasing the Diffuse Limit can dramatically increase noise levels and render times. https://www.sidefx.com/docs/houdini/render/limits_tab.html It's beautiful. That's a beautiful little render. And it edifies you. It's almost like it's the Holy Bible of VFX and CGI. This is how I'd like to see the manual for 3D Coat.
  19. You know what would make the best basis for a meticulous manual, in the manner of Houdini? The programmer's notes buried right in the code. // We need to multiply quantity by 2 here because they are bought in pairs cost = quantity * 2 * storePrice; All the code is annotated to avoid confusion as it's passed up and down the pipeline of labor . It should be a commentary that goes into the greatest detail not only what each tool is doing but what each parameter inserted is for and how it's linked to other operations and dynamic databases within the program. That's the kind of molecular level of information that the manual we need should be drawn from. It's not 3D Coat v2 anymore. It's a serious vital tool now, not a casual toy. That's probably an insane thing to propose but it felt good to say it.
×
×
  • Create New...