AccuRender nXt

advanced rendering for AutoCAD

One more thread, Roy, to talk about a strange behavior in e4, with the joint bump in the settings of the procedural tile material. Here is the illustration and the dwg

Views: 847

Attachments:

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Marc, what exactly is the problem here? E4 solution looks better than E1 I think.

Hi George, look at that. Don't you see that something looks inverted in the bump of the E4? Or do I have to stop my little beer of the evening? Or rush to the medecin... ;))

I posted this same observation in the Build 315 thread. The bump mapping is opposite for the Hybrid (E4) engine.

Oops:D Never stop any beer you have started to drink Marc and of course do not visit the oculist, you do not need it :D

I should better put on my glasses next time :D

But I think there is a problem with the E1 result. The third joint width looks twice as wide than the others. But it can be cause of bitmap you've used. So maybe it has nothing to do with the bumping issue you and Garret mentioned.

It's true that with the E1, the third joint is exactly the same as the others. They are procedural joint of the nXt Tile Material Editor. So it's strange... I give the dwg with materials, above, so you can examin it.

And with the E4, its seems that the joint appear in + or in - depending on the angle of vision. On the left they are good, but on the right, at the point where you don't have to see anymore the shadow in the joint, nXt produce a shadow... And so the joint looks as if it was inverted.

With an higher resolution, we can see strange crossing of the lines. Perhaps my bump is too strong...

I think the joints look funny because of the extremely wide camera lense angle. The joints that appear darker are normal to the lense while the others quickly reach a sharp angle to the lense.

The image here is using 35mm lense while Mark's original is using a 12.8mm lense.

Garret, would you pull out your car of my pool, plz!!! ;o)))

The crossing lines look strange, I have to try some experimentation but no time today...

I wouldn't waste too much time on this Marc-- the bump mapping on procedural materials is not very robust-- no more than adequate.  Use a bitmap if you want something better.

I understand, Roy.

It was practical to match the bump with the joint in the tile material. And so, to obtain no repetitive tile material, without enormous tile bitmaps. Perhaps, I have to find the way to match a bump bitmap with a procedural material (???) or accept this little problem... Or use tile material without bump... It's true that the problem appear only when your point of view is very close.

You can easily create a tile bumpmap in Photoshop or eq.  You only need a single tile.  I would work in gray scale, starting with black for the joint and white for the tile.  Careful blurring of the joint should do it.

If you're not very close to the tile, the procedural system you're using will work just fine.  Lower values for the bump will also help.

Thanks Roy. But I can't obtain that the joint of my bump map is synchronous, with the joint of the procedural material. And same problem for the width of these joints... And do I put the bump map to the "tile" settings (I use 2 procedurals in the fractal option) ? Or use it in the "joint"settings. I find it too difficult...

So forget it.

I have to accept never put my camera too close to the tiles... With procedural tiles

RSS

Search

Translate

Latest Activity

Peter Milner replied to Roy Hirshkowitz's discussion AccuRender Studio
"Yes, the glass material translated as Refractive automatically."
Dec 23, 2020
Roy Hirshkowitz replied to Roy Hirshkowitz's discussion AccuRender Studio
"Yeah-- like I mentioned the caustics are accurate but could be annoying.  Things that might alter it include changing the sun angle so it's not striking the chair's metal surfaces so directly, changing the roughness of the chair…"
Dec 23, 2020
Peter Milner replied to Roy Hirshkowitz's discussion AccuRender Studio
"Here's the latest render using metallic materials. The chrome now looks a lot better. I do feel though that the reflected light on the back wall is too bright."
Dec 23, 2020
Roy Hirshkowitz replied to Roy Hirshkowitz's discussion AccuRender Studio
"Ah-- so that's a function of the material type.  The standard material won't give you a mirror anymore.  You need to change the material to metallic and you should get something more familiar.  Use the Type popdown on the…"
Dec 18, 2020
Peter Milner replied to Roy Hirshkowitz's discussion AccuRender Studio
"Pacing a mirror on the back wall (reflections = 1.0, noise = 0.0), you can see the difference more clearly (top image is nXt)."
Dec 18, 2020
Peter Milner replied to Roy Hirshkowitz's discussion AccuRender Studio
"You can see from these two images that there is definitely something wrong with reflective surfaces. It appears the light is being reflected, but not objects or textures. In the nXt version (top image), the carpet texture is being reflected in the…"
Dec 18, 2020
Roy Hirshkowitz replied to Roy Hirshkowitz's discussion AccuRender Studio
"It's interesting-- overall the quality of this interior is very high for that short amount of processing, and may be acceptable for certain scenes.  In this one, however, there are some reflective caustics that are taking longer to…"
Dec 17, 2020
Peter Milner replied to Roy Hirshkowitz's discussion AccuRender Studio
"ARDECAL now works. Here's the image after 10 minutes of rendering. I do have a slight concern that reflective surfaces seem rather dull. This is particularly evident on the end frame of the desk and the base of the chair."
Dec 17, 2020

© 2021   Header image courtesy Peter Milner   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service