PixelPlow Render Farm for Cinema 4D
PixelPlow Render Farm for Cinema 4D
nerv

First experiences with Cycles4D

83 posts in this topic

Hi.

Of course you can reverse engineering the materials in the starter pack, as nerv has said. It´s a great start for grasping the "how to" of Cycles materials, and the library is usable for projects also. But not to long after looking the library, you want to ask and know more...

As 3DPangel has pointed out, the material tutorials in Chocofur´s site are great: very good tutorials and important hints for developing materials for Cycles. One of the best in the web. They has a tutorial for defining IES light profiles, even when Cycles don´t implement this light type yet: http://www.chocofur.com/ies-lights-in-cycles.html

A proof of the versatility of nodes shading system in Cycles.

 

On ‎20‎/‎01‎/‎2017 at 2:38 PM, nerv said:

The written Cycles4D manual is more detailed, and can be accessed at any point from the UI.  

Don´t forget the video manual examples, they are very well explained and easy to follow.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, JuanRender said:

Hi.

Of course you can reverse engineering the materials in the starter pack, as nerv has said. It´s a great start for grasping the "how to" of Cycles materials, and the library is usable for projects also. But not to long after looking the library, you want to ask and know more...

As 3DPangel has pointed out, the material tutorials in Chocofur´s site are great: very good tutorials and important hints for developing materials for Cycles. One of the best in the web. They has a tutorial for defining IES light profiles, even when Cycles don´t implement this light type yet: http://www.chocofur.com/ies-lights-in-cycles.html

A proof of the versatility of nodes shading system in Cycles.

 

Don´t forget the video manual examples, they are very well explained and easy to follow.

Oh definitely.  I love their video manual, both for xparticles and cycles4d.  I just thought that was what 3dPangel was referring to as "cookbook-like", so he should refer to the manual when wanting a little more on the how and why.  

 

Here's another one!  2 million particles, lots of refraction, and reflection.  My computer kind of got a little bogged down while previewing, but it rendered fairly quickly once I sent to picture viewer and stepped away. 

somenerv-DILVVE.jpg

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cycles is one of the best render engines in terms of speed and quality.  For the 99.9% of scenes that don't use caustics it works great.  It's integration with C4D, xparticles, turbulence 4d, etc. is also great.  Learning the different methods to keep fireflys away takes a little knowledge, but it's not bad.  The documentation got me going fast.  Being very familiar with other render engines probably did help a lot too.  If you want something with speed Cycles might be the fastest GPU render engine available.  Better quality than Octane, faster than Maxwell, and C4D with GI and sometimes C4D without GI.

One feature I like a lot is the ability to tone down the GI, relection, refraction bounces if I don't need them and it actually does speed up the render a lot.

Here is a quick test I did converting over the bmw scene from blender.  Didn't finish all the materials.  Rendered at 1920x1080 in 2 min.

 

 

 

bmw27_gpu2.jpg

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/25/2017 at 10:55 PM, Fastbee said:

Cycles is one of the best render engines in terms of speed and quality.  For the 99.9% of scenes that don't use caustics it works great.  It's integration with C4D, xparticles, turbulence 4d, etc. is also great.  Learning the different methods to keep fireflys away takes a little knowledge, but it's not bad.  The documentation got me going fast.  Being very familiar with other render engines probably did help a lot too.  If you want something with speed Cycles might be the fastest GPU render engine available.  Better quality than Octane, faster than Maxwell, and C4D with GI and sometimes C4D without GI.

One feature I like a lot is the ability to tone down the GI, relection, refraction bounces if I don't need them and it actually does speed up the render a lot.

Here is a quick test I did converting over the bmw scene from blender.  Didn't finish all the materials.  Rendered at 1920x1080 in 2 min.

 

 

 

bmw27_gpu2.jpg

Nice.  

I have continued to really enjoy cycles, as I learn.  

I don't know that I'd call it the fastest.  I've been Alpha testing Redshift, and oh my... that thing has blown me away.  It is by far the fastest renderer I've tried to date. 

It's not without its quirks, but I'm very, very, very impressed by it.  

Anyways here's another Cycles4D render, a result of playing around with Volumetrics. 

26xBxIC5suS4MwvPG.gif

 

 

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

More fun with volumetric shading, which is quickly becoming my favorite Cy4D feature.  

somenerv-atmosphaera.thumb.jpg.54bbe327d0552f8249c394248135efc9.jpg

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looking nice...good job! :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/31/2017 at 4:24 PM, nerv said:

More fun with volumetric shading, which is quickly becoming my favorite Cy4D feature.  

somenerv-atmosphaera.thumb.jpg.54bbe327d0552f8249c394248135efc9.jpg

Okay...this is cool. 

Is there anyway to get the volumetric shading to not run hard to the outside of the volume?  That is, could you use this technique to create volumetric clouds around a planet and be self-shadowing. This is what I am after:

earth-clouds-wallpaper-4.thumb.jpg.0f641cb4b69125177e4e054a64579020.jpg

If you used the shader that you developed, it would not look right because clouds do not run hard against a perfect sphere at the top of the atmosphere.  In fact, the exact opposite of what you created would be what is needed.

Creating the perfect 3D model of the earth from space has been a pet-project of mine for quite some time.  And so far, the one thing that I have not been able to create is volumetic clouds from space that look real.  If Cycles volumetric rendering could do that, I would be buy it right away.

Dave

P.S.  That would be an interesting Cafe challenge: make a hyper-realistic earth as seen from space.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@3D-Pangel I think it can be done. I'm playing out a few scenarios in my head as I type this that could work. Most likely using particles. 

 

I'm try it out when I'm at my computer. and report back. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, nerv said:

@3D-Pangel I think it can be done. I'm playing out a few scenarios in my head as I type this that could work. Most likely using particles. 

 

I'm try it out when I'm at my computer. and report back. 

Thank you.  I would be interested to see what you come with.  Right now I am trying to get that effect by using pyrocluster to shade a bunch of tiny spheres cloned randomly to the surface of a larger sphere using MoGraph.....and right now it looks like a bunch of uniform puffy spheres cloned to the surface of another sphere.

There has to be a better way!

Thanks for all your help.

Dave

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/5/2017 at 0:56 PM, 3D-Pangel said:

Thank you.  I would be interested to see what you come with.  Right now I am trying to get that effect by using pyrocluster to shade a bunch of tiny spheres cloned randomly to the surface of a larger sphere using MoGraph.....and right now it looks like a bunch of uniform puffy spheres cloned to the surface of another sphere.

There has to be a better way!

Thanks for all your help.

Dave

OK, so the short answer is YES.  

Mind you, this is a very rough draft, and it's obviously not a physically accurate representation of earth, but it serves as illustration.  

somenerv-cy4dclouds-draft.thumb.jpg.ce9ddf6aa2fd041b1b9a052001f671ca.jpg

 

As I expected, I had to rely on particles for this (X-particles in my case).  

There are 4 spehres in the scene, but there are only two that are generating the clouds: 

1.  a sphere I named CloudTex.  Simply using this one with a noise texture that generates the particles from the surface.   Hidden from render view as it's only a utility shape.  

2. another larger sphere I called volumeContainer.   This has a normal cycles4D object material assigned to it.   The Point Density node uses the density of particles (from the emitter above) to drive the density of the volume scatter and absorption nodes.  

 

By default, things start out looking kind of blocky, due to large voxel size and small particle counts.  Bringing down voxel and volume step sizes, as well as cranking up the particle count start bringing in the detail.    

It also starts taxing your resources pretty heavily.   The results from this run still look really blocky (and noisy) and my computer was already starting to get kind of sluggish.  

So, again... YES! But you'll need to spend some time tweaking things to get it looking right, and be prepared to wait for clean, detailed renders.  

 

somenerv-cycles4dclouds-screencap.thumb.jpg.38df34ea3f196218fbe604f8bff600bc.jpg

 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The get the correct point density cloud for the clouds I would use Turbulence FD which works very well with cycles.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.