Jump to content


Regular Member
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


EAlexander last won the day on February 26

EAlexander had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

145 Great


About EAlexander

  • Rank
    Cafe Samurai

Profile Information

  • First Name
  • Last Name
  • Location
    Princeton, NJ
  • Website URL

Cinema 4D Information

  • C4D Version
    R20.026 Broadcast

Recent Profile Visitors

3,700 profile views
  1. Thanks! I think image quality is more about the user then the engine. Think of it like a photographer using a Nikon for some shots and a Canon for others. Technically speaking, Corona is much much easier to use with much less input needed. Redshift has a steeper learning curve and a different philosophy on fine controls for all aspects. I also think that Corona is better intigrafed with the traditional Cinema workflow. I still use Corona for my professional work. I added Redshift mainly for Volumetrics, which Corona is quite poor at. I now have clients using Redshift on our current project, hence the deeper dive. In learning it more, I've found that, for me, Redshift does bump and dispacment better, but it's not a show stopper for Corona by any means. Redshift will only really pay off if you have a good GPU set up, but if you are happy with Corona, keep going. Once I committed to Corona and really learned it, I could focus more on the design and lighting, and less on "rendering". Corona remains my go to for most jobs.
  2. I think it really comes down to personal preference at this point. Octane, Corona, VRAY, Redshift, Arnold - if you know how to use them and learn about lighting and materials, you can get amazing results out of any of those engines. I'm partial to Corona because I like the easy of use and I like how it handles light. That said - I use Redshift a lot and love it's material system more then Corona for some things. There is no magic bullet for rendering - it's more about knowledge of photography, lighting, composition, etc. Trial them all and see which one feels like the right fit for you.
  3. Just trying to log as much time in Redshift as possible to get comfortable.
  4. Here's more messing with curvature.
  5. The model is clean. I think the "smushiness" is the noise layering in the curvature between the black and gold layers. I've also gone a bit overboard with bump.
  6. In Redshift, I've been learning how to use curvature maps to make those worn edges, but then add noise into the mask for the curvature to break up where and how often you see it. I imagine you can do something similar in Substance.
  7. Yes, the edge wear seems too regular /patterned. I like where the piece is going though. Which render engine are you using, or is this substance?
  8. Getting more familiar with texturing workflow in Redshift for an upcoming project.
  9. Some more lighting studies in this set.
  10. Agreed. Struggled with that in this one. Wanted it dark enough for the fire to be glowing, but not a night shot.
  11. 02.26.SEARCHING FOR FATHER. The machine didn't give us answers, it just connected points in space to make the picture clearer. Where are you? _________________ I've been chipping away at this one for a few weeks in my spare time - time to move on. Based on architecture by Buro511. Modeled in Vectorworks and rendered with Corona for Cinema 4d.
  • Create New...