Jump to content

DasFrodo

Cafe Contributor
  • Content Count

    631
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by DasFrodo


  1. Game Engines are great, but they are also very limiting to work with. Especially Lightmapping (which you kind of need in UE if you want photorealistic results, no idea how good RTX is by now) is a pain in the butt to work with and due to lack of previewing (like lower rez renders in Octane etc.) very time consuming. You are basically changing something that you are not 100% happy with, and then you wait for an hour for the light to compile.

     

    Of course there's also serious other drawbacks, such as limited polycounts (although not as much as it used to be) and that you just can't send a client an Unreal Engine project to have a look, since you need a powerful PC to run it. It just doesn't run sufficiently on Office PCs.


  2. 52 minutes ago, adrencg said:

    Does anyone else experience this? Most of the time when c4d crashes, it won't open again unless the computer is restarted. Is there a little tweak to something I can make in my system to make a restart unecessary?

     

    I had the same issue with R21. The culprit was an old Wacom Driver that somehow regularly killed C4D in a way that did not allow it to start up again, even though there was no process running, at all. The only solution was a reboot. Probably because the Wacom driver that was causing the trouble started again as well.


  3. 57 minutes ago, 3D-Pangel said:

    I have two 2560x1440 monitors and I agree they are perfect resolution for doing graphics work....but then again, my nose is only about foot away from the screen.

     

    IMHO, color depth, contrast and dynamic range is more important than resolution when it comes to the viewing experience in a normal home entertainment setting.  The first time I saw a 4K screen in the store, I walked up to about 6 inches away and marveled at how I could see the pores on the persons face.    Step back a few feet and  that experience goes away.  Sit down 6 to 8 feet away so that you can take in the whole image without neck strain and you might as well be looking at a 1080P image.  Same thing goes in the movies.  In fact, do you realize that digital movie projection uses and old TV technology called DLP (remember the old rear screen projection TVs)?  Well, I arrived really early for the first movie showing of the day (it was a hot day an I needed an escape to air conditioning) and up came the DLP calibration routine (three DLP chips each projecting R,G or B).  Each DLP color image was only 1080P according to the calibration routine.  That was it!! On a 40 foot screen too.  So not sure why you need 4K on a 65 inch screen.

     

    But what immediately becomes noticeable at any distance is the color banding (eg. 8 bit color) and the lack of detail seen in the darker areas of the screen or the blooming (and again loss of detail) in the brighter areas.  It all goes back to color reproduction, dynamic range and contrast.  A great test for any TV is put up a completely black image and turn off the lights.  Do you see completely black or are there subtle grey clouds all over the screen?  Well, that shows that the TV is failing to shut down the pixels completely and that will lead to poor contrast.  So resolution is just a sales gimmick (IMHO) used to demand higher prices from the consumer.  Also a great number for bragging rights along with screen size ("I have a 65inch 4K TV with 7.1 surround sound!!!"   --- "Awesome.  How many 4K movies do you have with 7.1 surround sound?"    Errr....two.)

     

    Now, a better question is when do you need 4K or 16K textures in your work?  Those files are huge!  Is there some equation that says if the object occupies this much screen space in the final render, the texture resolution needs to be this size?  For example, if I have a shot that shows a close up of a rock and it takes up 80% of the screen space in a 2560x1600 render, then the minimum texture size needs to be X?

     

    Dave

     

     

     

    I feel you. Buying screens is a pain in general. I think I spent two weeks finding a good screen for my graphics stuff that was affordable for a home setup that doesn't throw any money.

     

    I don't think there is anything computer related that is such a jungle of features, upsides and downsides of certain technologies and so on. Panel Type (not just TN, VA and IPS... there's LOADS more subtypes), backlight type, reaction time, grey to grey reaction time, black to white reaction time, energy consumption, resolution, curved and non curved, calibratable yes and no, color depth (many monitors say they use 16bit color but what they actually do is they can UNDERSTAND 16bit but just display it at 8bit anyways), color accuracy, etc.

     

    It was a nightmare. Ended up with this one: https://www.asus.com/de/Monitors/MG279Q/

    Granted, I wanted a color accurate IPS panel at 144Hz with low reaction times, and that is hard to find and not cheap. But even if you're less picky about your setup, it's still a major pain in the butt to find something. You also just can't rely on specs that the manufacturers give you. There's hella expensive IPS screens that have IPS glow from hell. No color accuracy on the planet is worth anything if the brightness changes along the edges of the screen.


  4. 24 minutes ago, Jops said:

    It is absolutely right, that the buzzword 4k sells TVs and cameras, but the resolution and sharpness of a 4k H264 stream is hardly any better then a full HD PNG sequence. But that is nothing people are concerned about as long they have 4 or 8k standing on their TV and they can be better, or at least not worse off then their neighbors. That said my customers are not end customers but companies and they pay just for what they need. My impression is that for them full HD is still a good compromise between quality and cost. And in the end customers are watching this stuff on their 4k TVs and can't see the difference. Don't get me wrong. 4k 60fps is crazy cool, but most of the time it is just not worth 8 times the rendertime over 1080p 30fps.

     

    No, it's really not. I can see it for stills, absolutely. But for animation, unless you're in the VFX industry for big budget movies like the Marvel movies it's just a waste of money.

    I forgot where I saw that, but you need either a really big TV or be pretty close to the screen to even have a noticeable difference between 4k and 1080p.

    For me the ideal resolution right now is 2560x1440. It's the perfect middleground between FHD and 4k. It looks great, is noticeably sharper and not a waste of resources.


  5. 10 hours ago, kbar said:

    Edit: Actually looks like you are using version 7 of C4D. So these tools won't help you. 😞

     

    That screenshot in the post is definitely not R7. Interface looks way to fresh imho.

     

    16 hours ago, muhchris said:

    Forgive me as I attempt to purvey the details of my question, as to structure the question in the most concise manner.

     

    We will start at the very beginning.

     

    As seen in the attached picture, within Cinema 4D, and created solely for the sake of this discussion, I create a simple object, and unwrap it.

     

    Next, in my personal pipeline, I will "Create UV Mesh Layer", and save the Texture out as a .PSD.

     

    Next, I open the .PSD within Photoshop to apply my Textures to the UV Layer.

     

    Herein begins my question.

     

    Simply creating a few new layers and dragging, and stretching textures into place where they belong on the UV, is not the problem. My lack of understanding is as follows.

     

    Ultimately, this model, and its UV, are going to end up inside Unity. I need to understand how to apply a number of multiple Texture Maps, (ie Diffuse, Height, AO, Normal), inside of Photoshop, while stretching, and aligning them to the UV.

     

    One single Texture is no problem, drag it, get it into shape etc, no problem, but let's say for every face of my simple object I need/want to not only have the Diffuse, but the Normal also. Both maps would have to be, "stuck" together throughout the placing, stretching, and resizing phase, or they will end up out of sync with one another.

     

    So that again, ultimately, when I drag the finished UV, to my object within Unity, the object will automatically be UV mapped, with all of the Texture Maps correctly aligned.

     

    I fully understand that Unity has it's own way of adding Texture Maps to objects, however, that is only going to work if you are dealing with an object that did not need to be UV'ed, flat objects such as a terrain, or a plane, or a Cube, however that will not work with a single object that needed to be UV'ed in the first place, such as my object, in which I purposefully raised the center of the top up, just so it wouldn't be a simple Cube.

     

    One may say that this question is better suited for a Photoshop forum, but I don't agree, given the approach of my question. Within a forum of this caliber, CG related scenarios are going to be more in sync with what I am attempting to do, as what I am attempting to do is almost a mainstream procedure in UV mapping, versus something that someone would/could help me with within a Bitmap Graphics based forum.

     

    I can only hope that I am explaining my scenario correctly, and/or perhaps there is a more efficient way of doing this, thank you for your time.

     

    Okay, so others in the thread have already explained how texturing for game engines works. It's an entirely different beast to something that you would do in C4D or other 3D software. Unless you're using Triplanar Mapping, probably everything is going to need a UV map. Even a flat plane. A game engine simply does not have concepts like cubic or spherical mapping unless you specifically write a shader for it.

     

    I personally have not tried or used kbar's 4D Paint yet but that is mostly because I use Substance Painter / Substance Designer for my texturing workflow. These two tools are pretty much industry standard and they do everything you could ever need for game engine texturing and especially Painter is pretty easy to get into. Photoshop as texturing tool is simply outdated by now and has been for years. People definitely work on diffuse and other textures in it, but they certainly do not use it as a texturing tool. It's too tedious and lacks even basic features for the quality of texturing that is expected these days.


  6. 22 minutes ago, Jops said:

    I am not shure about the situation others are in, but I hardly have any demands for 4k, besides projects for big LED walls and so on. I think that many customers are aware that the difference between full HD and UHD is hardly visible in everyday situations and they are not willing to spend extra money. 

     

    Judging by the average person around me, that is definitely not the case. If it was, people wouldn't buy 4k TV's left and right even though they sit so far away that they physically cannot see the difference. And Sony + Microsoft wouldn't have used 4k as their buzzword for their consoles for years now.

     

    I think it's much more likely that they simply do not want to pay  the extra price for a resolution that renders roughly 4x as long when 1080p is absolutely "enough" in most situations.


  7. Alright alright, I'll try... even if it goes against my nature as a german 😜

     

    I, DasFrodo, thoroughly aknowledge the existence and the possibility to observe these digital renditions of a F1 concept car. Please consider continuing working on them, as I can derive a certain amount of enjoyment off of them. Thank you.


  8. Yeah you're going to have a hard time building a decent CGI rig for that budget. It's doable sure, but you will have to make a lot of compromises...

    Question is, what do you want to do exactly? Because if all you want to do is modeling then it doesn't need to be as powerful.


  9. 13 hours ago, BigAl3D said:

    Most of this high-end stuff is way over my head and what I do with C4D, but it did look impressive. I thought it very odd to show off Redshift in Maya instead of C4D. Why do that? I know Redshift is available for other apps, but this is a MAXON presentation. Also, as for the new Redshift RT, it was presented as a new feature (I think). Shouldn't that be presented as "Redshift will be way faster in the next upgrade!" Why would anyone ever use a slower setting and not always use the fastest?

     

    Also, someone needs to help out David McGavran's video setup. The man looked a little disheveled, poor quality video, lighting and audio. Call Rick Barrett for help! 😉

     

    Because RT is probably going to have a limited featureset and not support everything. I'm sure there's also going to be artifacts in certain scene setups. And for everything that uses stuff that is not supported you're going to need the basic Redshift.

     

    If you rewatch the presentation you can, albeit the sh*** video quality, definitely see a difference between RT on/off.


  10. There are not many engines that support AMD GPUs. The sad reality is that CUDA has the monopoly on that, so you either need to get an NVidia GPU or live with whatever renders you can find.

     

    The only ones I know of are ProRender (integrated in C4D) and Cycles. There are probably more though. If you want to use the big boys though you'll need an NVidia GPU.


  11. There are AI upsamplers, for example it's integrated in Octane. The results are not great, and depending on the content, even horrible.

     

    This is not a normal workflow at all. Downsampling is probably more frequently used, as it gives you a nice sharp image.


  12. Most "cheap" mice that are wireless are still all Bluetooth at their core. If you want something that is not BT you need to look at Logitechs Lightspeed mice, like the G903 for example. The dongle is just as big as any other dongle, so it basically vanishes inside the USB port.


    I have that mouse, and I love it. Battery lasts a long time, you can still use it with cable if it's every empty and they even offer a wireless charging mousepad so you never have to plug the mouse in again. Of course, that is rather useless on a mobile setup.


  13. I've been working on texturing a BMW 315 PS DA 2 for a texturing contest over at thepixellab for the last couple of days. Finally finished it 🙂

    Pictures are in 4k, so please have a look at them in all their glory!

    Old_Car_01_0000_8BIT.thumb.jpg.32c9dbdcf7a846cb142ad25f2b8801e9.jpg

    Old_Car_01_0003_8BIT.thumb.jpg.bfbf18f32c6df06a4266e793439db0b3.jpg

    Old_Car_01_0002_8BIT.thumb.jpg.f572484a87d4711fada9fd8ed3514b7c.jpg

     


  14. 1 hour ago, Freemorpheme said:

    I think you have to fake it using the Spectral shift or adding a volumetric using dispersion only.

    This is currently the only solution yes. Don't recommend it because it completely detroys rendertimes. Better idea would be to do it in post.

×
×
  • Create New...

FORUMS INFO:

Dear members, we are aware of few more bugs that are still present withing the theme.We just wanted to let you know that we are working to fix them as soon as possible.
 

NEW MEMBERS:

Please be aware that we are manually approving all new registrations, due to spam prevention. Please be patient in case you cannot login right away, we will approve you within 12h or less if we decide you are not potential spammer. 

 

Thanks for understanding! :cowboypistol: