Maxwell Render | Official public forum

I'm all of a sudden getting bad fuzzy output from the same model/materials since applying the patch. I saw that there was a scattering issue with the c4d plugin, that's not happening here is it?

I see in Maxwell Render that Scattering is set to 50%...where can that be turned off?

You can change the default; go to Scene Manager > Output, enable Scattering, set it to 0, disable it again, then in the page's toolbar click Presets > Defaults > Store Current. Of course, if you have made other changes to the Output page, those will be stored as well, so you may want to open up a fresh instance of Rhino first.

hmmm, scattering apparently was not causing the problem...think I'll go walk the dog...need to put this away for awhile OK, I've calmed down a bit...walking the dog...good therapy, good for him too First image, before patch:

second image...nothing changed on my end,AFIK, this is after the patch:

I'm seeing this too...chalked it up to how MW goes about resolving scenes which may be different from 2.0?

jvm

Well, the first one looks like it has scattering on.

JD...any idea what's going on? This is another one of those moments that I'm ready to walk away from all this and take up my pencils and watercolor brushes....I've got so much time in this, learning, practicing, and now this

As I said, the first image looks like scattering is on - the second one, I am not clear on what I'm supposed to be diagnosing. It looks like a picture of a roof under physical sky - it doesn't look fuzzy here.

The fuzzy comment was about an image (not shown in this post as the closeup test of the roof I rendered afterwards is showing the problem much more clearly) I rendered of the entire house after having added brick...I just noticed that the sky dome (not phys sky) was enabled...as far as I remember I had the phys sky set before, so that would explain the different lighting and make it look less sharp ("fuzzy") to me.

The big issue is how Maxwell is (now?) rendering the same roof....look at the first four courses, they are lighter, and also some weird transparencies going on...it's just downright ugly. The thing is that I have not changed a thing in the model except apply the brick texture to some of the walls.

It looks to me like the texture mapping went bad.

Sorry, I wasn't even looking at that aspect of the image. So, without an actual file to look at:

- what version of the plugin did you save this model with before opening it and rendering this time
- what does the material look like? (I mean, how is it built)

It does look like it might be a mapping problem, I think I am seeing individual pixels - is that correct?

my fault, I had drawn your attention to the fuzziness of an image I did not even post.

anyway, I think we're on to something. The file was saved with MW v2.0 and the plugin would have been the latest one BEFORE 2.05. It was opened with MW v2.01 and the 2.05 plugin. I think I see where the problem is, the materials had 2 layers each with their own BSDF, now I'm seeing one layer with 2 BSDF's.

UPDATE: testing now...that was the problem, all the bsdf's came in under one layer. I fixed it and all is well. So is EVERY MXM we bring in going that have that issue?

ONE MORE UPDATE: the render is coming in REALLY sharp and clean! Wow, what a difference!

It sounds strange that a material like that would've been modified by the plugin. There exists a very specific case where I have to get rid of superfluous layers that have been written into pre-2.0 materials (and identify and fix 2.0.1 materials that fit that profile but were happily read/written by 2.0.1), but that should be a rare situation.

I'm quite positive that I created these materials with one BSDF per layer in MW 2.0.

Could the fact that I used this roof file as an attached "xref" file in my house model have anything to do with it? Anyway, I'll keep an eye out.

I just checked the rest of my materials in the main (house) file, and there are indeed some pre-v2.0 materials that have the same issue.

OT: I noticed in a material from the MXM gallery that had a base layer with basically no material description on it, and then had two Additive layers over that. In such a case, should one always create like an "empty" base layer to add to? I don't know if my question makes sense or not?

Don't want to get inbetween this discussion as my issue may be separate and unrelated, but I do think I'm seeing a fuzziness with ver 1.x materials...doing a little more testing.

jvm

Let me know if you find anything you think is suspicious. Not sure if you are aware of this function, but if you select some materials in Scene Manager > Materials then right-click, there is an Export Selected function; it will export all the selected materials into a single-file material library, and copy all the textures they use to a /textures folder next to the library file. That makes it easier to pack up a bunch of materials - you could then send them to me so I can take a look at exactly what you're working with.