Any features you'd like to see implemented into Maxwell?
By cgbeige
#306442
great news. I just hope that the 2.0 upgrade isn't too expensive since I just paid for VRay for Maya to replace Mental Ray for my quick renders.
By Cadhorn
#306452
Maximus3D wrote:I'm glad to see i was now proven wrong about IES for Maxwell. :)

/ Max
I didn't think it was going to happen either! :shock: :o :D

Now I hope "soon" (release of 2.0) = soon and not uh... the typical 'soon' in next limit speak (6-9 months?).

Tangent: I'd love to hear some of the programmer's stories about how they overcome certain obstacles in bringing features to Maxwell... but I suppose that's proprietary information that would aid their competitors.
User avatar
By macray
#306453
IES in Maxwell still sounds strange - but it is measured by the companies, so it's physically real and therefore Maxwell can use it?!
Sounds strange and really like a lame excuse but a great feature will be there in future and I cannot wait to play with it!

I wouldn't have thought this possible - but looks like the reality strikes back. :D
By Cadhorn
#306473
macray wrote:IES in Maxwell still sounds strange - but it is measured by the companies, so it's physically real and therefore Maxwell can use it?!
Sounds strange and really like a lame excuse but a great feature will be there in future and I cannot wait to play with it!

I wouldn't have thought this possible - but looks like the reality strikes back. :D

Maybe it's a language/translation difficulty, but what uh... "lame excuse"? what are you talking about!? :D

In other words: IES in Maxwell is a lame excuse for __________? If you're thinking it's a better idea to model the light fixture + emitter to exactly match the real world output... I strongly disagree. I've been down that road half a dozen times on different architecture rendering jobs. Trust me it's no fun making super-detailed models of reflectors and emitters just to get a simple (and typical) light pattern on a wall.

Or, if I've totally misunderstood your point, ignore this. I'm just really happy about the idea of using IES data files in Maxwell.
By zdeno
#306474
about month ago I saw in speed/noise comparision that caustics solved much faster, then I thought (think?) GREAT ! I can make IES much faster than usual !

and today KABOOMMM! IES news ! so sweet, at last !


IES WE CAN !!
IES WE HAVE !!
IES WE ARE !!
User avatar
By macray
#306479
Cadhorn wrote: .... If you're thinking it's a better idea to model the light fixture + emitter to exactly match the real world output... I strongly disagree. I've been down that road half a dozen times on different architecture rendering jobs. Trust me it's no fun making super-detailed models of reflectors and emitters just to get a simple (and typical) light pattern on a wall....
That's exactly what I meant. You can do it. I did it myselves several times. Not that it was fun, but it works as it should without any external data.

You can do everything accurate and physically correct in Maxwell. Until today I'd have the idea of using IES refused as physically incorrect, because you CAN model it and get the appropriate light according to the model. To use the data otherwise that is given by the producers of the lamps is a lot easier and still correct.
Therefore I can live with the idea of IES data and really looks forward to use it in my renders.
By zdeno
#306491
@def4d

I have realize this.
I watched You looong time Neo.

even at this moment I see Your back!

KNOCK KNOCK !!
By zdeno
#306552
recompiling matrix kernel - I am an architect BTW.
and buy some vodka - You asked - don,t You remember ? didn,t take Your pills ? easy easy ....
By zdeno
#306560
of course not . I had hamster when I was young, till then I can,t it something like rabbit.
but You have to be carefull there is a possibility there is a little xenomorph in this one.

I live in Poland I have to drink, it is some sort of legacy ;) (joke)

So, is this a known issue?

Thanks a lot for your response, I will update and […]

did you tried luxCore?