[DELETED]

DELETED

[Thomas An.]

I dont' know if that is off-topic.

Maxwell is based on real physic laws ,so in the future, is planned to give in Maxwell analysis tools for illuminance and luminance , using the CIE parameters and IES profiles for lights ?


tks.

Is this related to item:
(Q051129.W001.0029.Maxer)

Please, everyone, it would be great if we try to make an effort not to include duplicates.

Many Thanks,

[max3d]

Will the scenes setup with the Beta version renders with RC1?

no

EDIT:
old mxs from beta won't render in rc or v1.0

Your signature line makes this less convincing

To free the topic of these kind of remarks, I opened this topic http://www.maxwellrender.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=8859

Thomas, isn't it an idea to refer to this 'support' topic in your openingspost?

[campomanes]

site insertion is when you have a picture and you want to align the camera to match the picture camera.
Generally you give3 referense points in the picture, give the distance and the camera aligns accordingly

[michaelplogue]

Will we be able to use the emitter within a sub/multi material, or will we only be able to assign emitter materials to stand-alone objects?

[Thomas An.]

site insertion is when you have a picture and you want to align the camera to match the picture camera.
Generally you give3 referense points in the picture, give the distance and the camera aligns accordingly

Thanks for the explanation. Orthographics would be a different question because they don't show perspective... plan and elevation views, in other words.

I think this is related to item:
(Q051128.W001.11.Nicolas Rivera)

You have beed referring to the wrong item (you have been referring to W001.0008.Nicolas Rivera)

[noseman]

Will cooperative render work on mixed Mac & Win networks?
Thanks.

P.S. great idea putting this Q&A topic up guys!

[Kabe]

offset lens be present in 1.0 ?

That question is on the first page and it escaped, it seems. So, to put the question a bit clearer:

Does M~R support camera offset, which has an important application in architectural exterior shots to eliminate vertical skewing?

Kabe

[Thomas An.]

offset lens be present in 1.0 ?

That question is on the first page and it escaped, it seems. So, to put the question a bit clearer:

Does M~R support camera offset, which has an important application in architectural exterior shots to eliminate vertical skewing?

Kabe

No it didn't escape.
Its in item: (Q051128.W001.014.baboule)

[oz42]

I've asked it in a seperate thread but I thought I'd add it to the official list:

"Will files created in RC1 work in Final 1.0?"

[Thomas An.]

(Q051129.W001.0031.rivoli)
is there any plan for supporting different render passes (such as diffuse, reflections, refractions and so on)? can we expect it in a future point release, if not in version 1.0, or is totally incosistent with the technology maxwell is based on?

Rivoli,

Do you think the earlier Victor's response is sufficient for now?
Do you need any clarifications ?

http://www.maxwellrender.com/forum/view ... hp?p=83425

- Is there any pass support? we all know how important pases are in film production. It fine for still renders of interriors, however film approach requers more elaborate and flexible techniques.

We support alpha, z, cosine camera and normal. We will be adding more if needed.

[tom]

(Q051129.W001.0038.oz42)
There's no such guarantee, MXS may be subject to change during RC period. (-edit)

(Q051129.W001.0037.noseman)
Yes, this is actually mentioned in the latest whitepaper.

(Q051129.W001.0036.ginoso)
Yes, there are plans about illumination analysis tools in the future.

(Q051129.W001.0035.michaelplogue)
This question is not core related, but plugin. Questionable.

(Q051129.W001.0030.adehus)
Licenses are not transferrable.

(Q051129.W001.0028.u.biq)
Bug list is currently very short and this is good comparing to many applications. Yes, it will be moderated/organized better. We are already cooperating with advanced users about plugin based bugs.

[Thomas An.]

(Q051129.W001.0038.oz42)
No, MXS file is now enhanced.

Hi Tom !

Just to clarify. He means to ask if the future RC1 (friday 2nd) will be compatible with the future v1.0 (Dec 22)

Also, what (Q051129.W001.0035.michaelplogue) asks is if one the layers could be an emitter layer (but I could be wrong)

[tom]

Just to clarify. He means to ask if the future RC1 (friday 2nd) will be compatible with the future v1.0 (Dec 22)

Oops!
(Q051129.W001.0038.oz42)
There's no such guarantee, MXS may be subject to change during RC period. (-edit)

Also, what (Q051129.W001.0035.michaelplogue) asks is if one the layers could be an emitter layer (but I could be wrong)

Well, let's make the questions clearer before pulling into pool.
I may not answer depending assumptions.

[Thomas An.]

Just to clarify. He means to ask if the future RC1 (friday 2nd) will be compatible with the future v1.0 (Dec 22)

Oops!
(Q051129.W001.0038.oz42)
There's no such guarantee, MXS may be subject to change during RC period. (-edit)

Also, what (Q051129.W001.0035.michaelplogue) asks is if one the layers could be an emitter layer (but I could be wrong)

Well, let's make the questions clearer before pulling into pool.
I may not answer depending assumptions.

Thank you Tom !

michaelplogue, can you please clarify item #(Q051129.W001.0035.michaelplogue)

Thanks,