Maxwell Render | Official public forum

Hi,
I'm working out how to use SSS effectively, and can't get a handle on this problem. IGNORING the colors, the reflections, etc, and only looking at the SSS; what can I do to improve (fix) the difference between the two. In the real photo, you see that the wax is "brighter" in the middle than the top and bottom (eventually, I would like to see the color change as in the real wax, but for now, I want to focus on this). The Maxwell wax is the same level from top to bottom; the real one does not do this. Is it just my settings? If you tell me that this is becasue SSS isn't fully implemented to do this, I'm ok with that and can wait. If it's something I'm doing wrong, please give me a tip. Thanks!

"REAL" photo


Maxwell (after about 17 hours...)


Mike Tripoli

I think you need to post a screen shot showing the detail of your setup, especially the emitter placement. is the candle modelled acurately as the one in the photo, i.e is it hollowed out to the point of the wick tip ?, from the photo it also seems that your candle is ornage/red and not yellow, is the sss mat also orange/red ? surely these points need to be considered. Does one of the emitter types have accurate light falloff ? Maybe you could experiment with others to see if they change the effect.
All this bearing in mind that sss is at a basic level atm !

Edit: I'm doing a qucik test for you, modelled as i would expect a candle to be, i'll post the results and 3dsmax 6.1 file for you to compare if i get desired results.

Results.

MAXWELL 1_2_2a_beta ( Engine core: rs1c )
[ Physically and Unbiased Based Rendering ]


## Scene Information ##

7 meshes ( 10066 triangles )

## Render Information ##

*settings:

resolution: 800 x 600

*render time: 0 hours 39 minutes 28 seconds

target sampling level: 25
sampling level reached: 9

MaxwellBench 1.0: 10.857177




sss candle.max

Hehe. I agree thats some answer. BIG LOL.

Credtis to Philip.

knowledge dosnt come easy...

Owned.

_Mike

I can't open the mxi file and I'm using 1.2.2a same as philip

It's not an mxi file, it's a 3dsmax file, here's the "mxs" file for that scene.
The original image used an emitter for the candle light and skydome, this mxi file uses an emitter for candle light and an emitter spherical environment.

candle.mxs

Hi Philip,

Thank you for your quick response. I'm using Lightwave, and I'm not getting the same results as you. It *could* be that the material settings aren't the same, or not as fully implemented as 3dsmax. I've posted parts of my scene here. I have modeled the candle to the exact "real world" dimensions, using 1 emitter (kind of shaped like a flame, started as a cylinder, I just pushed it around a little). One more emitter plane for some general lighting of the scene. Everything was measured to be accurate. Again, I'm less concerned with the colors as much as the effect. Here's a couple of snaps of the scene setup:




I would not have thought that there would be a difference once the scene has been "converted" to MXI, but maybe there is between Lightwave and 3DS. Obviously, you are getting the correct result, and I am not. The one thing I don't see in your settings is the for the diffuse settings for absorbtion and scattering( the wax itself). Could you share those as well? Again, your help is appreciated.

*** A note to the "other" posters *** Philip responded in the manner in which we would hope that everyone on the forum would; with good information and the spirit to help. Far be it for me to chastise anyone, but comments like "owned" are far from helping. Let's just hope that one day should you need help, you get actual help, and not some facetious remark.

Mike Tripoli

I agree mike, there's no need for these inbetween coments at all, no help there what so ever guys

here's some further information for you mike.





hope this helps, i could always export the model for you, which types would be suitable and compatible for both max and lw ?

mtripoli wrote: Far be it for me to chastise anyone, but comments like "owned" are far from helping. Let's just hope that one day should you need help, you get actual help, and not some facetious remark.
Mike Tripoli

It wasn't facetious, as much as it was in good fun. I suppose I could've put a little smiley there and then you wouldn't have gotten your panties in a bunch, but I refuse to use emoticons every three sentences just to stop self-righteous, humorless reactionaries like you from playing thread police.

Lighten up. His post was a killer response and it made me smile. Sometimes people poke good-natured fun at one another, and it's neither malicious, nor in need of your intervention.

Oh, and


_Mike

hope this helps a bit....

cy,
Andronikos

You know, with charts like those, and a little recruiting by NL, Maxwell could be the first renderer in history that ships with a useful manual. Nicely done.

_Mike

mverta wrote:You know, with charts like those, and a little recruiting by NL, Maxwell could be the first renderer in history that ships with a useful manual. Nicely done.

_Mike

thanx Mike... I am doing my best. I am sure that maxwell manual will be amazing! ...I know the guy who is responsible...

Tom where are you?

cy,
Andronikos

To Philip and Andronikos;

Thanks again for your help. I "plugged" in your settings to Lightwave; I'm getting a different result. I then went back and re-ran an old test of a simple cylinder (solid) with an emitter "buried" in the middle. I'm getting different results from the alpha to the beta (so much so that the 25% luminoisty value that I used before was like a lighthouse searchlight in beta!). I used your colors, and I don't get the nice gradient that you do. There is definetly something different between 3DsMax and Lightwave. I'm going to let a couple of these run overnight, I'll post the results tomorrow.

To _Mike: I hesitated saying anything at all because of reactions like yours. I was making an observation; you turned it into a personal attack. The fact of the matter; nothing you said bothered me past the point that I didn't think it contributed to resolving the problem. If I wanted to start a pissing match, I would state that you appear to be the typical "bully" poster that make statements you would never make to my face ("have gotten your panties in a bunch" "reactionaries like you from playing thread police"), due to "net anonymity".

Mike Tripoli

mtripoli wrote:To _Mike: I hesitated saying anything at all because of reactions like yours.

Inasmuch as you misinterpreted my post, hesitating would have been a good idea.

mtripoli wrote:I would state that you appear to be the typical "bully" poster that make statements you would never make to my face.

Mike Tripoli

A statement you're not making to my face, I notice.

_Mike