Maxwell Render | Official public forum

Nope you're not the only one, i have to admit i'm one of those too who's interested in normalmaps. Zbrush is to blame for that, damn addictive program

/ Max

killerX: I'm interested in this feature too, especially as Cinema4D 9.5 can make normal maps from displacements (or something like that!). However at this stage I'm more interested in the overall Maxwell materials which look very promising with the, as yet, limited info' made available.

Hi,

Actually normal maps are being supported by the release but not the displacement maps. However they will be provided with the nearest free update to 1.0. I can hear you saying this is not a complicated thing to implement but it's a fact that the core had many vital changes in the last months and it couldn't be possible for the premiere. Normal maps will also make your day while waiting this upgrade. Thank you for your patience and attention.

Cheers,

Tom

Cool, very cool Displacement maps are essential.

Thanks for the good info Tom i appreciate it.

/ Max

I've asked this in the maya section, but i'm still not clear on what normal maps do that bump maps dont do, heres the full question...

version 1 boast support fro Normal maps, Um, well, i just have used bump maps, or I displace my objects to polys, What would be the advantage of normal mapps for maxwell? I ask this becasus Ive always been under the impression that noraml mapps were developed for REALTIME applications (games) and I dont see how they are different then bump maps when it comes to rendering in a non open GL method?.. anyone use normal maps for non gamish application, Ive done some looking around and i know you can record the Normal difference between hirez geometry onto lores, but again for me, Id rather just render the hirez, Cuz from the examples ive seen of normal mapping on a lorez geo, normal maps almost look just like bumps, with normal mapping the sides of the objects (whats oblique to the camera) still looks flat, just like a bump map on a object.
anyone fill me in on this , anyone maybe have a good exampe to share,?sorry for my ignorance on the normal mapping issue

-luke

Yes, it's true, normal maps are encoding depth in 3 parameters, X for horizontal, Y for vertical and Z for depth. The RGB values of each pixel in a normal map corresponds to this information. It's not a geometric displacement but it's far more better than traditional bumpmapping. It something between bump map and displacement map.

Oo.. now i gotta ask Tom, this might be impossible to answer now but in the coming update beyond 1.0 will we be able to combine bumpmaps, normalmaps and displacement on one and the same mesh to get those extreme details ? (maybe by using layered shaders or something like that..)

It's good when you work with Zbrush 2, then you often generate those 3 different maps and combine them on your final model once you render them. Some details pass through displacement, other via normalmaps and smaller surface details as bumpmaps. All those 3 combined would be good

/ Max

tom, great, thanks for the quick reply, Now I'm anxious to see this normal mapping used in maxwell , since the Bump mapping in maxwell before was so great. It will be a thrill to have the added two x and y type of control for the bumped appearance. I'll just have to wait a few days to see how this acctually looks in maxwell , and from your earlier post, sounds like it will be great!

-Luke

adehus wrote:Tom-

I appreciate it that you're taking time to answer about the normal mapping. Could you please also give us more info on the status of clipmaps, and the sun/glass bug?

Thanks!

Clipmaps are working. I'll give you information about sun/glass bug when I test it. We expect no problems with the new material system.

tom wrote:
Clipmaps are working.

brilliant!

tom wrote: I'll give you information about sun/glass bug when I test it.

if you put it this way it sounds as if you were the only betatester. well, you and whiskey actually. maybe he's already tested it, you should ask him.

rivoli wrote:

tom wrote: I'll give you information about sun/glass bug when I test it.

if you put it this way it sounds as if you were the only betatester. well, you and whiskey actually. maybe he's already tested it, you should ask him.

OK, it's not about betatester amount, it's about availability of features intergrated. Question was directed to me and I decided to put my very honest answer. I answer I fail, I don't answer I fail. I don't understand the point.

Thank you! If we were sure of everything, it would be actually released and would be in your hands. Integration is another concept than developing. As you all could imagine, complicated applications are made of many parts and they expected to work together without problems. Integrating these several parts is really challenging and is not a process done at once.

tom wrote: Question was directed to me and I decided to put my very honest answer. I answer I fail, I don't answer I fail. I don't understand the point.

ops, temper, temper. well, as adehus says, didn't mean to tease you tom. i was kind of joking, nothing more. i know you had lot to do lately, and i know you're working hard (and you're even out to be a daddy), so believe me: no harm intended.
it was just a silly joke.