Everything related to http://resources.maxwellrender.com
#314911
I agree and fully support having more tutorials but not that kind. Because, for example if you have 5 pages manual it's so weak and if you have 100 pages maybe it's cool but if you have 1000 pages, it's surely inefficient. Words, words and words, images or hours of videos which are still only input sources in learning. The only interaction happens when you dare/attempt to use it yourself and figure how it works. I think the main problem is not immediately Maxwell or the software itself. All of us should have a basic knowledge when starting to do anything and if not, the problem begins. I think the gap (annoyance factor) mostly tend to appear at this point. To be honest, I can't read a lot of books, tutorials about something as much as I want/need. There are thousands of them available on the internet but time is very limited. I believe the time is also limited and valuable for any of you. So, nobody has enough luxury to read hundreds of pages, nor even watch hours of videos about 5 topmost application they have to be using well. If it was for once, that could be acceptable but, what if the applications have to evolve and so everything else... Every single day the acceleration of improvements grow up and morph. These are really not excuses but facts. You all know and encounter what I mean. I wish Maxwell were your worst experience but I bet there are numerous other stuff you're already having similar or more troubles with and this is nothing intentionally done on you. For example, while you're hunting a problem on your hardware, that manufacturer builds a completely new one and when it's in the market they can only be sorry about the one you have had. The improvement is irreversible but you want them all both fast and perfect. This is a physically incorrect request. With enough time, we can build a spacecraft, too. And with far less time we can't even make notepad.exe maybe. What you have is done in the most optimal result with our resources and nobody can argue it was better before and you may easily justify this is something vastly improved (there are guys on this forum since alpha era who know what I really mean very well) and will even be better. In the beginning there was no single page of document, now we have a decent set of documentation, tutorials, videos and a very responsive technical support. Having 1.x tutorials with no 2.x equivalents at the same time is not the end of the world.
#314919
tom wrote:The only interaction happens when you dare/attempt to use it yourself and figure how it works.
I agree 100%. You can read and watch video tutorials all day, but they can only take you so far. The rest is experience. Mike's videos are a great foundation, the next step is experimentation.
#314926
tom wrote:I believe the time is also limited and valuable for any of you
Also 100% agree on this one ... :)
I completely understand that experimentation is the key and that a 1000 page manual is not very useful. You have to keep the information as compact as possible. But I really don't have to the time to experiment which setting causes which effect. So I have to at least know how the system works, and since Maxwell is very "scientific" some kind of explanation how these values interact would be great. How could I know that metals have a high ND value? etc. Sure, Mikes tutorial is a great start, but somehow I'd really appreciate a list where I can check things fast. Which I could maybe print out. And which has a lot of examples as well.
About the physical sky settings: there was a good explanation about the settings by one user I think. Sadly I can't find it anymore. There were a lot of example images on the effects.
#314932
Dear God !
Tom I am overwhelmed by this tons of words, but thanks for such complex eplain of Your side of view.

This all discusions seems to be endless.
I just rather would like to spend 2 days reading 1000 pages of manual about mxm system+ 2 day for testing settings in real work + 2 weeks catching fluency with worklflow.
Instead of unlimited all night testing, trying, reorganizing and guessing WTF with this material ?
I am this guy which like to READ MANUALS instead of monkey trial (look what happend if I put thin button? -hmmm nothing ... so maybe this red one ? hmmm ... recording, funny :D weee!)
I like to know how tools work before i will use them. I have no time to TRY setting I want KNOW what I have to do to get real looking wood in EVERY ligths circumstances possible.

To visualize problem ... I bet hundreds of maxwell users even don't know what this button does.Image

Bubballo - how much time You wasted to make Your awesome simple tree with SSS ? I know it was for fun , but how many tries , changes , render tests ? And still I can show w few pictures just better with faked biased method.
Wasn't it be better if someone from NL just explained HOW to make that kind of materials ?

But if any fresman will get to think site , find this old rusty tutorial with tiles 48 - (he will think this is how thing should be done) and waste a few days trying to achieve PURE results with this method . Not everyone have so much patience to seek for answer in forum because there are
Words, words and words, images or hours of videos which are still only input sources in learning.
He will put a few scanline look pictures in gallery and will never use maxwell again.

So think site should be smaller but better. Just get rid of silver , gold is better even smaller piece.

and finally - there is a book about BIASED renderer - about 1500 pages . It is just brilliant . There is everything, from theory to practical cases. It saved a half year of testing, testing testing searching on forums , share settings with other noobs . That is the way it should look like.
#314936
Bubballo - how much time You wasted to make Your awesome simple tree with SSS ?
Half a day.
I know it was for fun , but how many tries , changes , render tests ?
A few. But that's where the real learning happens.
And still I can show w few pictures just better with faked biased method.
That's not the point. I can paste clipped trees with Photoshop all day. Would this help me learn Maxwell?
Wasn't it be better if someone from NL just explained HOW to make that kind of materials ?
Definitely not. In fact, I like to believe I was pioneering a new method. My method. :mrgreen:
#314947
zdeno wrote:...and finally - there is a book about BIASED renderer - about 1500 pages . It is just brilliant . There is everything, from theory to practical cases. It saved a half year of testing, testing testing searching on forums , share settings with other noobs . That is the way it should look like.
Is that VRay, The Complete Guide you're referring to? I've been thinking about that (not sure how much could be applied to Maxwell), but cost is currently about $150 USD. If such a book existed strictly for Maxwell (maybe not quite so pricey) I would buy that in an instant as I also very much like to read/study the results of others' proven pioneering work....saves me a lot of time having to "reinvent the wheel", as the saying goes.
#314948
zdeno wrote:I like to know how tools work before i will use them.
Me too and we already have a user manual because of this.
zdeno wrote:I have no time to TRY setting I want KNOW what I have to do to get real looking wood in EVERY ligths circumstances possible.
No, this is the point of confusion. Maxwell will not make you the artist you're after and it will not teach you how to achieve realism for free. This is not the license agreement. Maxwell user manual can only give idea about what each thing does. It's strictly not user manual's duty to donate you with artistic skills. Also, "real-looking-wood-under-any-kind-of-illumination" is contradicting with the purpose. Because, if user already provides a realistic set of parameters for the wood, Maxwell guarantees rendering it at that realism under any condition. You want to know how to achieve it? It's an ongoing discussion in CG world. There is no only-correct solution. There could be several different ways of simulating things. But moreover and again, it is not something bundled with Maxwell. So, keep this apart. Besides, when one of us including you put a tutorial for wood, someone else will still yell about another material or someone like you will come up and disagree and try to impose that in fact it should be done in another way and so on...
zdeno wrote:To visualize problem ... I bet hundreds of maxwell users even don't know what this button does.
You bet and you lose. Because, when you roll over the button it reveals a yellow help pop up saying "Enable/disable layer". Besides, this is already history for us. It was 1.x and like everything else in life, it's now a memory and vastly improved in 2.x. You could say it was not comfortable, not easy to figure etc but it was not completely awful like you describe. Imagine we might not even have such a button but it's great we had it here or there somewhere and it's really functioning.
zdeno wrote:Bubballo - how much time You wasted to make Your awesome simple tree with SSS ? I know it was for fun , but how many tries , changes , render tests ? And still I can show w few pictures just better with faked biased method.Wasn't it be better if someone from NL just explained HOW to make that kind of materials ?
We did. But have you ever read the manual already? There are 8 pages which covers SSS and leaves etc. Better ones with faked biased method? Aha... Did you know there are also conventional paintings done (without software or computers) which are looking better than these all? So, what's the point again? Don't you think these forum users are done with biased / unbiased software fights everyday?
zdeno wrote:But if any fresman will get to think site , find this old rusty tutorial with tiles 48 - (he will think this is how thing should be done) and waste a few days trying to achieve PURE results with this method . Not everyone have so much patience to seek for answer in forum because there are...
Yes, it was how it should be done back in 1.0 and as I said, you're free to disagree. That's why Think! site is open for new authors. The below images have been produced with that version using that so called poor setup and they are not awful at all.
http://think.maxwellrender.com/arroway_ ... p=7&lang=0
zdeno wrote:and finally - there is a book about BIASED renderer - about 1500 pages . It is just brilliant . There is everything, from theory to practical cases. It saved a half year of testing, testing testing searching on forums , share settings with other noobs.
Cool, so why did you end up here? I guess the riddles were disappointing so this must be an effort for compensation. :)
Josephus Holt wrote:Is that VRay, The Complete Guide you're referring to?
If there's any particular software or example zdeno is refering to, it wouldn't explain why he's still here making posts.
#314974
zdeno wrote:ok You have just convinced me . everything is fine. I just have to work more to finally made some real looking set of architectural materials.
You have convinced me, too! We just have to work more for developing more useful and up-to-date tutorials/information for sake of your valuable time. Thank you for your gentle approach, zdeno!
Sketchup 2025 Released

Thank you Fernando!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! hwol[…]

I've noticed that "export all" creates l[…]

hmmm can you elaborate a bit about the the use of […]

render engines and Maxwell

Funny, I think, that when I check CG sites they ar[…]