[Tyrone Marshall]

You can use the feedback email that is provided from Next Limit's website.

I did. More than once, and actually in a very polite manner.
That´s btw the black hole i was referring to.

They do read the email, they may not be able to respond to them all because of time restraints. As you know they are hard at work!

One post, and as forum leader, I'll check it and see that it gets routed to where it needs to. I cannot tell you more than that, Next Limit has their own development plans and if your request or suggestion works within their time frame and plans then it has a good chance of being implemented in some fashion.

I have no doubts that you would forward it to NL, and this has nothing to do with you, but i think i´ll need to pay a fanboy next time i want to suggest something, cause that´s probably the only way NL will listen.

That is why you have forum leaders, they can assist in making sure you have a voice and that is it is heard.

To name an example, i suggested procedurals at one point and basically got most of the A-team as well as all their slaves asking for my blood even for suggesting - and i quote - "Bullshit materials".
Of course if we take a look at the wish list section we can clearly see that now when one of the "accepted ones" made the same request. EVERYONE think it´s a splendid idea...

I do not see anything wrong with suggestions. If you have any more, let me know about it. I'm serious, and I would hope no one takes any suggestion lightly.

[Tyrone Marshall]

" that Cinemaxwells current workflow is good. Version 1.0 were by far better"

..well sadly thats true. Tyron, could you also pass on, if there is a better way handling assigning the textures. the new 1.1 way is terrible workflow. 1.0 was indeed much nicer from the plugin itself. it is bad to have to manually assign each uvw to each maxwell material. that should be automatic like it was in 1.0 or rc5.

thanks
Stefan

p.s. do you know what i mean?

Stefan please let me know the specific issue with texture handling that you do not like? I want to make sure I do not overlook anything in your response. If it is about having to assign every polygon to a selection tag once it has a texture tag attached to a maxwell render material tag then I will get it up on the suggestion list.

[lllab]

Hi Tyron,

i try to explain, it is this:

in version 1.0 i did a c4d material with mapping and then assign a maxwell material. that was it. maxwell did AUTOMATICLY take the uv coordinates of the c4d material.

in version 1.1: i do a c4d material with mapping and then assign a maxwell material, AND THEN I HAVE TO MANUALLLY DRAG THE C4D MATERIAL INTO THE MAXWELL MATERIAL texture tags field.

this is very bad as with the 1.0 version i could "semi automaticly" assign a mxm to all objects with the same c4d material with the built in cinema tools. (so a modell that has c4d textures is in one minute textured with mxm's in 1.0- in 1.1 it takes 1-2 hours or more)

one example:
so giving 50+ objects(each with its own uv) a wood mxm texture was a matter of SECONDS.
in 1.1 i have to go to each of those 50+ mxms an manually drag each c4d material to the mxm texture tag field. that takes 30+MINUTES or more just for one material.

i hope you understand. the need to manuall drag each c4d material into the texture tag field ruins every automation task for dealing with modells with many objects. it is very workflow unfriendly, and it already WAS GREAT!

so i hope it is possible to do this like it was already:-)

cheers
Stefan

[lllab]

dont know, do you understand what i mean Tyron?

cheers
stefan

[Tyrone Marshall]

Hi Tyron,

i try to explain, it is this:

in version 1.0 i did a c4d material with mapping and then assign a maxwell material. that was it. maxwell did AUTOMATICLY take the uv coordinates of the c4d material.

in version 1.1: i do a c4d material with mapping and then assign a maxwell material, AND THEN I HAVE TO MANUALLLY DRAG THE C4D MATERIAL INTO THE MAXWELL MATERIAL texture tags field.

this is very bad as with the 1.0 version i could "semi automaticly" assign a mxm to all objects with the same c4d material with the built in cinema tools. (so a modell that has c4d textures is in one minute textured with mxm's in 1.0- in 1.1 it takes 1-2 hours or more)

one example:
so giving 50+ objects(each with its own uv) a wood mxm texture was a matter of SECONDS.
in 1.1 i have to go to each of those 50+ mxms an manually drag each c4d material to the mxm texture tag field. that takes 30+MINUTES or more just for one material.

i hope you understand. the need to manuall drag each c4d material into the texture tag field ruins every automation task for dealing with modells with many objects. it is very workflow unfriendly, and it already WAS GREAT!

so i hope it is possible to do this like it was already:-)

cheers
Stefan

Thanks Stefan,

I understand your explanation very clearly. To sum it up, you would like the option that makes the default maxwell material for an object take what it can first from a C4D material (Channels that Maxwell Render can use), next use the Maxwell Render tag for additional material description.

As a secondary step; Only use the texture tag and polygon selection tag fields of the Maxwell Render tag if desired by the user, otherwise the default is the C4D material (channels) + Maxwell Render material tag applied to all polygons.

Does this sum it up?

[lllab]

"As a secondary step; Only use the texture tag and polygon selection tag fields of the Maxwell Render tag if desired by the user, otherwise the default is the C4D material (channels) + Maxwell Render material tag applied to all polygons. "

....yes that would be absolutly excellent!

cheers
Stefan

[lllab]

another thing that would be great:

support for the cinema "save as project"

or some kind of pack and go, where all mxm's, textures(+iors?) get collected into the /tex folder of a cinema project( the tex folder on the same level as the .c4d file)

cheers
stefan

[Rochr]

Having more C4D material channels translated wouldn´t be to bad either. Especially the alpha and diffusion channel. Creating an alpha mask with MXM´s for an object without getting those white contours is a tideous process,(actually, i have no idea how to solve it) compared to the 5 second procedure in C4D.

Example with the same alpha masks(RGB).


Memory management to allow highres renders i already mentioned, but for me it´s an absolutely critical issue, so i´ll repeat it.

And please pretty please with sugar on top, tell them to let us have the camera selection back.

[Tyrone Marshall]

"As a secondary step; Only use the texture tag and polygon selection tag fields of the Maxwell Render tag if desired by the user, otherwise the default is the C4D material (channels) + Maxwell Render material tag applied to all polygons. "

....yes that would be absolutly excellent!

cheers
Stefan

Added to bug list as suggestion #4.

[Tyrone Marshall]

another thing that would be great:

support for the cinema "save as project"

or some kind of pack and go, where all mxm's, textures(+iors?) get collected into the /tex folder of a cinema project( the tex folder on the same level as the .c4d file)

cheers
stefan

Hello Stefan,

I like your suggestion, but I want to see if this is alright with you. There is a wish currently posted to have pack/go textures with MXM through the Maxwell material editor. I wonder if this was implemented would this fulfill this need as it is, the custom mxm tag refers to an existing mxm w/textures. If you could just pack and go your mxm to an existing c4d project then it would already be there?

What do you think?

[Tyrone Marshall]

Having more C4D material channels translated wouldn´t be to bad either. Especially the alpha and diffusion channel. Creating an alpha mask with MXM´s for an object without getting those white contours is a tideous process,(actually, i have no idea how to solve it) compared to the 5 second procedure in C4D.

Example with the same alpha masks(RGB).

Memory management to allow highres renders i already mentioned, but for me it´s an absolutely critical issue, so i´ll repeat it.

And please pretty please with sugar on top, tell them to let us have the camera selection back.

Thanks Rochr for the C4D material channel suggestion and camera selection. I will get back to you on this one.

The memory management issue seems like it should be handled through MXCL. I think if HD gets better in MXCL then you would get the benefit as well through rendering from the plugin.

What do you think?

[Boris Ulzibat]

another thing that would be great:

support for the cinema "save as project"

or some kind of pack and go, where all mxm's, textures(+iors?) get collected into the /tex folder of a cinema project( the tex folder on the same level as the .c4d file)

cheers
stefan

Hello Stefan,

I like your suggestion, but I want to see if this is alright with you. There is a wish currently posted to have pack/go textures with MXM through the Maxwell material editor. I wonder if this was implemented would this fulfill this need as it is, the custom mxm tag refers to an existing mxm w/textures. If you could just pack and go your mxm to an existing c4d project then it would already be there?

What do you think?

I guess that this + ability to save C4D scene as a project with all the used MXMs in some subfolder (with relative paths of course)
Would be better than to do any of this two things separately!
Textures located inside MXMs are great idea btw!

[Rochr]

Thanks Rochr for the C4D material channel suggestion and camera selection. I will get back to you on this one.

The memory management issue seems like it should be handled through MXCL. I think if HD gets better in MXCL then you would get the benefit as well through rendering from the plugin.

What do you think?

Thanks Tyrone.

Well i´m not an engineer, but it sounds like a working idea. Being able to assign more memory to HD would probably help out a lot.
As long as we don´t have to punch in a lot of commands i´ll be happy.

I have no idea why Maxwell is chewing up all the memory. Ok, i normally use a massive poly/object count, so that´s undoubtly part of the problem, but still, buildings i can render out in the resolution of my choice in C4D still fail as soon as i get close to around 3000 pixels or sometimes less with Maxwell.

My guess would be that Maxwell need the extra memory to store data for the fine tuning during render, or features such as multilight etc.
But if this is the case, wouldn´t it be possible to deactivate these features prior to a render and use the extra memory for higher resolutions?

As said, i´m just guessing here.

[seco7]

Has anyone done a study of maximum resolution as it relates to both poly count AND materials? I don't seem to get anywhere near the max resolution others have claimed with similar hardware and I'm wondering if it might have more to do with the materials and maps I'm using because the poly counts really are not that high. Unfortunately, 90% of what I do is for print and the general trend is for larger and larger at higher and higher rez.

[Rochr]

...the general trend is for larger and larger at higher and higher rez.

That´s unfortunatly exactly the case, and my problem as well.
These days, every client demand better quality, even if it´s a wall sized print.

Based on previous scenes i´ve done with different 3D software, there can be a massive difference in memory use between an textured/untextured scene.
In my case, i´ve used no materials at all, only a colored diffuse tag and i still can´t render out anything in the necessary resolution.