[Ernesto]

The upper Image was made with V1.7
The other with V2.7



In the upper image I have invisible lights to create a burning effect.
They are invisible even in glass reflections

In the other image although the light is the same, it renders in the reflections of the glass.

I wonder how to create a material that could behave like V1.7....

Ernesto

[rusteberg]

Ernesto...... despacio hombre.

I understand you are on a mission to get to mars quite quickly, but understand you have entered a new set of variables while entering supersonic speed with maxwell 2+.

The scenario you've posted looks quite complex.

It may be best to post links to each originating (mxs) example file (maxwell 1.7 file & maxwell 2.7 file) so that someone around here can help dissect the situation. Or at least post screen shots of your model with material settings along with intent.

There was a book years ago by peach pit through pearson publishing on how to learn a mac (computer). it was so simple yet so effective. the maxwell manual was that way back when it was no more than 50 pages.

[Fernando Tella]

Use "Hide to reflections/refractions" option?

[Ernesto]

These are the Object Properties:

And These are the rendering settings:


All these settings are exactly the same in both Maxwell Versions, although the behaviour is not the same.
Apparently in V1.7 when an object is hidden to the camera, it will not be visible in a mirror.
But in V2.7 it will be visible in the mirror although the object is hidden to the camera.
To discard any interference with the emiter material I used an old emiter as the used in the image created with V1.7, and then used new emiter created in V2.7, and both behaved in the same way.
It seems that it is a Bug in V2.7, unless I am doing anything wrong.

Here I am posting a detail:


Ernesto

[Ernesto]

Ernesto...... despacio hombre.

I understand you are on a mission to get to mars quite quickly, but understand you have entered a new set of variables while entering supersonic speed with maxwell 2+.

The scenario you've posted looks quite complex.

It may be best to post links to each originating (mxs) example file (maxwell 1.7 file & maxwell 2.7 file) so that someone around here can help dissect the situation. Or at least post screen shots of your model with material settings along with intent.

There was a book years ago by peach pit through pearson publishing on how to learn a mac (computer). it was so simple yet so effective. the maxwell manual was that way back when it was no more than 50 pages.

Well, this creates certain anxiety...
The following is a critic to Next Limit. But I intend it to be a CONSTRUCTIVE one, so I hope you (NL) will take it as it!
A Software should be a Tool but not the goal. A tool is usefull, when the artist gets used to it, so that his/her mind can concentrate in the goal. When you change the tool, you lose all the control on the goal. This is more evident if the new tool is not capable to do the same things as the old tool.
Phisical tools as a hammer for instance, are so well defined by centuries of experience, that they became a standard.
When a carpenter changes his hammer, it shouldn´t be a problem at all.
The problem with softwares is that they are DISCONECTED from the phiscal world, so they often lose their connection to the user mind!
Apple is a company that concentrated in that specific point: The connection between the User Interface and the Human Mind!
That is not an easy goal, but you can aproach to it if the designers of the software concentrates into that problem.
When software designers gets so used to the "mechanical" architecture of the software, they often loose their conection to the user mind, because they have diferent goals. The Software designer wants everything to work. But the user wants everything to work in an INTUITIVE way. When the artist has to deal with a software created as a mechanical device, it is necesary to invest certain energy to TRANSLATE the mechanical behaviour to the desired artistic goal. The result is that the TOOL consumes the artist energy, that otherwise would be invested in his/her ART.
Apple products are the oposite: the sofware designers TRANSLATED their mechanical architecture to adapt to the User Mind, and the result is that the user can FORGET about the tool!
The BEST TOOL is the tool is the one that WORKS as an extention of the ARTIST.
Otherwise the TOOL acts as an OBSTACLE betwen the artist and his or her goal.
I see Maxwell Render closer to the last concept, and wished it to be closer to Apple´s concept.
I have expressed this years ago, although not THAT clearly as now, I hope.
Anyway this is just an opinion.

Ernesto

[Half Life]

I can see your point, but it can be seen in the opposite way -- as an artist I don't like being limited by my tools. I grow, and as I grow I don't want my potential to be stifled by lack of growth in my tools -- otherwise I will simply move to another tool.

This would be my criticism of Macs -- in making the tools easy to use they have limited what can be done with them... this could be seen as a form of "planned obsolescence", but I think it may be more likely to be poor long-term strategy.

Best,
Jason.

[Bubbaloo]

These are the Object Properties:

And These are the rendering settings:

Messing with any of these settings will instantly make your render unrealistic. All scene lighting is supposed to be seen in reflections. Can you create a light in the real world that doesn't cast shadows, or only illuminates certain objects and excludes others, or isn't seen in reflections/refractions? Maxwell requires a shift in thinking from the traditional CG lighting techniques used for unbiased rendering.

[Ernesto]

All scene lighting is supposed to be seen in reflections.

If that is true, why it IS possible in Maxwell V1.7, and impossible in V2.7?

Anyway what would be the logic of having a Hide from Camera option, but that would not work when you have mirrors in V 2.7 and that would work in V 1.7?

The only similar logic would be the case of Vampires that cannot be reflected in mirrors.

The Important Question is:
Is Next limit going to fix this or my option would be to go back to V1.7?
The only reason I upgraded is that Tom assured me that the problems I was facing in V1.7, were solved in V2.7. What I didn´t knew is that in V2.7 there were new problems.

E

[rusteberg]

[rusteberg]

[zdeno]

how did you achieved this lovely banana ? is it some new feature in 2.x ?

[Ernesto]

You did it, rusteberg!

I do not have that option name in Maya...
Here I am posting a screen capture of the object properties settings in Maya and Maxwell Studio

I wonder if the setting that you mention Hidden to Reflections, is the same as Hidden from Reflections / Refractions as shown in Maxwell Studio, and as Hide to Secondary Rays, as shown in Maya...
I am trying but it is not working for now... perhaps because this scene is too complex and I get lost often. I will do a new file from scratch to test again.
Thanks rusteberg!

Ernesto

[Ernesto]

YES!!!
It worked!! Thanks rusteberg!!!
E

[Ernesto]

It worked the first time.
But sometimes it do not work.
The scene is a simple emiter, that is lighting a ball, and both (the emiter and the ball) are being reflected in a mirror.

So I played in Studio chaging settings while running the Fire viewer, and here you have the strange behaviour:

1) Started Fire without checking any option.
The lightsource is visible, and it is lighting the ball, and both are seen reflected in the mirror.
2) Then I checked the emiting polygon properties Hide from Reflections
In the Fire window, I can see that the reflection of the emiter is gone. Anyway the ball is enlighted, and I can see it reflected in the mirror.
3) Then I checked the emiting polygon properties Hide from Camera
I was expecting the emiting polygon to dissapear from the scene, but not the light.
But what happened is that as soon as I did it, everything dissapeared: The emiting polygon, the reflection and the emiting light.

Then I tried in the oposite order:

1) Started Fire without checking any option.
The lightsource is visible, and it is lighting the ball, and both are seen reflected in the mirror.
2) Then I checked the emiting polygon properties Hide from Camera
It dissapeared from camera, but the emiting light was still on, and in the mirror I could see the emiting polygon.
2) Then I checked the emiting polygon properties Hide from Reflections
I was expecting this to make the reflection of the emiter to dissapear only, but..
In the Fire window, It dissapeared the reflection together with the emiting light, and everything is in darkness.

I tried this is Studio and in Maya, and in both I have got the same behaviour.

Ernesto

[Ernesto]

Now I made a new test from scratch in maya, and it worked as it was expected....




Evidently I am having another problem that seems to intefere
Still trying to find it