Maxwell Render | Official public forum

Since the invisibility of the emitter is an object property and not a material one I don't think it's possible with only one object and material. The object cannot be visible and invisible at the same time; not at least until quantic properties are implemented.

Edit: Duplicated post, sry.

let's get quantic then!

...seemed so simple, a glowing glass that is not opaque and white
yet it is impossible...

Well, it's impossible under your conditions, but using two geometries is really easy and simple.

joaomourao wrote:does not work because you will have an emitter facing the opposite direction. it really has to be a 2 in 1 material solution...

AGS needs no thickness as it doesn't refract and has no transmittance. JFYI.

yes, but can we have an object with an emitter on one side and a AGS on the other while it reflects and emits light from the same side? am I missing something? I've heard in v3 we will be able to have 2 materials on a plane (both sides), will it help?

I know nothing else than the rest of the people about v3, but I don't think it will be possible as the problem would be the same: you want an object hidden to camera and visible to camera at the same time. Unless that property is changed to be applied per material instead of per object I foresee you'll have the same problem. Maybe that can be done, just ask for it.

Edit: I think you need "hidden to camera" property to be applied per material layer instead of just per material, cause you also want two materials on the same polygons... It gets more convoluted.
Or even better: just a property in emitter component to make it invisible. That would definitively would be easier for everybody. I would +1 for that.

YES! A property for the emitter to become hidden or not would be perfect!
+1000

In ArchiCAD via Maxwell plugin we have a Hide Geometry check box in the material... that is why all of this started

Thanks Tella!

Woah! So it does exist and work?

I'm so good I even give solutions that I didn't know they existed.


Hey why is it not available in mxed?

Does it hide the whole geometry including other layers? I guess it does. It probably acts on the object properties.

Both mentioned solutions are available via ArchiCAD plugin — emitter could be invisible and object could be hidden:

Nevertheless - idea of "AGS Emitter" is not bad...

Rafal, you are forgetting that we need reflections... so we need one object (piece of glass) which will emit light but will apear as a AGS with reflections...

joaomourao wrote:Rafal, you are forgetting that we need reflections... so we need one object (piece of glass) which will emit light but will apear as a AGS with reflections...

...yes, that's why I wrote "it is not bad idea" (="good" ). I think that for some technical reason it is not possible in Maxwell and we have to prepare some invisible (for maxwell) elements with emitter material.

I have posted this in the "wish list" from the forum...
If it is because of technical reasons or not, I must say NL are up to solve it!!!
Cheers!

Sorry why don't you simply use 2 planes next to each other? Making an emitter invisible is not hard at all. Just check Hidden from camera option for the emitter geometry. Then you could place an AGS plane in front of this without problems. Makes sense?

joaomourao, trying to stay compliant with BIM working standards, while using Maxwell for visualization, is causing 100% of your struggles.

Just make two files; one with the part numbers, drawings, building materials, etc.; and a 2nd file just used for rendering. Why cause yourself all this pain just so you can build and render from the same file?

Say I have an object I want to design, render, and 3D print. To do this from one file would be silly.

In my first file, I do all my modeling, with multiple versions of the geometry and all the parametric functions included in this file. I can use this file to hide/show older versions, compare geometry, go back in my history, etc. Then, for rendering, I take the final geometry and put it in a 2nd file, where I add cameras, animation, emitters, materials, etc. For 3D printing, I take the final geometry and put it into a 3rd file, merge all the bodies, strip out unnecessary data, and shell the geometry.

All 3 of these files contain features that would get in the way of each other's processes. E.g., I can't send the file with all my rendering geometry (emitter planes, studio environment) to the 3D printer.

Instead of trying to tinker with workarounds, it is far simpler to have different files for different purposes.