[Olivier Cugniet]

and i like it to test and learn some new stuff that will be in release 1.0 even if it's not totally working... i think it's not a waste of time

[Jozvex]

and wasting time learning each version etc....

That time wasn't wasted because:

A) By using those versions people provided bug reports and other feedback that will ultimately result in a better V1, in faster time. If NL had never released any of the alphas/betas it would surely have taken them longer to figure out exactly how Maxwell should be.

B) Many of the concepts and features from the previous versions will apply to how you use V1, so when it's finally released you'll have a head start on how to use it.

[dutch_designer]

Jeez Andrew, lighten up... 'wasting time' blah blah blah... as if people are robots that aren't supposed to have fun every now and then. If the RC5 release will be somewhat better than the beta and will prove to be the basis for v1 than I'll be more than happy to 'waste' some time playing with it. What are you doing reading this thread anyways, get back to work and stop wasting time

edit by myself: sorry to make this OT post, lets try to keep this stuff out of this thread.

[JDHill]

Jeez Andrew, lighten up...

Go easy on him. Life's not easy when you're...

Being coned...

[DELETED]

DELETED

[mverta]

Hey guys and girls -

I've gotten permission to have my ongoing material studies posted in the Announcements section: http://maxwellrender.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=10619

I made sure they're watermarked so you can get some concrete info on their rendertimes and material info.

Lots more coming.. I just have to let them render a bit so they're nice and pretty. Many of them do things you absolutely could not do in Beta or any other version.

_Mike

[DELETED]

DELETED

[mverta]

For indoor photography, ISO 400 is typical, my brother.

Though it's an interesting observation, because the exact scaling of lighting has moved around a bit and may not be calibrated 100% yet. I saw a bunch of real-world lighting calibration tests running with other team members, though, so I know they're on it. Not sure when they'll be done, but this ISO/f-stop/ss is pretty real-world as it is.

_Mike

[mverta]

Have you rendered the same scene in beta? these look dark to me!

Thanks

A

Dark? Wow.. that's odd.. we're seeing them completely normal here.. though my monitor is gamma 1.8. The current RC does NOT have an issue with "darkness" in ANY way. I'll check these renders on a couple of other workstations, mac and PC, but it may just be that I rendered at 1.8 gamma instead of 2.2. No worries.

_Mike

[andretto]

well, very nice tests mike, thank you

anyway, what kind of emitter you got there? i mean, 400 ISO may sound "real photography", but 1/250 is quite speedy for the shutter i think

PS: render times are a little bit scary...

PPS: is that a 5.5 RC??


Andrea

[DELETED]

DELETED

[psanitra]

I think that with shutter 1/125 and 1/90 for indoor on Iso 400 is ok.
THX for the tests.

Will maxwell have this watermark feature included(as other renders) or did you added manualy?

[DELETED]

DELETED

[mverta]

Happy to stand corrected. Hey maybe that's why nobody lets me use their camera... though I sure have gotten a lot of info to the contrary.

Well in any case, it's entirely relative at this point, as optimization of light values is a WIP, and I could have easily turned up the emitter and lowered the ISO. As for the RC5.5, it's not "5.5" as you might think; the .5 is an internal code. It's still good 'ol RC5.

_Mike

[mverta]

Oh by the way, on the rendertimes... these looked pretty a lot sooner, but I let them run while I sleep. Got better testing things to do during the waking hours

The material descriptions are above the images if you want to see how they're created. I'm going to try and export all the .mxm's for release so you guys can reverse-engineer them.

_Mike