[mverta]

It is like selling icecreams.. but you have to bring your own cone from home because the icecreams come with no cone or spoon..

Well #1, icecreams are known quantities, and useless without the cone. Maxwell is niether. and #2, I'm addressing NOT the value of the feature, but why if it's crucial enough to merit all the bitching, you bought it in the first place without knowing, and why you didn' t ask for your money back 3 seconds after you learned it wouldn't be in there.

You'd sure as hell ask for your ice cream money if the vendor scooped it into your hand.

_Mike

[RedRaven]

we have just found out it won't be in there!

1) Not true... it wasn't working in beta, and was never promised to be a feature.

2) Let's say -for argument's sake- it's never in there. If it was crucial, and you didn't know, why did you buy it? I'll keep asking this question until someone tells me why an assumption -however reasonable- without proof is justification for the rants.

_Mike

[markps]

If it is to be seious.. they should state...

You'll get this this and this.. and that's what you've paid for.

Instead they show you images that you won't be able to do... and things that won't happen until 2007, change the main page to reflact the current doable features. It makes no sence.. it seems that it will evolve as it goes along. I mean they read the forum, see what we are debating.. If a thread is 10 pages long talking about sunlight through glass... well something is expected.

[Maximus3D]

Hm, shouldn't sunlight through glass be a obvious thing to be included as Maxwell is physically correct. I mean in a physically correct real world as we live in there the light from the sun passes through glass.

This is worrying, it sounds like you Mike got some news from NL that they now cannot find a solution on how to fix so that sunlight passes through glass and that's the reason behind your sudeen statement. If that's the case then we wanna know for sure what the deal is now. No beating around the bush anymore please.

I mean then it's suggests that sunlight shouldn't reflect in a mirror either since that's not a listed feature. Or am i completly off track now..

/ Max

[markps]

The point is that we don't know that it wasn't doable. If it says physical sky. It means a physical sky that works. If it doesn't work it is NOT a physical sky.. it is something else...

victor is even talking about Moonlight.. it makes no sence everything for nothing.

It is like selling icecreams.. but you have to bring your own cone from home because the icecreams come with no cone or spoon..

Well #1, icecreams are known quantities, and useless without the cone. Maxwell is niether. and #2, I'm addressing NOT the value of the feature, but why if it's crucial enough to merit all the bitching, you bought it in the first place without knowing, and why you didn' t ask for your money back 3 seconds after you learned it wouldn't be in there.

You'd sure as hell ask for your ice cream money if the vendor scooped it into your hand.

_Mike

[mverta]

.. it seems that it will evolve as it goes along. I mean they read the forum, see what we are debating.. If a thread is 10 pages long talking about sunlight through glass... well something is expected.

"Expected". Assumption. Reasonable, but an assumption. So far I've heard it "should be" in there, that it's "reasonable", and "expected" and "a fair conclusion", but nobody's told me why if it's crucial, they bought Maxwell without knowing. Apparently, it's the money exchanging hands that makes it so horrible. Why did you buy without knowing? And the second you learned in Beta it wasn't working, did you not demand your refund right there?

_Mike

[mverta]

It means a physical sky that works. If it doesn't work it is NOT a physical sky.. it is something else...

Physical sky DOES work. It simulates sun, sunlight, and atmosphere color/conditions. Sunlight penetrating through glass is a seaparate issue.

Your ASSUMPTION that is was otherwise does not satisfy my challenge.

_Mike

[ajlynn]

Guys -

I have a question:

I'm not an architectural visualization guy, so the whole sunlight+glass thing isn't as important to me, but I went back and looked over all the previous Maxwell features, and I don't see this having ever been specifically mentioned as a feature.

Mike-

With all respect, and not wanting to shoot the messenger and all, sunlight through glass shouldn't have to be specifically listed as a feature. When they say they have sunlight, and they say they have glass, and they say they have the most realistic lighting engine, it's assumed that these features work together. How can the sunlight be realistic if it doesn't pass through glass?

If I design a dormitory, then after it's built say "There's an electrical system and the correct number of bedrooms but I never actually said all the bedrooms would have lights and outlets - I suggest you get around the problem by running extension cords through the hallways," I'll get sued.

I hope what you're saying isn't the party line, because that would be really pathetic.

The glass and the sunlight working together is a deal breaker. Nextlimit might not allow refunds, but as a student on a subscription plan, if this isn't working by the next time I'm scheduled to make a payment I'll be instructing my credit card company that Nextlimit is not authorized to bill me. (That last part isn't directed at you so much as general griping.)

[RedRaven]

let see what a poll on the matter brings up

http://www.maxwellrender.com/forum/view ... hp?t=10719

[markps]

this listed feature thing is a very bogus excuese Mike...

Just because Shaddow maps and reflections are not mentioned it doesn't mean we won't get shadow and reflection... it is embedded on the meaning of the render engine itself..

A glass that's solid is not a glass.. ! man it makes no sence this discussion.

[dd_]

cause NL said they where trying to fix it
thats why
if not then why let us think otherwise

[mverta]

When they say they have sunlight, and they say they have glass, and they say they have the most realistic lighting engine, it's assumed that these features work together.

You actually used the word assumption. For the 5th time, I agree it's a reasonable assumption, but assumptions aren't wise places to make purchases from, nor strong places to launch entitled rants about.

Good swing, though...

_Mike

[dd_]

just curious but who in thier right mind wouldnt think that a unbiased renderer would have a glass window that doesnt allow the sunlight through

yes thats some logic you have got

[leoA4D]

It is reasonable to conclude that with arch viz images and NL courting arch viz, arch viz is a viable market for M~R and obviously sunlight and glass are natural components of arch viz.

Assumption. A reasonable one, but an assumption. Not justification for entitled harangues and personal insults.

"Not justification for entitled harangues and personal insults." Huh? Please explain. I was not haranguing or insulting you with my response.

[RedRaven]

it is NOT an assumption

Q051128.W001.0002.aitraaz)
sunlight working with dialectrics? sorry its a bore, but me been asking for months...
(Q051128.W001.0002.aitraaz) - Answered by: Juan
A lot of ideas of the main core of Maxwell are always present in all the different versions of the engine that we have released. But also We are developing different techniques at the same time to find which is the best solution in each case. Obviously we can not give so many internal details about the problems of the current engine with the sun light through dielectrics, but we have worked hard to fix it. This issue ( and others) is already fixed in the experimental versions of the engine that we are developing now. We are working to stabilize this engine and provide it to you in next releases of Maxwell.

from

http://www.maxwellrender.com/forum/view ... ight+glass

and i'm sure there are many more.