Don't we already have that in RC3? Render Option > Light bounces?juan wrote:Hi Micha,Yes, very soonMicha wrote:Could we get a bounce control for the preview/rendering like in the material preview?
Juan
When you say matte, do you mean the diffuse material? or metals with roughness ? like this --> http://www.maxwellrender.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=9299patrikpanda wrote:.i am an architect doing architectural renderings, mostly compositing.so my questions are:
1/ will some kind of MATTE SHADER be available in V 1.0?
2/what about CLIPMAPS ?
.yes, TIMO´s one is the one I´ve been asking.Timo-pekko Nieminen wrote:Usually Matte shader means special shader that can make holes in alpha but still, for example receive shadows.When you say matte, do you mean the diffuse material? or metals with roughness ? "
In FX work matte shader is used, for example, like this. One have background photograph of a room. One models 3d character to fit in the room. One renders the character so that one uses matte shader in floor geometry. Floor geometry itself wont be showing (it is anyway used from the background photo) because of the matte shader but character's shadow is.
3dsmax's matte/shadow material is a good example of the required functionality. IT IS A MUST.
Work Around:Mihai Iliuta wrote:Will there be an UNDO in Maxwell Studio.....uh.....soon? Like immediately?
Imagine you have just set up materials for a bunch of objects, and then accidently move something........
Well, Victor can choose to speak though Tom. I do not see why some think that Tom's answers are of lesser value. Tom is part of NL and consults Victor and other developers on many occasions.adehus wrote:Thomas-
I noticed that this thread was initiated on the 28th of Nov. It's now the 15th of Dec. Do you know if Victor has any intention of answering any of these questions?
Please feel free to delete, of course...
The thought of particle support not comming until 2.0 is saddening...tom wrote:NURBS, particle support and complex procedural textures are in future plans. It's hard to give any date for sure. You can expect some/all of them with 1.x or with 2.0
Yes Victor agreed that an effort will be made from NextLimit to offer responses. The responses can be from any developer. During my communication Victor specifically mentioned that in many occasions he will employ Tom's help in regards to this Q&A thread as well as from other other developers.adehus wrote:I dunno... Tom's not responsible for what's transpiring, I would assume that Victor is. Nothing against Tom, but Victor's words have much more weight.Thomas An. wrote:Well, Victor can choose to speak though Tom. I do not see why some think that Tom's answers are of lesser value. Tom is part of NL and consults Victor and other developers on many occasions.adehus wrote:Thomas-
I noticed that this thread was initiated on the 28th of Nov. It's now the 15th of Dec. Do you know if Victor has any intention of answering any of these questions?
Please feel free to delete, of course...
This thread has slowed down a bit, that is because they are still in the "woods" and the stress is high. Other developrs might join in as well once this rough time is over.
Beyond that, it's problematic because you apparently contacted Victor and he agreed to do this. So... why doesn't he just do it? It's just another aspect of NL avoiding it's self-defined responsibilites, and it helps to continue to erode confidence in them. Call me crazy, but I'd be thrilled if someone from NL would, for once, just do something they say they're going to do- and do it all the way.
- By Andreas Hopf