DasFrodo

I've been working on texturing a BMW 315 PS DA 2 for a texturing contest over at thepixellab for the last couple of days. Finally finished it 🙂 Pictures are in 4k, so please have a look at them in all their glory!

If that is easily possible with the Substance Designer AO Node, then I don't know how. The AO you need for edge wear is not a simple inverted standard AO as far as I know. Iirc I used the Edge Detection Node for that and that worked pretty well. Sorry, I can't follow. What are you asking exactly 😄 ?

Me neither, I've only heard about it because digitalproduction.com had an article about it. Thought it couldn't hurt to share 😉

Boris FX just released the standalone version of their software Particle Illusion for free. More details here: https://borisfx.com/products/particle-illusion/ I haven't tried it myself yet, but apparently the entire thing is pretty much fully featured, and has almost no restrictions (even supports up to 8k ProRes). The only downside is, it's standalone only. No integration into any compositing software.

Thanks for reminding us, I would have totally forgotten about it. Looks like I know what I'm watching this evening 😄

Thanks Igor 🙂

Art Dump! Had a loooot of fun learning Redshift recently 🙂 mainly just experimentation to get a feel for the render and of course learning all the potentiall pitfalls and quirks it has... Crystal.mp4 XParticles.mp4

Well for this you have TeamRender. Look it up in the documentation, it's really easy to set up and works like a charm (in most cases). However, if you really want to cut down your rendertimes I recommend switching to a different renderengine. Depending on what you need there's loads of options that are all miles faster than the C4D render. If you want super realism there's Octane, V-Ray and Corona for example. If you want more stylized and less photorealistic looks there's Redshift which is really fast.

Wait, last time I checked if I wanted to use ExplosiaFX in the Redshift Volume I still had to export it to OVDB and then link those to the Redshift Volume. Did I miss something? If not, in my mind that is still "importing and exporting".

I don't have access to V-Ray anymore (we ditched it after it went back to Chaosgroup and became subscription only) but it just has even more access to internals than Redshift. There's just millions of rendersettings that change how it behaves, how and what it renders etc. It's overwhelming to be honest.

It does! But it doesn't come close to V-Ray, Arnold and others...

CPU render engines tend to be more flexible on many, many things. Not only when it comes to scene sampling of specific effects, but also on the materials side since it's apparently WAY harder to implement certain features on a GPU than on a CPU. When Octane came out it did not have Subsurface Scattering, for example. Having said that, many GPU renders are catching up nowadays. Redshift has a lot of settings for all kinds of optimization and scene setup. Octane on the other hand is just different, you basically only have ray depth for reflection, refraction and volumetrics and ONE global sample amount. This is why many artists that don't like the technical side of 3D work prefer Octane over other render engines. They more or less have one quality slider and that's it. Compare that to how the settings in V-Ray look and you know what's up.

I overshot my VRAM once so far in Redshift. I don't remember what I did exactly, but it was... very very slow.

I use GPU render engines purely for the fact that they are insanely fast an none of my scenes were a problem with VRAM thus far, which is of course the main drawback of GPU render engines; the limited VRAM. I used Octane for a couple of years but recently bought Redshift. I am super, super impressed by the speed of it. It practically flew through everything I've thrown at it so far, even with volumetrics, lots of tiny lights, etc. I don't think any GPU render engine has any special feature that CPU render engines don't have, or at least I haven't heard of it yet. It's more the other way around. I'd say most people use CPU engines because they are more flexible and GPU because they are faster. If you want to render very, very big scenes with tons of geometry and lots and lots of textures you can't just use a GPU render.

God I love Worms! That new skin material is rather creepy though, looks like he's made of Döner 😄

I think the reason MAXON hasn't bothered with these modules for a long time is X-Particles. At least when it comes to fluid / particle / fire / smoke simulation that is completely covered by X-Particles and I don't think they could even come close to the functionality that it provides. That said, yes, Dynamics could use some love. Especially the Soft Bodies are horribly hard to control and work with.

For some reason all these images still look fake as all hell. I don't know what it is about ProRender, but I haven't seen a single Artwork yet that doesn't have this high gloss super fake early 2000s CGI look. It's a shame. But sure, great to have an alternative as Blender User that is also free.

Man you're doing these things at a speed...

I had the exact same problem a while ago... this is the solution. You need a sample Node to read the values of the effector.

Yeah I've been dabbling in Redshift as well for two or three weeks now and I'm impressed by how fast it is. Octane does definitely look slightly more realistic but compared to Redshift it's just slow, especially once you bring volumetrics into the scene (SSS, fog, etc.). I was impressed by how fast Redshift handles GI. Had a pretty suboptimal scene setup (room with a smoll hole where the only light shines through) and it still managed to render the scene at 4k in sub 5mins on a 2070 super with GI and full PBR setup. No flickering as well, just standard settings. The only thing I don't like so far is the material editor since it's built on top of XPresso. It's just fiddly especially if you're used to Substance Designer.

What was your experience with it? Any problems, pitfalls?