- Thank you received: 0
Using Solidrock .52, but result isent...
16 years 2 months ago #622
by MartinLau
Using Solidrock .52, but result isent... was created by MartinLau
Yesterday i resided to buy SR, and the scene i had problem rendering before, well guess what still have even with Ultra settings, its not what i expected, so if you guyz have an idea what to change to get a even smooth result plz let me know, cause i have no idea 
As you can see, the one side nearest to the camera is clean, but the further part is not, its like the right part is not rendered liked the left part.
As you can see, the one side nearest to the camera is clean, but the further part is not, its like the right part is not rendered liked the left part.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
16 years 2 months ago #626
by subburb
Replied by subburb on topic Re:Using Solidrock .52, but result isent...
hmm.... tricky 
seems to be a reflect caustics problem, but not sure, or very dark lighting leading in bad irrmap sampling.
Please Try to disable reflective caustics (and refractive, to be sure ) to see if it helps.
Make a try at medium or good mode to see if it helps to cleanup.
It can gives this kind of results if u use a sun (intensity 1.0) with standard cam.
As i'm actually working on next release, this scene is really interesting me
especially because it's tricky,and works bad in SR.
If you want, just send it to me at This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., i'll try to find the problem, and use your scene (if you're ok) for the \"in progress\" 0.6 version of SR
seems to be a reflect caustics problem, but not sure, or very dark lighting leading in bad irrmap sampling.
Please Try to disable reflective caustics (and refractive, to be sure
) to see if it helps.Make a try at medium or good mode to see if it helps to cleanup.
It can gives this kind of results if u use a sun (intensity 1.0) with standard cam.
As i'm actually working on next release, this scene is really interesting me
especially because it's tricky,and works bad in SR.If you want, just send it to me at This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., i'll try to find the problem, and use your scene (if you're ok) for the \"in progress\" 0.6 version of SR
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
16 years 2 months ago #627
by MartinLau
Replied by MartinLau on topic Re:Using Solidrock .52, but result isent...
I just try to increase the light atm, to find out if its the lightning that is to dark, after that i just mail it to you so you can use it in your 0.6 release, i then try the other things you mentioned tomorrow, its getting late here.
Almost am sure its not rendering corect again, this screenshot is taken when it calculate the Light Cache.
Surprised me that the result is a clean picture.
I have been unable to get the bad result again, i tryed to undo all the settings as i could remember, but unfortunately i can only get teh clean result now, but i uploaded the file for you anyway, i hope you get the bad result as i did, so you can find out for your self what is needed other then increase the light output.
But for some reason i can see the exterior light is off, that might bee what makes the difference, i try to find out what went wrong there, i know i did not turn them off hmm
I try to set it to render while i sleep, and post the result to morrow.
And here is the result after tonight render: Clean as it should bee, so SolidRock worked as it should
.
Almost am sure its not rendering corect again, this screenshot is taken when it calculate the Light Cache.
Surprised me that the result is a clean picture.
I have been unable to get the bad result again, i tryed to undo all the settings as i could remember, but unfortunately i can only get teh clean result now, but i uploaded the file for you anyway, i hope you get the bad result as i did, so you can find out for your self what is needed other then increase the light output.
But for some reason i can see the exterior light is off, that might bee what makes the difference, i try to find out what went wrong there, i know i did not turn them off hmm
I try to set it to render while i sleep, and post the result to morrow.And here is the result after tonight render: Clean as it should bee, so SolidRock worked as it should
.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
16 years 2 months ago #628
by subburb
Replied by subburb on topic Re:Using Solidrock .52, but result isent...
Hmm.. strange, but in the good way
I can't open your scnene here (max2009 64 on vista 64). max just crashes.
So i've tried ti merge your scene in a empty one.
Only cam and light comes, and a strange object, wich seems to be an aberration (displaced carpet ?)
i can't make a printscreen, because it crashes just after...
But, when i try to open you scene, it tells me that it's an older vray version blabla...
I'm on Vray 1.5sp2
I can't open your scnene here (max2009 64 on vista 64). max just crashes.
So i've tried ti merge your scene in a empty one.
Only cam and light comes, and a strange object, wich seems to be an aberration (displaced carpet ?)
i can't make a printscreen, because it crashes just after...
But, when i try to open you scene, it tells me that it's an older vray version blabla...
I'm on Vray 1.5sp2
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
16 years 2 months ago #630
by MartinLau
Replied by MartinLau on topic Re:Using Solidrock .52, but result isent...
Strange, i know max sometimes crash if the path to the textures isent correct anymore, i remapped the texture path to C:\maps and re uploaded it again. Can also bee cause i'm using danish chars in the textures also, that i also corrected.
Im also using max 2009 with Vray 1.50 SP2, so should not bee any difference there.
So hope it works this time
Same path again as before.
Im also using max 2009 with Vray 1.50 SP2, so should not bee any difference there.
So hope it works this time
Same path again as before.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
Time to create page: 0.252 seconds
