Full Version: MOI3D to Octane Render Tutorial

Show messages:  1-6  7-26  27-46  47-66  67-86  87-90

I saw it. But something it's still missing from my side.
What happen if my object it's far from the origin? How can I fit in the view? I mean, sometimes it's not that far but still not visible, seem strange to me that I need to seek for him.

Octane is a totally different type of render respect all the other actually used, so for sure I need to modify my workflow or just to learn how it work.


In any case thanks for the help.

---

There are some new navigation features coming in the next beta that allow you to click on an object and it immediately centers the view on that object. Is that what you are talking about?

That way, if your object is way, way far away, you can click on it and the view snaps to that object. It will also be helpful to those doing arch viz to quickly move around a building.

---

Yes, is that.
And maybe the possibility to personalize the mouse buttons, I prefer to pan "pushing" the MMB.
But there is no hurry!

---

Hi Phil,

Thanks for taking the time to create this tutorial.
I'm following it to export and render a little turntable of one of my model right now with the new beta.

I'm wondering if any enhancement will be done into Octane regarding the vertex normal info coming from MoI,
or if things will stay in the actual state.

When reading the tutorial, it sounds like Octane actually manage this normal info :
- from the .pdf - : Check the "import per material smooth value" and "use OBJ vertex normals if supplied". This will allow Octane to use the high quality vertex normals.

If it means : Octane will use the vertex normal embeded in the .OBJ file to create a nice and accurate shading from you object : it's WRONG ...
As showed and discuss during days here and on the Octane forum, the vertex normal info is overwritted.

That's actually why you suggest to use the 'divide larger than' option in the tutorial to 'help' octane to deal with some surfaces ... if the vertex normal was rightly used, this
option would not be needed, at all.

If you do some research on MoI forum, especially about MoI to 3Dsmax 1 or 2 years ago, you will see that this 'divide larger than' is often used to deal with export into 3d software where this precious normal info is lost.

These are 'poor' workarounds, not solutions from my pov ...

... and advertising Octane as a 'Moi/Rhino ready render is not very fair.

Again, I support this render engine as much as I can, and I don't want to sound negative etc. ... but it's really frustrating that no one from the Octane team seems to understand the problem.

---

This is the Octane material test scene ... The irony here is that the model is build in MoI, it's not normal (sorry :P) to have a so bad dancing reflection result on this 33.000 triangles spheres.

---

Ewww. What do the devs say over in the octane forum? I confess to forming a certain.. opinion.. based on the earlier discusion that took place here, but I assumed progress was being made over in the beta forums. Are they saying this is working as intended or something?

---

Yeah, I'm still seeing artifacts as well despite the claimed efforts to correct them.

I agree with Michael, I don't believe smoothing groups is the answer...

-Will

---

"I'm still seeing artifacts as well despite the claimed efforts to correct them"

Same here. I just purchased Octane assuming this was fixed after Michael's lengthy dialog with Octane.

I know my MoI model is good because it renders smooth in KeyShot.

Ed

---

Hey guys, put some pressure on the MoI to Octane thread then,

http://www.refractivesoftware.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=23&t=743&sid=92ebc45641680a2a39833b5cf8c9f914&p=13425#p13425

I can't have a discussion with Radiance myself anymore, looks I'm a bad little duck, never happy, and without any respect for the work done.

---

"You are not authorised to read this forum."

I'm not yet a customer because before I need that the problem with Moi will be addressed.
All the world of render engine (in particular GPU based) seem overpressure.
For now I pass, waiting to see what happen between arion, octane, shot, iray ....

But it's reality that all the application on the market nowadays are full of bug (except moi), missing feature and workflow issue. It's not only octane, that at least is still a beta.....

---

Hi Falcon,

Yop, I don't blame Octane, at all. I can understand bugs, beta etc, no problem.
The problem here, it's to make them admit there is a bug, I've never seen something like that before.

Last note from Radiance :

"the only remainins 'shading artifacts' is the intersections on low poly geometry with direct sunlight,
which is'nt an artifact, it's just something that's natural, there is no physically correct solution to it."

Have you seen the reflection sphere above ? :P ... seriously ... I don't get it.

The day he will consider that indeed, there is something stange, we all win. Then if it takes 6 months to fix it, I don't care.
The main problem is that he has no clue of what this sphere should look I guess.

---

"Last note from Radiance :

"the only remainins 'shading artifacts' is the intersections on low poly geometry with direct sunlight,
which is'nt an artifact, it's just something that's natural, there is no physically correct solution to it." "

I don't read the whole thread, but if I understand right ... so far I know it's a known general render technic problem. I can produce this kind of error per Vray too.

---

Make me wondering, maybe unbiased renderer can't deal with this 'special' normals surfaces ?

Will try to see if maxwell or fry can render them as expected ...

---

Hey Paq, can you post a picture how that sphere & reflections should look like if done correctly? I have a license for Octane and I'm willing to voice myself on the forums, but I don't know what I'm arguing about exactly :-)

---

Candide, check out the reflection of the cylindrical base at the bottom of the sphere.

I don't have access to the octane thread since I'm not a customer, but I definitely got the impression that Radiance had some walls up when presented with this issue in the earlier thread. I'm really disappointed to hear that they shut you out over there, Paq. You're one of the most respected members here and over in the modo forums, and I've never seen anything but helpful commentary from you.

---

->I can't have a discussion with Radiance myself anymore, looks I'm a bad little duck, never happy, and without any respect for the work done.

I don't believe that's true, your input and knowledge is most appreciated.

I don't know much about polygon stuff, I just know something doesn't work!

Marc

---

There's also a simple test file available here: CylinderOctaneTest.zip

That's a cylinder surface that is split into some slices. But the vertex normals on it come from the true cylinder NURBS surface, so creases or seams between the slices should not be apparent if those good normals are being used.

For example in Cinema4D importing the OBJ file from the zip file linked to above renders like this:



- Michael

---

Hi Michael

Just tried it both are faceted in Octane. For my understanding are the vertex normals in the .obj or in the .mtl file?

I hope this can be solved by the Octane crew. Thanks Michael for spending time on this as its not really your problem.

regards

Jamie

---

Hi Jamie, thanks for testing it.

> For my understanding are the vertex normals in
> the .obj or in the .mtl file?

They're in the .obj file - you can actually see them listed if you open the .obj file up in a text editor (try a text editor a bit more advanced than notepad, like notepad2 or notepad++), they're the "vn" entries that look like this:

vn 0.08659345 0.01440297 -0.99613961
vn 0.16999357 0.05883424 -0.98368731
vn 0.08664738 0.03098550 -0.99575706


When MoI exports an OBJ file, it puts the vertex normals from the smooth NURBS surface in there at the corners of each polygon that was created, so that when the polygon is rendered it can be shaded to closely resemble the original surface.

But if the stored vertex normals are not used and instead are just calculated by averaging the normals of adjacent polygon face normals together, it won't produce the same result.

- Michael

---

Hi Michael

The attached cylinder from blender works fine in octane. Any ideas why. I noticed that the vn entries in the blender file are shorter six figures after the decimal MoIs have eight. I have no idea if and why that would make a difference.

It does seem that MoIs files are different somehow. They will look at it in the next beta but if you have any ideas that would be great.

regard

Jamie

Attachments:
cylinder_blender.obj

---

Show messages:  1-6  7-26  27-46  47-66  67-86  87-90