VfR4 / VfR3 SR1

[Theory13]

Re: VfR4 / VfR3 SR1

...we're doing the infinite DR licenses. ...

this would be nice.

[caje]

Re: VfR4 / VfR3 SR1

Is that a joke? :-X

[Travis Serio_cg]

Re: VfR4 / VfR3 SR1

i dont think so, i heard the same thing from Joe once.

[Gijs]

Re: VfR4 / VfR3 SR1

It is possible...I will post the tests when the renders finish. I think it might need some tweeking, but we will see...

Here is the view from inside the box...The red wall will be invisible from the outside


Here is the view from outside the box...The wall is invisible yet still influences the lighting in the box, and appears on the reflections of the ball. Unfortunately the outside surface doesn't bounce any light, which leads to the odd shadows on the ground.

Looks great

[dalomar_cg]

Re: VfR4 / VfR3 SR1

Joe, if possible, please implement some "invisible for camera" stuff, so that the user can render an interior through a single surface wall. If it is only material based, it's ok. Most, it is needed for "look in to closed rooms" only.

This just got added to the new vray book...Its amazing how this is pretty much the only thing to really say about the sketchup 2sided material.

@Kreten+Travis
Infinite DR licenses is no joke. VfMax's DR is currently supporting infinite DR licenses with a total of 256 possible threads per DR license (or something like that).

[joe_b]

Re: VfR4 / VfR3 SR1

@Kreten+Travis
Infinite DR licenses is no joke. VfMax's DR is currently supporting infinite DR licenses with a total of 256 possible threads per DR license (or something like that).

I think they are actually doing 10 DR licenses per license and something like 1000 Network Licenses per license. At least those are the defaults I've been seeing. I'm not sure if it is infinite anymore.

[ALTO]

Re: VfR4 / VfR3 SR1

Hi Joe,
there will be some UI improvements in SR1?

Not a full UI rewrite, only something like Copy&Paste for textures and colors, Drag&Drop materials to object, dynamic UpDown controls etc...

Also could you "optimize" the material editor size?
I think it's too big at the moment and some elements are not aligned correctly:




Here is my modified version:



I've reduced vertical and horizontal spaces, i've changed some elements position to reflect more the VrayforMax Material editor and to get better vertical alignment.
Please look at it and tell me what do you think.

As you can see i've also changed layers position, i think put them in order of relevance is more logical and easy to understand instead of the "physical properties" order.
I mean diffuse and reflective layers are the most used in material creation and usually they also have more relevance in complex materials.
...only my opinion

[merlik585]

Re: VfR4 / VfR3 SR1

Oh !!!

Nice and clean and very logical.

I like that !

Renee

[Micha_cg]

Re: VfR4 / VfR3 SR1

Yes, the UI could be more compact, only the physical layer order, this I would keep. And the emissive layer could be placed below the reflection layer, good for easier simulation of backlighted shiny plastics.

[joe_b]

Re: VfR4 / VfR3 SR1

Hi Joe,
there will be some UI improvements in SR1?

Unfortunately I don't think so - we plan to completely overhaul our UI after this release. The reason being is that our plan is to make V-Ray a one-click rendering engine. Meaning it will come in a default state that will be easy for beginners to jump right in and go. Obviously - this will require much more than a simple face-lift. I understand all of your points, as we have internally discussed this as well as had other users bring up similar issues - but I simply don't know that we'll have time to do much tweaking on the UI side between now and the official SR1 release. Basically SR1 is the stuff we feel we "owe" our users. Things that we really wanted in place when we first released VfR back in July. These include the physical sky/cam, distributed rendering, larger models being able to be rendered, etc. Though we realize that there is a lot of room for improvement in our UI, I hope you can understand our logic in not addressing them yet.

But who knows - your design will definitely trigger discussion internally over here to determine if our priorities are correct.

As you can see i've also changed layers position, i think put them in order of relevance is more logical and easy to understand instead of the "physical properties" order.
I mean diffuse and reflective layers are the most used in material creation and usually they also have more relevance in complex materials.

I have them placed in the order in which they actually appear in the shader. Unfortunately an ugly side-effect of changing this order would mean the transparency between layers would be even more confusing than it already is to our users. An example being that, in your example, changing the diffuse transparency would still, in reality, affect refraction, even though by the looks of it - it would affect reflection.

[merlik585]

Re: VfR4 / VfR3 SR1



[/quote]
The reason being is that our plan is to make V-Ray a one-click rendering engine.
[/quote]

and would it still be possible to tweak what we want ?That is what I like about vray,not being force in using settings other choose for me.

Renee

[ALTO]

Re: VfR4 / VfR3 SR1

.... I understand all of your points, as we have internally discussed this as well as had other users bring up similar issues - but I simply don't know that we'll have time to do much tweaking on the UI side between now and the official SR1 release.
....
Though we realize that there is a lot of room for improvement in our UI, I hope you can understand our logic in not addressing them yet.

Thanks for your response, i understand perfectly.

....mmh ...no offense but see the screenshot of actual material editor, for me it looks like an alpha/beta version, same elements in different layers have different order and alignment, some words are too long .....
i think fix these things doesn't takes so much time....but you know better than me! :P

... in your example, changing the diffuse transparency would still, in reality, affect refraction, even though by the looks of it - it would affect reflection.

Yes i know about that problem infact i think transparency and/or blending options should have a different position, maybe like in Max:



or in Brazil for Rhino:



...or better like in Maxwell where layers are not divided by physical properties order (except coating,emissive and SSS) but each layer contains Diffuse, Reflective, Refractive parameters, and transparency/blending options works in a different way.

But i don't know if this can be done in Vray.
???

[joe_b]

Re: VfR4 / VfR3 SR1

and would it still be possible to tweak what we want ?That is what I like about vray,not being force in using settings other choose for me.

Of course - we will not put any limits on the full power of V-Ray, which lies in its many settings. But we will have the default style set to be a "beginners" mode. The same UI will, with advancements, will be available to the expert users like you guys.

[joe_b]

Re: VfR4 / VfR3 SR1

....mmh ...no offense but see the screenshot of actual material editor, for me it looks like an alpha/beta version, same elements in different layers have different order and alignment, some words are too long .....
i think fix these things doesn't takes so much time....but you know better than me! :P

I don't claim to know better than anyone Yes - our UI is essentially a beta product's UI and we would like to change it. But, as a small development company, have to make choices between functionality and looks. For this round I think our clients are better served with additional V-Ray functionality. Though I too cringe at certain aspects that you've brought up.

... in your example, changing the diffuse transparency would still, in reality, affect refraction, even though by the looks of it - it would affect reflection.

Yes i know about that problem infact i think transparency and/or blending options should have a different position, maybe like in Max:

or in Brazil for Rhino:

...or better like in Maxwell where layers are not divided by physical properties order (except coating,emissive and SSS) but each layer contains Diffuse, Reflective, Refractive parameters, and transparency/blending options works in a different way.

But i don't know if this can be done in Vray.
???

Yep - I'm not sure whats "best". I don't think that our current setup for layer blending is intuitive to all users. The Maxwell setup is basically just layered materials - each layer is its own full shader consisting of all the different layer types (Diffuse, etc..). Thats kind of how V-Ray for Max works - you layer up materials using a Blend material. I'm not sure which way is more physically correct or more easy to work with, or more flexible.

The points you bring up show exactly why we don't want to just jump into this quickly. We would like to spend a lot of time with our users and very carefully plan where to go from here. That isn't going to happen between now and SR1's release, at least not to any level that will add any significant value to our product.

All I can say to kinda wrap this up is - we're a young product. We didn't start off expecting we'd actually make a material editor / texture editor. We took it to a level where it was as functional as possible within our time and resource restraints. Is it perfect? God no. But its just our first iteration of it. We know it needs fixing - but can you honestly say you'd rather me work on aligning text controls over implementing the Sky/Sun and distributed rendering?

I do appreciate your input - and I'm sure you, and other users, will have a hand when we start the design process for iteration 2 of our UI.

[merlik585]

Re: VfR4 / VfR3 SR1

Of course - we will not put any limits on the full power of V-Ray, which lies in its many settings. But we will have the default style set to be a "beginners" mode. The same UI will, with advancements, will be available to the expert users like you guys.

OUF

Renee