PDA

View Full Version : Lightwave 2018 - Unwanted reflection



jaxtone
05-13-2018, 04:42 AM
I cannot say I am skilled enough to master Lightwave 2018 and really would like someone to explain a probably easy thing to solve, when you know how.

Recently I did get into nodes when using UV maps in the Surface editor. The basics are no problem but as always when working in computer environment as a rookie its definitely one step ahead and nine backwards as soon as things stop working.

Here is an image of a simple scene of a container in Layout of where it does a 360 degree spin around its own center point. But how come this mirror like reflections appear in the upper surface of the container? I haven't designed the surface to act that way and do not know how to turn this reflection off. Is it set like that by default?

PS. The lower image is a preview from Lightwave modeler!

prometheus
05-13-2018, 06:10 AM
I cannot say I am skilled enough to master Lightwave 2018 and really would like someone to explain a probably easy thing to solve, when you know how.

Recently I did get into nodes when using UV maps in the Surface editor. The basics are no problem but as always when working in computer environment as a rookie its definitely one step ahead and nine backwards as soon as things stop working.

Here is an image of a simple scene of a container in Layout of where it does a 360 degree spin around its own center point. But how come this mirror like reflections appear in the upper surface of the container? I haven't designed the surface to act that way and do not know how to turn this reflection off. Is it set like that by default?

PS. The lower image is a preview from Lightwave modeler!

We really wouldn´t know how to advice properly without guessing too much if we do not know..
what material you are using?
and what kind of lights?
perhaps also what kind of light?
Ultimately you simply post the scene and object and someone will probably solve it for you in minutes.

Obviously you must have some sort of reflection on the top part of the container, make sure it isn´t reflective, seems you have two different surfaces going on...Just guessing.

Kryslin
05-13-2018, 06:46 AM
Turn up the roughness, and drop the specular. This assumes that you are using the principled material. Most plastics should have a very low specular/reflective component, and a fairly high roughness.

Tim Parsons
05-13-2018, 08:49 AM
Here is an image of a simple scene of a container in Layout of where it does a 360 degree spin around its own center point. But how come this mirror like reflections appear in the upper surface of the container? I haven't designed the surface to act that way and do not know how to turn this reflection off. Is it set like that by default?

In "Shading Model" set "Reflection Options" to "Raytrace Only" you most likely have it set to "Raytrace and Backdrop" . With "Raytrace Only" only scenes objects will effect shading/reflections.

JohnMarchant
05-13-2018, 09:13 AM
Also check your spec and roughness in VPR, change these settings from Final to specular direct or something else, it will show you what is effecting this. Its either you have roughness set to low when for plastic it should be higher and specular should be lower. If roughness or specular are texture maps then you need to turn them down or change them.

jaxtone
05-13-2018, 11:47 AM
Promotheus, Kryslin, John and Tim!

Thanks for your effort in helping me. This is start to feel like learning Lightwave from the start since all new default settings are confusing. Some settings are like they used to be and some are turned off.

I went into the shadow land and clicked down a default setting that turned out to be the problem!

JohnMarchant
05-13-2018, 12:23 PM
Promotheus, Kryslin, John and Tim!

Thanks for your effort in helping me. This is start to feel like learning Lightwave from the start since all new default settings are confusing. Some settings are like they used to be and some are turned off.

I went into the shadow land and clicked down a default setting that turned out to be the problem!

As far as rendering goes, we are all in the same boat, things are very different now in 2018 as far as rendering goes compared to 2015 or before. The reason i cant see myself ever using just 2018 alone, i will likely have 2015 and 2018 on my system for some time.

jaxtone
05-13-2018, 12:48 PM
I definitely run 11.6 and the new one at the same time but admit it feels like a shadow land at the moment.

I guess Lightwave 2018 needs a lot more basic video tutorials.

JohnMarchant
05-13-2018, 01:01 PM
Agreed, look for Andrew Comb 2018 videos on YouTube, he has some very good ones on Lighting and this may help you with your problems.

jaxtone
05-14-2018, 12:31 AM
Sorry!

The first image missed an important part.

Send a better image of where one has to turn off the gloss to avoid reflections.

Good to know for other rookies like myself!

rsfd
05-15-2018, 06:27 AM
^
you need to be aware that if you deactivate "Glossy Reflections" in the Shading Model Tab, you loose Environment Reflections (Indirect Specular Reflections) on that Material.
You will only get Direct Specular Reflections from scene lights.

If you aim towards photorealism and you are using Environments/HDRI Lighting, you should follow Kryslin's advice and fine tune the Material in the Specular/Metallic and Roughness Department.
(The Reflection on the top of the container comes from your Backdrop. It's the Fresnel effect).

jaxtone
05-15-2018, 10:57 PM
Yeah, I got what you mean!

But from time to time photorealism is less necessary than keeping up with time limits and budget. I was kind of frustrated when I had to accept this decades ago when some customers just didn't want to pay for time schedules that are delayed and might not have a genuine interest in Hollywood productions.

On the other hand I am going try to get away from that kind of business relations officially since it damage my chances to get customers that really want photorealism and state of the art productions. At least as I have the less interested customers products in my portfolio. Its a hard road to walk since three small jobs a year for the customers who do not want to complicate things and might have a mellow interest in realism pay more than a customer that needs the "real thing"!

But I get what you mean and definitely will try to get into the Octane Render engine since I experience Lightwave's native render as a joke! Its way to slow to make things affordable in the long run.


^
you need to be aware that if you deactivate "Glossy Reflections" in the Shading Model Tab, you loose Environment Reflections (Indirect Specular Reflections) on that Material.
You will only get Direct Specular Reflections from scene lights.

If you aim towards photorealism and you are using Environments/HDRI Lighting, you should follow Kryslin's advice and fine tune the Material in the Specular/Metallic and Roughness Department.
(The Reflection on the top of the container comes from your Backdrop. It's the Fresnel effect).

rsfd
05-17-2018, 11:30 AM
Just wanted to add this info, so that others probably discover that this trick also comes with a certain side effect that one should be aware of.

Regarding the new LW Renderer I can only state that I like the quality it can deliver. But I agree that it might not be the fastest engine around.

As a Mac user, I'm a bit off to Octane and other GPU renderers as I don't see Apple supporting Nvidia cards natively in the nearer future.
And I'm still doubtful about the speed that Octane probably will deliver when scenes get a bit more crowded and materials get a bit more complex.
(As it's very specialized too and as 3D is only a smaller side part of my work, an investment in multiple GPUs wouldn't be any useful equipment to me anyway).

Tobian
05-20-2018, 03:38 AM
Short answer. Your model is 'apparently' a rough old plastic, but your roughness is very low. Just increase the roughness. Increasing roughness will make it look less mirror like, and also, more importantly, reduce the reflectivity on glancing angles.

The display port can't really convey reflection of the environment well, which is why it looks different in ogl than render. It was ever thus (albeit better).

jaxtone
05-21-2018, 02:06 AM
Tobian!

I listen and learn from you guys and must say that this new render machine, its light and material options are like a riddle to me! So different from the old options and names for how to increase and decrease values!

Thanks!

Tobian
05-21-2018, 02:46 AM
To be fair the new system is simple. The main control for specular is roughness, the specular control is less relevant, and in most game engine texture sets is just a static 50% (hence substance painter doesn't create a spec map by default)

Your main issue is you think it's more complex, and or you are thinking in the old model, which was wrong...

jaxtone
05-21-2018, 02:56 AM
I am Swedish but I guess the old expression "Old dogs and Englishmen" would do just fine in the context that I have been using Lightwave's interface since 1996. Meaning that its hard to learn old dogs to sit where you need them to be.

Gosh, this will take time to master!

I have tried the roughness thing but it didn't change anything at all when I am in the Surface Editors "Standard Mode".


To be fair the new system is simple. The main control for specular is roughness, the specular control is less relevant, and in most game engine texture sets is just a static 50% (hence substance painter doesn't create a spec map by default)

Your main issue is you think it's more complex, and or you are thinking in the old model, which was wrong...

Tobian
05-21-2018, 04:01 AM
Ohhhhhh..

Ok change to pbsdf. The standard material should be renamed 'this material is crappy old and doesn't work right and isn't pbr' but newtek didn't want too. Don't use it unless you *have* too and there are very few reasons too.

jaxtone
05-21-2018, 10:26 AM
Crappy is my middle name at the moment... I use what I understand and that kind of useless light somehow has been a companion. I adapt slowly into a new world of possible wins and some failures. In the future there might be less dips into the bowl of goofy choices! :)


Ohhhhhh..

Ok change to pbsdf. The standard material should be renamed 'this material is crappy old and doesn't work right and isn't pbr' but newtek didn't want too. Don't use it unless you *have* too and there are very few reasons too.

rsfd
05-21-2018, 10:27 AM
jaxtone,

most (if not all) of us here obviously assumed you were already using the Principled Shader (BRDF).
As Tobian already stated, this should be your everyday shader within LW2018.

If you want to become more familiar with it, I would highly recommend reading Allegorithmic's "PBR Guides 1+2":
https://www.allegorithmic.com/pbr-guide

cheers

jaxtone
05-21-2018, 10:56 AM
Say what?

I must say that I never thought I would read anything thicker than a bible! But this information in deed needs some Amphetamine as help to get stuck inside my brain before I fall asleep :)

Thanks for the tips but that was so massive that an old "white paper hater" just died mentally. Its probably really good information of what I can see this far but I guess the time ain't just right. Have too many cloths in the customer pipeline at the moment. To me that went from 9.11 to the 2108 version in just a week ago this is at least a 2 week constantly reading process with added trial and errors in the luggage before I even understand the half of it.

But hey, thanks. I know I am going to need somehow!


jaxtone,

most (if not all) of us here obviously assumed you were already using the Principled Shader (BRDF).
As Tobian already stated, this should be your everyday shader within LW2018.

If you want to become more familiar with it, I would highly recommend reading Allegorithmic's "PBR Guides 1+2":
https://www.allegorithmic.com/pbr-guide

cheers

rsfd
05-21-2018, 11:50 AM
no problem (as you now know where to find it when you like to read it)

cheers

Tobian
05-24-2018, 02:31 AM
Jaxtone. Those aren't white papers, they are friendly and beautiful visual guides with rich pictures and easy to understand visuals...

jaxtone
05-25-2018, 01:38 AM
Tobian!

Don't know of you just were sarcastic but since a rendering process is running in the background I got some time to answer mostly because I believe there might be more than me that do not experience "white papers" as friction less how "friendly" they might be. Well, opinions are like onions and to peel layer by layer always comes down to the same result, "after the core nothing is left."

I started to read Lightwave's white papers 1996 and because of slow internet connections I had patience with these awful papers by then but wished there was a way to watch understandable video tutorials instead.

I do not wan´t to be rude but the "friendly and beautiful visual guides with rich pictures" you talk about sounds more like a selling point for old schoolbooks from the 60´s to me. I am glad to say that my experience by helping schools and pedagogic institutions with educational material in this century definitely goes the other way, away from the old behavior where white papers or what we like to call them discriminate a huge amount of students or users.

It feels like you may have missed a few points here and first of all I must connect to the studies Boeing and Texas Instruments made in 2010 where they stated that the learning curve was shortened by 30% at its lowest rate when 3D was used instead of traditional white papers in education about basic all day information or advanced technical stuff. I was involved in educational systems using Stereoscopy or Auto-stereoscopy and when I noticed how fast new surgeons learnt how to deal with the human body when seeing it displayed as a hologram instead of white papers it was a dramatic and beautiful experience to me. To tell stories or show connections and associations have been my goal since I painted my first oil in the 50's and finally we´we got there.

Another thought is this. If a company that seriously works with 3D and officially market themselves as an alternative and competitive resource for filmmakers and uses the word visualization connected to 3D and film I guess the word you use to convince me of that "rich pictures" are friendly makes me warm inside. Of course someone have made these with the best intentions but in the wrong century.

I guess the expression "one image says more than thousand words" are not up to date with the fact that a film or animation mainly uses 25, 30 or a variable amount of pictures every second. The word "rich" can mean lots of things but not to convince me of that one single image in general would be a better alternative than a film sequence with a voice over that explains exactly how to do things. Believe me, I have struggled with these white papers during the years and are so sick and tired of them I faint as soon as they are opened. My experience is the opposite of yours depending on that many of these "rich still image makers" results I have struggled with during the years haven't locked in all moments of a tutorial in the text and it sure took some years to learn why! Many times they just don't add the easy parts since its so obvious to them selves which of course can stop anyone that ain't skilled enough in the basics.

Thanks for you answer and have a nice day!

https://books.google.se/books?id=MMaeBQAAQBAJ&pg=PA265&lpg=PA265&dq=texas+instruments+about+stereoscopy&source=bl&ots=uU3f4fKbyh&sig=AbV_l2gsv9WqIAiDr5zqzJzoZjI&hl=sv&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwj_lI7MraDbAhUE3iwKHRvHApwQ6AEIVzAJ#v=on epage&q=texas%20instruments%20about%20stereoscopy&f=false

http://jaredjared.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/Bendis-Stereoscopy.pdf



Jaxtone. Those aren't white papers, they are friendly and beautiful visual guides with rich pictures and easy to understand visuals...

Tobian
05-25-2018, 02:33 AM
You could have read the guides in the time it took you to write that. Repeated in case you missed it. No, no sarcasm (today). Try reading the guides and they may help. If not, we tried.

https://www.allegorithmic.com/pbr-guide

jaxtone
05-25-2018, 03:27 AM
Tobian!

I could for sure have done that and get more migraine than I can handle at the moment, but even thinking about hanging in with printed papers without instant information gives me a hangover without booze. Just let me ask you this about the first text you wrote:

"To be fair the new system is simple. The main control for specular is roughness, the specular control is less relevant, and in most game engine texture sets is just a static 50% (hence substance painter doesn't create a spec map by default) Your main issue is you think it's more complex, and or you are thinking in the old model, which was wrong..."

I wonder if you missed that this is an indisputable subjective opinion and that I maybe disagree because I don't feel the same way? I might have misunderstood your intention here but since I don't force you to follow my steps so why do you act like your opinion about simplicity would be a dictate for me to follow? Most of the wavers on this forum, both un-experienced and experienced have told me that the step from 11.6 to Lightwave 2018 may be experienced as steep and complicated. You are the only one that says the opposite, that it is simple and that I have misunderstood how simple Lighwave 2018 is. God I hope you are right Tobian but it actually feels like your opinion doesn't fit into my learning curve after two weeks in a quite new environment.

Believe me, I swallow the information you share and are grateful for that but how come that the gap between the both version is perceived as simple by you and no one else?

I wish you a nice day on an island in the sun that surely is packed with white papers. Personally I don´t fit into that environment any longer. Those white papers are haunting me :)

SBowie
05-25-2018, 07:40 AM
I wonder if you missed that this is an indisputable subjective opinion and that I maybe disagree because I don't feel the same way? I might have misunderstood your intention here but since I don't force you to follow my steps so why do you act like your opinion about simplicity would be a dictate for me to follow? Most of the wavers on this forum, both un-experienced and experienced have told me that the step from 11.6 to Lightwave 2018 may be experienced as steep and complicated. You are the only one that says the opposite, that it is simple and that I have misunderstood how simple Lighwave 2018 is. God I hope you are right Tobian but it actually feels like your opinion doesn't fit into my learning curve after two weeks in a quite new environment.

Believe me, I swallow the information you share and are grateful for that but how come that the gap between the both version is perceived as simple by you and no one else?

I wish you a nice day on an island in the sun that surely is packed with white papers. Personally I don´t fit into that environment any longer. Those white papers are haunting me :)I just want to take a second to commend you for taking the high road in expressing yourself in this post ... a disagreement, to be sure, but handled with dignity and a little humor rather than vitriol. Thank you.

Tobian
05-25-2018, 01:50 PM
Don't worry Steve. I'm done being helpful, I've had more than enough vitriol poured on me today.