Huh. Well, that’s what I’ve been fiddling, but it only seems to increase opacity with depth rather than light absorption, so I end up with a more opaque object as the depth increases, but what I really want is for the color of the object to get darker.
You know, like how red wine basically turns black.
Yeah, I don’t know. I only used it once in a project. I used to use the Igor’s Glass Shader and it seemed to do what you ask…thought the second tab controls gave you that.
Maybe it’s ony an approximation rather than the real thing.
Yeah, that RT Glass shader did convincing absorption, but I’ll be darned if I can get it happening in EI using the native controls.
On a related note, I downloaded the 7.0.1 demo last night. I haven’t tried out the refraction mapping, but I was very impressed by the layer rendering. In modo layer rendering is like some sort of cruel practical joke, but in EI it’s just stellar simple setup, perfect results. Very cool.
I’m rendering wine bottles for a web site I’m designing, and I’m finding that EI is really the perfect tool for this sort of thing. Its flawless anti-aliasing and alpha channel rendering really shines for the task.
Of course, it would be nice if I could finagle some light absorption, but for the time being it’s not a big deal. Maybe later on when I need some shots of red wine glasses. . . .
The only thing holding me back from upgrading is the price. I know this was discussed here already, but for me the upgrade price is just too steep. This doesn’t mean that I don’t think the new features are worth the price; just that for me it’s too much to fork out. I mean as cool as the new stuff is, all I really need at the moment is for my Open/Save dialog boxes to work in Leopard (6.5 crashes) and $450 (or whatever) is a lot of money to pay for a bug fix. So for the time being I’m dual booting back to Tiger when I need to use EI.
I know a lot of people will say it’s a mistake to upgrade an OS without first testing your software on it, and while I don’t think they’re wrong per se, I decided a long time ago that that approach was a mistake for me. Long term, there’s nothing worse than finding yourself trapped on an old, outdated OS because some app you need was never upgraded. So I jump on every new OS release, and whatever apps break get left behind. Tough love, I guess.
But I digress. . . .
Hi Mark and everyone else,
Through the end of this month, we are running a 20% off the upgrade price. Enter this coupon when asked for it, during the ordering process online, and this will make the deduction for you.
Hope this helps you out.
Coupon: MAYSPECIAL
Best Regards,
Phil Martin
EITG Sales
I’m sure you’ll find a way to get what you’re after:-).
Good job on the web site!
I was very surprised the first time I use the layer rendering controls. Really, really simple to use and got exactly what I expected to. Very well implemented.
I have to completely agree on what you say about EI’s AA and alpha channels - the results are always predictable and look good. Having true HDRI support opens up EI for product rendering considerably.
I don’t have a clue of how to do absorption in EI but your wine bottles look really cool Mark, congratulations ! :bounce:
Are they rendered with EI ?
If that’s the case, then it’s already a very good render of glass you have there. 
Cheers,
Laurent aka Tartiflette
Thank you Laurent, and you too Paul. I like the way they look just real enough to be believable, but also idealized that is, more beautiful than reality. The absorption isn’t really an issue yet since the effect isn’t really noticeable in white wines or the nearly-opaque bottles, but at some point I’m going to need to render some glasses of red wine, and there it’ll be important. I know modo can do absorption convincingly, but I never seem to be able to get artifact-free (or consistent) anti-aliasing out of modo. Whenever I need to get something done, I always turn to EI!
Yes, idealized product rendering is where it is at!!
Unless you are animating the reds I’m sure you can get pretty close with a combo of EI and Photoshop.
If you are doing glasses of wine then it is time for an upgrade to V7…just the refractive mapping will be worth the added price.
Modo does some stuff very well but in some cases just doesn’t cut it for me either…and AA is also one of them. Especially in comparison to EI. I do like it’s micro-displacement though:-)
There are some aspects of EI which I take for granted until I go into another app and find they are way behind what I have had it terms of quality for years. Mind you it is also the other way around in some cases.
WHy is nothing mentioned in the EI website. It could be a good idea to post this info in the website. just a thought . I give a try this time see if i can get it trhu
Yeah, the displacements are pretty sophisticated, but insanely memory-hungry. Ravenous, really. In fact, this is a bit of a problem because I have found that what I would normally use bump maps for in EI requires actual displacement to yield acceptable results in modo. The same bump map which looks great in EI sharply detailed looks like spongy mush in modo unless I just switch it over to displacement instead. This would be fine except that if you displace even a relatively small object or area, suddenly even low resolution renders gobble up multiple gigabytes of RAM. So then you gotta go in and make a tedious polygonal selection set in order to confine the displacement to just the regions that will benefit, and . . . well, you get the idea, and I’m sure you’ve run into this problem yourself. But this is one of those reasons why I always find myself back in EI when I need to get something done for real: I end up having to do a lot more work in modo just to get simple stuff done that EI does in its sleep. Modo is like a big, fascinating toy, but it’s got a long way to go before it becomes a truly useful tool. For me, anyway. But you know, it’s the current 3D darling. That’ll wear off as people get familiar with all its little quirks and gotchas. I like it, though. For all its faults. Like you said, there’s some stuff it does really well better than any other app I’ve tried. Those previews!
Wow! I never knew it was so demanding. I did have one project which rendered out at about 3000X2400 pixels without any issues. Couldn’t have done it without the displacement features.
In all honesty, EI’s bumps, both image wise and procedural are far better than any other app I’ve used. Especially procedural bumps…EI are so natural and beautifully detailed.
I’m just working on a project where the client wants it huge - at the last minute - 6000X4800. Just not an issue in EI where-as anywhere else it will either crash or run out of memory.
Yeah, it’s pretty crazy. Look in the Render window and watch the Geometry Cache bloat to obscene levels as you render displacements. I don’t mean to criticize it I’m sure it’s using as much as it needs to but wow. I’ve only got 2 GB of RAM on my machine, so it can get a little scary sometimes, and on my girlfriend’s 1 GB MacBook you can forget it unless you go in and isolate the displacement to only the essential polygons (which can be a pain).
EI’s bump-maps really are fantastic. Unless you get super close they look almost as good as displacements. Obviously there’s things you can’t do that you need displacements for, but I was just appalled by modo’s bump-mapping. I don’t even bother trying them anymore they look so poor; I just automatically switch the channel to Displacement. And happily the displacement quality is great if you’ve got the RAM.
Holy cow, I just noticed you said 6000x4800! I’ve never rendered anything even approaching that size.
Hi Paul, how far can you go size wise with Rhino/Brazil combi. With EI, I’m not surprised you dont have memory issues with largish images as you mostly are using procedurals.
Martin K
I’m not sure with Brazil4Rhino - a few versions back the largest I could go on one project was roughly 3000 X 2400 but there have been some changes since.
My technique with different 3D apps doesn’t really change much so I’m not sure of the point you are making:-) Yes, EI handles procedurals very well.
No point other than using procedurals takes less memory that using a lot of bitmap textures.
I’ve occasionally had to render very large images and one soon seems to run out of memory when you’re getting up to the 4500 pixel wide, what with the size of bitmap required and the necessary denser mesh. I was curious about the Rhino/Brazil combination and how far it would go size wise.
Martin K
I’ll let you know on the Brazil/Rhino size once the beta is over…which should be quite soon.
The Rhino crowd is a bit of a different crowd…for the most part, a one button click is what many want a render engine to be. They want very, very simple but with great output:-)
Seems Brazil has gotten it’s share of “it’s too complex” from many users though I can get a great looking image out of it with about 5-6 clicks. It’s pretty simple but might be a little more than most want. I hope it does well as it deserves to - great render and makes using Rhino a complete joy.
I’m completely sold on having a half-decent rendering engine in one’s modeler.
Yes, I have the beta, but haven’t tried it yet- it’s the time thing. It looks complex enough to have to spend a fair bit of time on.
I think with all these things, the art is getting the potential user going quickly enough- with something…There needs to be some sort of quick start that you can build on.
Rhino is a nice modelling environent, but not too keen on the meshing- it can bring the Modo ‘model’ window to a stand still. Modo is best with its own inhouse modelling/mesh at rendertime system.
Did a bit of EI messing about earlier- it really needs a better previewing facility. I notice mostly the mesh shading quality and the nicely shaped highlights. Also the way objects are affected by the lights in a way you don’t get with c4d.
Martin K
