
Quixel SUITE/PBR shader for Octane inside c4d
Moderators: ChrisHekman, aoktar
- prehabitat
- Posts: 495
- Joined: Fri Aug 16, 2013 10:30 am
- Location: Victoria, Australia
Hi Rickky,Rickky wrote:I don't understand why is so difficult with Quixel and so easy with substance painter ?
Do you use substance suite? Or just painter?
Win10/3770/16gb/K600(display)/GTX780(Octane)/GTX590/372.70
Octane 3.x: GH Lands VARQ Rhino5 -Rhino.io- C4D R16 / Revit17
Octane 3.x: GH Lands VARQ Rhino5 -Rhino.io- C4D R16 / Revit17
- prehabitat
- Posts: 495
- Joined: Fri Aug 16, 2013 10:30 am
- Location: Victoria, Australia
Hi Rickky,Rickky wrote:I don't understand why is so difficult with Quixel and so easy with substance painter ?
Do you use substance suite? Or just painter?
Win10/3770/16gb/K600(display)/GTX780(Octane)/GTX590/372.70
Octane 3.x: GH Lands VARQ Rhino5 -Rhino.io- C4D R16 / Revit17
Octane 3.x: GH Lands VARQ Rhino5 -Rhino.io- C4D R16 / Revit17
- prehabitat
- Posts: 495
- Joined: Fri Aug 16, 2013 10:30 am
- Location: Victoria, Australia
I thought the upgrade for painter was only $99 (only 149 for a new licence for that matter).
Unless you have multiple licences to upgrade?
Do you use the substance c4d plugin?
Or did you mean substance is easier because the Substance painted mats hook up to octane and present/look identically to in substance rather than the metal inconsistencies people seem to be getting with between Quixel and octane ?
Unless you have multiple licences to upgrade?
Do you use the substance c4d plugin?
Or did you mean substance is easier because the Substance painted mats hook up to octane and present/look identically to in substance rather than the metal inconsistencies people seem to be getting with between Quixel and octane ?
Win10/3770/16gb/K600(display)/GTX780(Octane)/GTX590/372.70
Octane 3.x: GH Lands VARQ Rhino5 -Rhino.io- C4D R16 / Revit17
Octane 3.x: GH Lands VARQ Rhino5 -Rhino.io- C4D R16 / Revit17
- prehabitat
- Posts: 495
- Joined: Fri Aug 16, 2013 10:30 am
- Location: Victoria, Australia
Aah, I was only looking at the indie pricing; I thought it was too good to be true.
I have Quixel already; might try SP trial and see if I like it... I like the idea of not wasting time (on a less refined workflow)
I have Quixel already; might try SP trial and see if I like it... I like the idea of not wasting time (on a less refined workflow)
Win10/3770/16gb/K600(display)/GTX780(Octane)/GTX590/372.70
Octane 3.x: GH Lands VARQ Rhino5 -Rhino.io- C4D R16 / Revit17
Octane 3.x: GH Lands VARQ Rhino5 -Rhino.io- C4D R16 / Revit17
- gordonrobb
- Posts: 1247
- Joined: Sat Mar 16, 2013 9:08 am
What is changing the gamma from 2.2 to 1.45 achieving. And if that works with maps for SP, ha anyone tried it with maps from Quixel. As far as I'm concerned, anything you have to tweak to set up, is not a very good export. I find that the Octain exporter in Quixel works well (not the Metalness one), as long as you have gamma of 2.2 for all maps except the roughness, which should be 1.
Windows 8 Pro | i7 3770 OC | 32 GB Ram | Single Titan (plus Black Edition on Order) | Octane Lightwave |
- gordonrobb
- Posts: 1247
- Joined: Sat Mar 16, 2013 9:08 am
Sorry I just noticed this thread was talking about C4D. I'm using Lightwave, but I don't imagine it should make much difference. I use the Octane (sRGB) exporter. plug maps into a glossy, all at 2.2 except the roughness which I set to 1. For non metals, i use in index of 1 and it should look right. For metals, I tweak the index way up. If I have a mix of both, I use two glossy nodes with different indexes, and mix them using either a high contrast version of the specular, or export a metalness map (after adding it to the project obfioulsy) and use that to mix. Results are shown here between quixel and Octane IPR.Rickky wrote:Can you elaborate more ? Which exporter do you use and can you show us some result ?
Thanks in advance
And something I textured in Quixel, rendered this way in Octane.
Windows 8 Pro | i7 3770 OC | 32 GB Ram | Single Titan (plus Black Edition on Order) | Octane Lightwave |