OTOY Forums

Hi Ahmet,

After using 3.08 I'm getting different colors from specular materials. See attachment which also includes the scene file made to illustrate the problem. This is quite a big problem since most of my materials I made before are now just a bit off. It would be a crazy amount of work to adjust every single material. I'm guessing it has something to do with the IOR interpretation which I assume has been adjusted in 3.08?

My question is if this is intentional or a bug? And if it isn't a bug, do you know the calculation or setup color correction to correct the materials so they are identical between 3.08 and 3.07.

Thanks in advance,

Tim

Tim_Twisted_1 wrote:Hi Ahmet,

After using 3.08 I'm getting different colors from specular materials. See attachment which also includes the scene file made to illustrate the problem. This is quite a big problem since most of my materials I made before are now just a bit off. It would be a crazy amount of work to adjust every single material. I'm guessing it has something to do with the IOR interpretation which I assume has been adjusted in 3.08?

My question is if this is intentional or a bug? And if it isn't a bug, do you know the calculation or setup color correction to correct the materials so they are identical between 3.08 and 3.07.

Thanks in advance,

Tim

This is the most frustrating part about octane. A guy is almost better off keeping a note in a text document of what version they used on a certain project in case you need to go back. Its great that its always evolving as a program but it is nearly impossible to go back when needed for a client.

Wish I could help you, good luck.

aoktar wrote:

GIOLETS wrote:Hi Aoktar,
here I've recorded a brief video that shows the problem, ass I said I've found the same on 2 different machine.
I don't say that is a bug, but ask where to investigate in order to know the relationship between my texture path and the camera imager while rendering in Live Viewer.
My texture disk (E:/) it's an SSD with almost 500GB of data, but never had this problem before (3.06 and 3.08 test 6)

slow viewport_01.mp4

Do you have a custom lut in imager?

I think to have found the solution: loading a LUT file into "custom LUT" field the viewport response come back to normality.
So it seems that the Camera always search for a LUT file and, using large texture disk, cause some lag in the viewport.. so Aoktar if you confirm this I think is very easy to fix.

Hi, here are some questions:

1- Is the vertex map broken? I'm using it on a landskape t as a map with octane scatter, no difference with the map loaded or unloaded in the vertx map slot.

2- when will offline mode be available again? At the end of the month I might have to move temporarily for a couple of weeks in a spot with no internet, will bring my workstation with me to continue a job and nne dto authenticate offline mode before i'm leaving. Same thing might happen this summer.

3- has something changed in the "keep away" slot in octane scatter? whenever I change it the cpu throttles to 95%+ for ages (minutes), I have used it in the past without problems . Testing it with simple cubes (just 300 clones)

Thank you for your help

jelly wrote:Hi, here are some questions:

1- Is the vertex map broken? I'm using it on a landskape t as a map with octane scatter, no difference with the map loaded or unloaded in the vertx map slot.

2- when will offline mode be available again? At the end of the month I might have to move temporarily for a couple of weeks in a spot with no internet, will bring my workstation with me to continue a job and nne dto authenticate offline mode before i'm leaving. Same thing might happen this summer.

3- has something changed in the "keep away" slot in octane scatter? whenever I change it the cpu throttles to 95%+ for ages (minutes), I have used it in the past without problems . Testing it with simple cubes (just 300 clones)

Thank you for your help

1-No. Please share your experience.
2-On next builts.
3-No. It depends to topology and complexity of faces. Be careful while changing values. It's heavy effect for cpu.

LFedit wrote:
This is the most frustrating part about octane. A guy is almost better off keeping a note in a text document of what version they used on a certain project in case you need to go back. Its great that its always evolving as a program but it is nearly impossible to go back when needed for a client.

Wish I could help you, good luck.

You can see the version that you're created/last edited. Just check Console window when you loaded a scene.

LFedit wrote:
This is the most frustrating part about octane. A guy is almost better off keeping a note in a text document of what version they used on a certain project in case you need to go back. Its great that its always evolving as a program but it is nearly impossible to go back when needed for a client.

Wish I could help you, good luck.

This is exactly what I've been doing for the last 26 years, and what you really should be doing, regardless of what production tools you are using. Every completed project archive should have a document that lists all the tools and the versions of those tools used in its production. Tools change over time, and backward compatibility is never guaranteed. I think I have six mothballed workstations with full installations of multiple software versions going all the way back. If I need to, I can probably get my old Electric Image projects from the 90s up and running in a few hours. I don't think I've ever had to go more than one generation back for a client, but you never know.

- Frank

frankmci wrote:

LFedit wrote:
This is the most frustrating part about octane. A guy is almost better off keeping a note in a text document of what version they used on a certain project in case you need to go back. Its great that its always evolving as a program but it is nearly impossible to go back when needed for a client.

Wish I could help you, good luck.

This is exactly what I've been doing for the last 26 years, and what you really should be doing, regardless of what production tools you are using. Every completed project archive should have a document that lists all the tools and the versions of those tools used in its production. Tools change over time, and backward compatibility is never guaranteed. I think I have six mothballed workstations with full installations of multiple software versions going all the way back. If I need to, I can probably get my old Electric Image projects from the 90s up and running in a few hours. I don't think I've ever had to go more than one generation back for a client, but you never know.

- Frank

You can see which version is used. This message will only appear if you open older scenes.

Tim_Twisted_1 wrote:Hi Ahmet,

After using 3.08 I'm getting different colors from specular materials. See attachment which also includes the scene file made to illustrate the problem. This is quite a big problem since most of my materials I made before are now just a bit off. It would be a crazy amount of work to adjust every single material. I'm guessing it has something to do with the IOR interpretation which I assume has been adjusted in 3.08?

My question is if this is intentional or a bug? And if it isn't a bug, do you know the calculation or setup color correction to correct the materials so they are identical between 3.08 and 3.07.

Thanks in advance,

Tim

Yes there's a slight change on results. But it's not related to plugin works. Propably about some revisions of 3.08.

frankmci wrote: This is exactly what I've been doing for the last 26 years, and what you really should be doing, regardless of what production tools you are using. Every completed project archive should have a document that lists all the tools and the versions of those tools used in its production. Tools change over time, and backward compatibility is never guaranteed. I think I have six mothballed workstations with full installations of multiple software versions going all the way back. If I need to, I can probably get my old Electric Image projects from the 90s up and running in a few hours. I don't think I've ever had to go more than one generation back for a client, but you never know.

- Frank

My thoughts EXACTLY!

I actually go a step further and c4doctane install folder is part of my project archives! Oh, and my projects from the 90s are on Amiga floppy disks.

A lot of users around here are quick to judge software as not being "production ready" and blame everything on developers. But they are forgetting that people also need to be "production ready" and that the only software they need to worry about is the one that's between their ears.

Regards
Milan