OTOY Forums

Hello,

There are a number of threads dealing with camera mapping and texture mapping.
In the past I have been able to get things working well enough to get results.
Now however, I have been asked to place a model inside an photo of a hall.
With the regular c4d renderer I would have used the compositing tag and camera mapping.

In octane however, I seem to be unable to correctly make the jump from c4d native camera mapping to octane mapping.
I have tried both the texture mapping on an object as outlined by Aoktar here as well as trying the background object.
I also looked at the example file for background objects.
While I am able to get the model positioned properly in regards to perspective and size, I am at a loss how I can make a floor object, pillars, ceiling et al.

what I tried to get parts of the hall into my model:
. A matte object with a texture projection linked to the camera. This nearly worked, but showed up in the render as a dark patch.
. Rendering the model on only the background. This of course produces no reflections, shadows or lighting, but worse is that the model has a faint outline around it.
. Obscuring parts of the background objects with carefully cut to size pieces of the hall. This also nearly worked, but again the matte option in the materials seems to show a dark outline where the object is.

I feel as though this should not be an issue at all and I must be missing something obvious.
Could someone point out to me what it is that I am missing and what I might try to get this working?

Thanks in advance.

EDIT:
Oh yes, I am using R14 and plugin 1.54.2 for this project

i don't exactly understand your problem. But there is a cameramapping.c4d with standart camera mapping and other method(octane's projection)

aoktar wrote:i don't exactly understand your problem. But there is a cameramapping.c4d with standart camera mapping and other method(octane's projection)

Hello Aoktar, I appreciate you taking the time to reply.
What I found using the standard c4d camera mapping is that editor and the live viewer / picture viewer do not match.
I was also unable to correctly project a texture on a given object inside the hall I am meant to use a a setting for the model.
When using texture projection, either the image was flipped upside down, or the object I was using as a matte with image projection appears in the render as a dark 'section' following the outlines of the object.
I will try to illustrate.

Here is my hall and a cube with reflecting material. No matte objects.


Here is the same hall with some pillar-objects with a matte material. Note how the objects appear whiter than the background.


And here is the same hall with the matte option in the textures turned off. Also note that the white outline on all objects remains regardless of the setting I use.


Does this clarify what I am trying to solve?

i think you are mentioning about background scaling. in old versions, LV was doing some fitting to LV resolution. On last versions, i have changed as keeping the background image ratio.

aoktar wrote:i think you are mentioning about background scaling. in old versions, LV was doing some fitting to LV resolution. On last versions, i have changed as keeping the background image ratio.

Hello Aoktar,

Thank you for your reply.
Yes, I read something about the relation of the live viewer and the editor.
So far I was able to work around it by maintaining a 3:4 ratio.

I have purchased 2.0 but have not yet used it.
Would you advise using 2.01 for this project?
Will that also help with the other issues that I am having difficulties with?

mixing with backgroud is done by plugin(so it's my code). It's same thing with to do compositing in AE. So you can use a comp. software to mix it for better compositing. Also 2.02 is well and mostly stabile.

aoktar wrote:mixing with backgroud is done by plugin(so it's my code). It's same thing with to do compositing in AE. So you can use a comp. software to mix it for better compositing. Also 2.02 is well and mostly stabile.

Hello Aoktar,

Thank you for replying.

Apologies, I am not certain what you are suggesting I do.
My assumption is that you are suggesting photoshop to composite the background and the render as desired, is that correct?

iFloris wrote:
Apologies, I am not certain what you are suggesting I do.
My assumption is that you are suggesting photoshop to composite the background and the render as desired, is that correct?

Yes, for avoiding the white outlines.