Dear Autodesk

xsi_fanatic · **Joined:** 06 Jun 2011, 03:08 **Posts:** 40

xsisupport wrote:

xsi_fanatic wrote:

origin wrote:

hmm I never adjusted gamma in my projects

For few years my workflow is the same, in short
setup gamma 2.2,
linearize textures, except for hdr's, or the ones that goes to bump/displacement etc
render to (linear) Exr
do the rest in Nuke, working from start to end in linear.

what do you mean by linearize textures ?

Hi

I believe he means you need to de-gamma the textures (remove any gamma-correction). They should not have gamma applied to them.

Here's a nice little slide set
http://www.pixsim.co.uk/downloads/The_Beginners_Explanation_of_Gamma_Correction_and_Linear_Workflow.pdf

Thanks

Autodesk

Stephen,

I dunno how you do it, but you always know where to find the good stuff. Makes life easier.

Thanks,
XF

Maximus · **Joined:** 09 Jun 2009, 15:45 **Posts:** 812

Considering the use of LWF, which most of the time is used with physically accurate renders setup hence the use of Photographic exposure, you should be very aware that checkin all the options in preference and then adding your photo exposure with gamma 2.2 applying the "use gamma correction" will double your gamma resulting into a washed out and incorrect render, reason why i never use all the preference options but just the last 2 and control everything with photo exposure when you dealing with physical accurate lighting.

Those preferences are only "visual" they should be used to "preview" your render with correct gamma, but often people forget about this and add on top a photo exposure with gamma 2.2 and the gamma correction in the final output file.

gfxman · **Joined:** 28 Mar 2011, 15:14 **Posts:** 88

Quote:

1 - The Image Clip Viewer (Alt + 6) still has limited features. I cannot zoom in manually, pan, or resize the imported image to my liking. I'm still constrained to the limited options available from the right click menu.

2 - I still don't see a real size measurement s.ystem. Wouldn't it be nice if we had the ability to measure objects in centimeters, inches, foot, meters ...etc ? Oh right .... I forgot, 3D Max and Maya already have those features, so I just need to spend more money and purchase the Suite edition and invest more time into learning more major 3D applications. Smart move.

3 - Lattice like controls to the UV maps in the Texture Editor.

4 - A new, user friendly ICE based hair s.ystem. I'm sure that won't kill you.

5 - A real HQ view port. Seriously, what were you thinking when you released the existing HQ view port in SI 2013 ? Why waste resources on a half finished product when you could do so much more improvements to other ends ?

Quote for the first 5. Would be very usefull.

EricTRocks · **Joined:** 25 Nov 2009, 02:41 **Posts:** 472

xsi_fanatic wrote:

5 - A real HQ view port. Seriously, what were you thinking when you released the existing HQ view port in SI 2013 ? Why waste resources on a half finished product when you could do so much more improvements to other ends ?

You have to start somewhere and the HQ isn't unusable. It might not be 100% the best HQ view port out there but it is functional with plenty of room to be improved. If they didn't spend any resources on it at all, it would never happen.

People have cried about wanting the HQ viewport for a while now. So now you have one. From what I understand Maya's wasn't the greatest in its first incarnation either. One can say the same thing about Ref Models and ICE as well where it wasn't all there right from the get go. Lay down a decent first layer then build upon that.

SreckoM · **Joined:** 25 Jul 2010, 00:18 **Posts:** 159

Maya one is not great one, still, according to what users say about it.

Quote:

You have to start somewhere and the HQ isn't unusable. It might not be 100% the best HQ view port out there but it is functional with plenty of room to be improved. If they didn't spend any resources on it at all, it would never happen.

Yeah, I definitely agree on this. This is like first step and you can not expect it to work flawlessly. On other hand I would like it more to be more like AdvancedOpenGL mode in Modo, without beautiful reflections, glossiness, DoF and all other 3dsMax crap, we have render for that. Just bump,displacement, shadows, procedural textures preview and maybe AO would be fine for me.

However good, solid base is here, that is important.

1. Yeah this seems like reasonable request
2. Can live without it, but also would not mind to have one.
3. UV tools definitly need more love.
4. Yup
8. Forget .3ds better to invest time into fixing obj or adding dwg now when you are under AD

steve3d · **Joined:** 20 Oct 2011, 17:14 **Posts:** 2

you guys might need some time to take look at this:

http://www.cgchannel.com/2012/05/autodesk-reshuffles-softimage-development-team/

Newcomer (<20 posts) alert: please use the URL tags - HB

SreckoM · **Joined:** 25 Jul 2010, 00:18 **Posts:** 159

Oh steve that is old news, and incorrect btw, and please do not start it again ...

Hirazi Blue · **Joined:** 04 Jun 2009, 12:15 **Posts:** 3209

I was wondering when someone would bring this up...

It was - as I already said in the comments to that cgchannel post - a badly worded and poorly researched item, containing at least one factual untruth (the size of the team). But this has all been addressed by multiple comments on "their" forum. If you search "our" community you will find most (if not all) questions raised by the team change have been more or less satisfactorily addressed already, (long) before cgchannel even posted "their" item.
Nothing to see here, move along, people...

bottleofram · **Joined:** 17 Aug 2010, 11:21 **Posts:** 346

>Posts: 1

I believe we call this something... t-t-t-... te- tor? trek? toll?.. TROLL! Yup, thats it. Troll.

:-h

Cheers

Hirazi Blue · **Joined:** 04 Jun 2009, 12:15 **Posts:** 3209

bottleofram wrote:

I believe we call this something... t-t-t-... te- tor? trek? toll?.. TROLL! Yup, thats it. Troll.

Seems like a harsh assessment based on one single post IMHO
Linking to an existing article that's inflammatory in itself, doesn't make the person who linked to it a troll per se.
In this case the article is to blame not those who were "confused" by it IMHO...
And calling him a troll won't motivate steve3d to disprove he is in the future...

Dear Autodesk

Who is online