Page 1 of 1

Instances of Instances

Posted: Sat Feb 02, 2008 3:01 am
by pixie
I've done a [(1x4)x8] array, but due to it some are instances of instances so, as you can see, anything beside the original one do not render.

What should I do? A 4x8 array, or is there any way to do this kind of array?

Posted: Sat Feb 02, 2008 3:10 am
by Zom-B
Yes, Instances of Instances don't work atm, but you can simply select all your not rendered instances, and change the source of instancing to the base mesh... done!

Posted: Sat Feb 02, 2008 3:45 am
by metapixel
The istances are made with 3DMax? :shock:

Posted: Sat Feb 02, 2008 4:13 am
by Marcofly
no, metapixel, this is the cinema4d subforum :wink:

You can also take the base object, >duplicate it 3 times (with 'generate instances' unckecked), so you have the first lower row of objects.
Then put the base obj and the copies in a group, select the group >duplicate ('generate instances' marked)..

why do you still have those triangles visible? they shouldn't be there! check the scale of your project, or post the window so we can have a look at it..

Posted: Sat Feb 02, 2008 4:41 am
by Zom-B
Nah... marco, this ain't cool!

If you can, and yes you do (!), stay with one single base mesh!

do you instancing work, and after this select all instances and change the reference Object back to your base mesh, by dragging it into the "reference object" field!

If you stay @ only one single reference, fixing the mesh errors visible in the rendering above isn't this much pain in the a** anymore :wink:

**EDIT**
Select ALL intstances... in the screenshot I forgot to select "Würfel.1" & "Würfel.2"

Posted: Sat Feb 02, 2008 4:50 am
by pixie
Marcofly wrote:no, metapixel, this is the cinema4d subforum :wink:

You can also take the base object, >duplicate it 3 times (with 'generate instances' unckecked), so you have the first lower row of objects.
Then put the base obj and the copies in a group, select the group >duplicate ('generate instances' marked)..

why do you still have those triangles visible? they shouldn't be there! check the scale of your project, or post the window so we can have a look at it..
Indeed that was the only way I thought of, yet the forum had eaten my post a few times already as such I add not expressed myself fully. I wanted to avoid it too because they are heavy objects even if only one. BTW, which triangles?

Posted: Sat Feb 02, 2008 4:53 am
by Zom-B
pixie wrote:BTW, which triangles?
This ugly guys here!

Posted: Sat Feb 02, 2008 5:50 am
by Marcofly
You're right, ZomB... thank you for the good suggestion! i will surely use it!!

mmmhh, are you sure it gets exported right? in your example Wuerfel.0.0 is an instance of an instance!

pixie, i had a similar project to render, a couple of years ago.. i started with modellling all the glass elements, but the rendertimes were extremely long.. for the close-ups i kept the modeled elements, for the far-views i just put a plane covering all the holes of the window, lowered the transparency, added bump.. and it was *a lot* quicker! maybe this could help..

Edit: yes, it works!! :D

Posted: Sat Feb 02, 2008 6:03 am
by pixie
Marcofly wrote:You're right, ZomB... thank you for the good suggestion! i will surely use it!!

mmmhh, are you sure it gets exported right? in your example Wuerfel.0.0 is an instance of an instance!

pixie, i had a similar project to render, a couple of years ago.. i started with modellling all the glass elements, but the rendertimes were extremely long.. for the close-ups i kept the modeled elements, for the far-views i just put a plane covering all the holes of the window, lowered the transparency, added bump.. and it was *a lot* quicker! maybe this could help..

Edit: yes, it works!! :D
But then these would be covered by the glass, therefore I didn't put much attention into it...

Well these are to be close ups and to influence the overall scene so I put as much detail as humanly possible...

Posted: Sat Feb 02, 2008 9:46 am
by Marcofly
pixie, it's always a compromise between quality and time.. sometimes there are scenes where everything is perfectly cleared, and 1 element still has noise after 30 hours rendering.. well, i prefer to find a roundabout for that object, instead of waiting so long..
The attached pic has an incredibly low poly count, clears the transparency at 250k samples\second, and IMO doesn't look so bad, at a certain distance.. (the bump could have a smaller tiling, but it's just a test..). After 5 minutes rendering i achieved 100 samples\pixel @1000x1000..

Posted: Wed Feb 06, 2008 12:45 pm
by kadajawi
Marcofly wrote:pixie, it's always a compromise between quality and time.. sometimes there are scenes where everything is perfectly cleared, and 1 element still has noise after 30 hours rendering.. well, i prefer to find a roundabout for that object, instead of waiting so long..
Region rendering :D

I started to use Photoshop a lot to refine the images, it really helps to get rid of noise etc., and saves a lot of time and electricity.

Instancing? Do you mean MoGraph stuff? If so, I would simply choose "Grundobjekt konvertieren", that's what I'm doing at least. But I guess I'm missing the point.

Posted: Wed Feb 06, 2008 12:48 pm
by pixie
Instance is useful when you have multiple copies of the same object, this way you only have to modify one and all instances will be updated, faster then speed of light! :-D

Posted: Wed Feb 06, 2008 12:52 pm
by kadajawi
Yeah, that's what I use too, I always copy the instances thing and hide it, and create a converted version of it then. That way I can modify if neccessary, but I also have something Indigo can use. It's not as convenient as when Cindigo would do all that, but it's better than nothing I guess.

Posted: Wed Feb 06, 2008 12:54 pm
by pixie
Cindigo can use plain instances, without parenting nor self instantiation.