Doc, I’m just uploaded my C4D file. When I actually create my final version, I will have a slightly more substantial (but mainly straight on) camera move. Also, I intend to have several more bottles, each with its own Particular effect.
Questions:
1) You would place a light source in the bottle to add illumination to the bottle walls and the stone wall…is this correct?
2) What do you mean by placing a material on the light source?
3) If the bottles overlap, would the Particular renderings each need to be separate, or could I do one render of all the particle systems?
4) When I place the renderings on a plane, what do you mean by inside the bottle? Won’t the camera mapping handle this?
1) You would place a light source in the bottle to add illumination to the bottle walls and the stone wall…is this correct?
It needs to be in the bottle, anything else will look wrong. Specular, Falloff, etc. Move it far out and see for your self.
3) If the bottles overlap, would the Particular renderings each need to be separate, or could I do one render of all the particle systems?
Ideally you have for each bottle one. Yes, it works with one, as long as one bottle is not in front of another one, then the content of the “front” bottle would show up in the “behind” bottle. You know your scene, and make adjustments accordingly. I do not like to mix too much, any re-render would require to render all again, and the adjustments are limited or more complicated. However, everyone has his/her own logic and workflow. Camera mapping has limitations and to know them means to avoid trouble.
4) When I place the renderings on a plane, what do you mean by inside the bottle? Won’t the camera mapping handle this?
Then you don’t get the glass influences to the particles, dirt, refraction, density, etc. Behind wouldn’t work, as it would be then twice (two layers of glass)
5) Finally, animation of which mesh?
If you have a lot of particles or the reflection of the “glowing” needs to be reflected more accurately, the mesh on which it is projected shouldn’t be flat. With a little deformation the image of the particles could be seen in a better way in the reflections. Since it is camera projection, the deformation will not show directly, but in secondary effects as in reflection, refraction, and in GI.
Please check this file out, while render with and without the Spherify Deformer. https://www.amazon.com/clouddrive/share/h0BO9Sdu51gv2AwcZY4iTQ3TFofInlLqOiGuF1WPWk1
So, I got your scene, only cork_02 was missing, but I think it will not matter much. The link for the file is in your PM—in a moment.
Doc, I’m gonna take all of your advice and see what I can come up with over the next several days. I’ll reach out if I get stumped. Thanks for your patience and advice!
In short, Particular has no connection to the C4D camera, before anything is extracted. Both, CineWare and Particular, are 2D elements which react to cameras, so it is needed to understand that the Extraction of the camera might give the impression that things have been moved (not really!) in “this window” around, perhaps out of it, as the views are not longer in sync (so it seems), if Particular was set up with the default camera, then a different camera gives the impression that it has moved, but its just not in the view of the camera anymore.
If you think about the light that I placed in the glass jar, if that is already in the file before it is used in AeCC, then this light can be used as Emitter position. Just use the “Whip-Pick” to set up the Emitter Pos. This will bring things back together.
Doc, you’re a good man. Thank you! I’m working on the particles in After Effects right now. If I can pull this off, I’ll be quite excited to see the result. I’ll keep you posted.
Good morning, Doc! Is there a way to make a C4D light invisible to the camera, but fully visible in reflections and refraction. I’ve tried the Compositing tag with no luck.
To split this up, you might check out to render in a two step Multi Pass, one time without visible light for the scene without light reflection or refraction, one time with visible light and take the passes that contain the wanted information. Then combine the parts.
I’m now working with the sprites/particles rendered from After Effects with an alpha and brought into Cinema with Camera Mapping. I’ve set everything up per your helpful C4D example, but I’m not getting the desired result. When I multi-pass render and look at the refraction and reflection passes, I see the sprites/particles in the refraction pass as if they are fully visible in the jar (not just as glass refractions as I desire). In the reflection pass, I don’t see any evidence of the sprites/particles at all and this is where I wish to see them the most. What I want to do is make the sprites/particles themselves invisible to the camera, but refracted/reflected in the glass. I’ve tried doing this using the Compositing tag, but with no luck. Thanks!
I didn’t check if you had rendered it in Straight, but I hope so.
The Alpha channel wasn’t set up as I would do it, compare your setting an mine, pick what you like the most.
The Plane wasn’t in the bottle, somewhere way behind, there is not option that will look right that way. (Please see discussion above.)
The Plane has a Deformer attached, check if that is needed, it creates a better distribution of the effect in the bottle.
Let me know if there is anything else, the upload stays open for now!
Please let me know if I’m becoming too much of a pest. I feel like this dialog may never end.
Since my actual particles are being composited from Particular inside After Effects, I don’t want to see them inside the bottle in Cinema. I just want to see colorful glints of the particles reflected in the glass in Cinema. By switching off Image Alpha in the material, I can see a better reflection on the back side of the bottle, but I still see a bright well-defined particle shape inside the bottle. Is there a way to have this material only produce glints of light in the glass?
I can’t even imagine that any C4D related post can become a pest, why would it! My target is certainly that things become clear and usable. Of course, learning has a gradient and the typical wish to skip that gradient by just receiving a cool-tip isn’t my reality nor my wish. In fact that kind of acquiring “skills” is dangerous and fake.
If there is a way, I certainly will try to find it. If there is not a way known to me, I certainly direct to the Support or Suggestions.
I try to learn each month an new app or a major up-grade, to keep this feeling fresh, and I’m filled with empathy about learning based on that. Don’t ever let your idea to know about things be scattered by feeling the way you hinted it above, thanks. Yes, there are arrogant people around, but they are just useless for this activity. So, please ask until you feel savvy with it.
.
Seen By
Please check out if the Compositing Tag has an answer for you. “Seen By” Transparency/Refraction/Reflections/Camera have all influence to it. If only the reflection is key, that should be the only one of the four (Seen By Rays should be active, though)
Try to adjust the appearance with the transparency channel, if the results are too strong. Setting the Luminance Texture To Multiply and dial in the Brightness of it accordingly will leave maybe dark spot in the reflection, similar as in using the Filter “Shader”. The transparency channel really allows for other sources to take over at a certain level. No reflection should be active in the Reflection channel!
Straight Alpha, this means that the RGB values are rendered fully, even some transparency is already given, and the transparency is not “premultiplied” in the file. The transparency of the pixels is then only achieved by the Alpha channel. Just to be blunt, Straight Alpha is the way to go in pretty much all cases. Why, because if the pixel-value will be changed, the amount of change will be influenced by the “baked in” or “Premultiplied” transparency.
This can lead to a lot a weird appearances. Worst case, the already transparent areas become calculated via alpha again transparent. Some suggest then to “choke” the matte, which is of course pure nonsense, if that could have been avoid in the first place. Yes it is simpler and perhaps faster, often not even noticed. But in any high end compositing package, you will find tools to “un-multiply” this state, because it leads to artifacts.
I have tried to explain it a decade (published here in 2008, though) ago in a tutorial. (…decade as an excuse for my rusty English back then) https://www.cineversity.com/vidplaytut/multi-pass_in_depth_005_straight_pre-multiplied_alpha
You might find in any better book about VFX composting a more or less longer chapter about.
One thought. You have rendered the Particles in Ae, then bring it in for reflection into C4D, but you go then back and render all again in Ae. It would be faster, to render it perhaps 1.5 times larger in Ae, to keep the quality, and have the final render in C4D. One step less.
