my mentor recommended me this tutorial for glass lookdev; your tutorials are like quality guaranteed to me now and I just can't thank you enough for sharing your knowledge.
Arnold does have caustics, and has had for a while now. Also, there is no need to enable or disable opaque anymore. Its a depreciated setting that does nothing. Arnold automatically determines whether an object is opaque or not. As for Caustics, its simply further down in your shader's settings under the 'advanced' tab. You're also not getting any shadows on your glass because your transparency depth is too high, for a simple glass like that, a transparency depth of 1 or 2 is suggested. Now Arnold's caustics are not perfect and its pretty much the only thing it cannot do, but it has them to a decent degree. Then again accurate caustics are literally only possible with Corona Renderer (Due to its photon scattering mode and fine control of those settings within the camera) Further, to get your caustics to render more realistically in Arnold, you can select your mesh, go to the attribute editor, under visibility tick 'self shadows' which will brighten the caustic reflections. Just wanted to make suggest those minor corrections. Otherwise, this is an awesome tutorial and the kind of thing I wish I could have come accross years ago when I was a student. Your use of the aiTriplanar for the scratches is great, no need to drag it into substance painter, same with the Fractal Noise for the bump. Keep up the good work!
Thank you for pointing out those things. Really appreciate it. Although I notice some work arounds may not be the way it should be when you want to create shader to mimic real world physics. I agree that Arnold do have caustics up to a degree but they themselves have admitted that since its a unidirectional path tracer render engine, caustics that gets created from small lights which creates the sharp focused light patterns are not possible in Arnold. You can check out the documentation here:- help.autodesk.com/view/ARNOL/ENU/?guid=arnold_for_maya_shading_am_Refractive_Caustics_using_an_Emissive_Shader_html Its really a limitation of the render engine. And they admit it. Also its not just corona render that can create accurate caustics, I have seen both in Vray and Renderman create the reflective and refractive caustics. Although I am not sure about Vray being physically accurate, Renderman is for sure is as its a bi-directional path tracer which can accurately mimic it. As for the transparency depth - it is given for the number of times the ray can pass through the transparent object and for accurate results, I don't think we should limit it to lower numbers. As in the real-world the transparent surfaces does not do this to the light rays, to get the accurate result, we should use the maximum number of bounces needed on the transparency and transmission depth values. They are only there to limit the render time if incase we needed to, not to limit the physical accuracy of the lighting and shading calculations. Also I would disagree on turning off the self shadows as its a hack to get more brighter caustics. That also is breaking the physicality. real-world objects won't do this. Thanks for the info on the opaque attribute. I haven't really noticed why the glass works even if the opaque is on. I have wondered about this before but I thought it might be some bug in my Arnold version. Thank you again!!
@Swatstuts I'm sorry but you are simply wrong with some of the things you've stated. Yes there are other render engines that have caustics, it doesn't mean they're all accurate. One of them that is for instance is Disnsey's in-house Hyperion renderer which I have had the pleasure of using. Vray is far from accurate, Renderman is impressive, true. I know Arnold is an omni-direcrional rendere and I know it struggles with caustics, I mentioned that in my comment. Turning self-shadows off is actually an important step, an object that is transparent is not going to cast a shadow onto itself. (On thin or flat sides) If you take a glass or bottle and render it, notice how the base of the glass on the inside will not have a reflection, turn shelf shadows off, it will. Again, turning your transparency depth up high removes all contact shadows and depth from the scene. I am a lecturer and I have a whole library to depict the difference in one of the lessons I created whilst studying Arnold extensively. The documentation actually states that you should only use high transparency depth when you have many transparent objects overlapping each other. (Best viewed when rendering vegetation) Transmission depth is also based on the complexity of your model. If it has 4 sides that are exposed to air, you need a minimum transmission depth of 4. And again, if you crank your transparency depth past even 1 on simple objects, you lose all shadows, it looks like your object is floating mid air AND exaggerates caustics to a hugely inaccurate level with no variation in darkness or colour based on the width or depth of your transparent object. (If the glass has a colour, this is exaggerated further) Case in point i.imgur.com/Q7BwZn4.jpeg Transparency depth of 2 i.imgur.com/kn9j3oQ.jpeg Transparency depth of 1 Notice the subtle shadows and variation
@@MCDesign199 Hey, this is interesting. I would like to get more theoretical info on the transparency depth attribute of the Arnold if possible. I tried what you have shared and also looked at the real reference. That makes a difference. Although I am not sure about the self shadow. Because the shader algorithm handles the surface properties and we shouldn't be altering the shape attributes for that. And the results I am getting with the self shadows off / on, I feel like keeping the self shadows on is the right choice. By the logic that any transmissive object won't cast shadow to his own surface, it shouldn't be casting any shadows to others surfaces as well. But since it casts shadows to the floor, some of that will be casted onto itself as well. It should make sense. And about the accuracy of the render engine, none of them says physically accurate. The more accurate word they use is physically plausible. Thanks for sharing this. Worth for a second part of the tutorial.
hello sir, I found your channel couple of months ago and it just mind-blowing to have such an amazing quality tutorial for arnold for maya. please sir I request you to create some premium tutorials on Arnold shader creation ( basic & complex), studio lighting, and abstract shaders ... would happy to pay for the premium tutorials, since arnold for maya tutorials are not available in internet
I have no plans for paid tutorials. Anything I create will be free always. I will try to make tutorials again which covers all the basics from time to time. And you can also refere to the arnold renderer official channel for tutorials as well. There are some pretty interesting tutorials there that you can learn. And thank you for the comment, it means a lot.
@@Swatstuts thank you sir.. Please Create a tutorial on how to create custom DOF/Bokeh effect using Bokeh maps in Arnold.. I didn't find how to apply bokeh maps in arnold wherein in V-Ray, Redshift, Corona it was prebuilt...
@@ODSA There are no way to add custom bokeh maps to render in arnold. However you can adjust certain attributes like number of blades and curvature to get the shape. That will be under arnold options in the camera shape node.
im confused im beginner in 3D , so its fine finally to use arnold for exemple 3D product design , packaging ?? because i see everyone use redshift or v ray
For product renders people often gp for octane or vray because it supports gpu rendering and it's more widely known for it. But I am sure all these render engines are more or less equal in the quality they produce. If you are comfirtable in arnold and you can create the expected quality in arnold, then for sure you can do it in arnold. I always believe that it's the artist's vision that is more important than the tools he is using.
@@Swatstuts thanks because i feel more comfortable with arnold ...EVen marmoset toolbag😲 this software are usefull to show any asset and props , i dont know why no one use for for presenting there 3d product , packaging and stuff...
@@dubardmickael1961 They have already become an industry standard for product visualization and there might be good reasons for that. Just like Renderman and arnold are more popular for VFX. But that doesn't mean that they cannot be used in any other areas. We should always work with tools that we are comfirtable with. In that way, we are more confident on the final out. There is no right and wrong. Its just preference.
Hello Sir , I had Another Question... We Used AiRange and Stuff to Controll the Details , can't we Use a Mask to Make it Visible at Specific Places ? Let Say Stains Only at Top of Glass. I tried Using Ramp Node on Stain's Mix(ailayerrgba), but that Didn't Work. And.. should we Work with Denoiser On ? I have 3060 /16gb Laptop
@@gratefulpixels928 ofcourse you can use masks for that. And masks and ramp works in uv space, so make sure you have proper uvs for the objects before proceeding. And denoiser is used to see faster iterations of the changes we make, without waiting for the final render. If you are already getting faster renders without denoiser, you can definitely disable it. Its always upto us whether to use it or not use it.
Bro i am stuck while removing the transmission for smudges , it just doesnt seems to work, am using maya 2023. Is it a glitch? Cause i followed every steps and the node setup also seems fine to me. Please help .
@@Swatstuts Thanks i got it solved. I was messing with Contrast /min and max values in ai-Range , way too much!. Regardless will ping you in instagram.
my mentor recommended me this tutorial for glass lookdev; your tutorials are like quality guaranteed to me now and I just can't thank you enough for sharing your knowledge.
Thank you ♥️
@@Swatstutsmalayalam tutorial
@@Vishnu.s_Official I will try to make one. But currently there's another few English ones in progress.
so instructive, big help for mastering material
@@motivationpluzz3927 Thank you ♥️
Great tutorial, thank you! you explain everything very well. I like the glass on the left. The details are sharper and look more realistic to me.
@@davidanthony4786 Thank you so much David!
Excellent demonstration❤
Thank you bro ♥️
Useful video 👍
Thank you
Very useful video
Thank you ♥️
Arnold does have caustics, and has had for a while now. Also, there is no need to enable or disable opaque anymore. Its a depreciated setting that does nothing. Arnold automatically determines whether an object is opaque or not.
As for Caustics, its simply further down in your shader's settings under the 'advanced' tab. You're also not getting any shadows on your glass because your transparency depth is too high, for a simple glass like that, a transparency depth of 1 or 2 is suggested.
Now Arnold's caustics are not perfect and its pretty much the only thing it cannot do, but it has them to a decent degree. Then again accurate caustics are literally only possible with Corona Renderer (Due to its photon scattering mode and fine control of those settings within the camera)
Further, to get your caustics to render more realistically in Arnold, you can select your mesh, go to the attribute editor, under visibility tick 'self shadows' which will brighten the caustic reflections.
Just wanted to make suggest those minor corrections. Otherwise, this is an awesome tutorial and the kind of thing I wish I could have come accross years ago when I was a student. Your use of the aiTriplanar for the scratches is great, no need to drag it into substance painter, same with the Fractal Noise for the bump. Keep up the good work!
Thank you for pointing out those things. Really appreciate it. Although I notice some work arounds may not be the way it should be when you want to create shader to mimic real world physics.
I agree that Arnold do have caustics up to a degree but they themselves have admitted that since its a unidirectional path tracer render engine, caustics that gets created from small lights which creates the sharp focused light patterns are not possible in Arnold. You can check out the documentation here:-
help.autodesk.com/view/ARNOL/ENU/?guid=arnold_for_maya_shading_am_Refractive_Caustics_using_an_Emissive_Shader_html
Its really a limitation of the render engine. And they admit it. Also its not just corona render that can create accurate caustics, I have seen both in Vray and Renderman create the reflective and refractive caustics. Although I am not sure about Vray being physically accurate, Renderman is for sure is as its a bi-directional path tracer which can accurately mimic it.
As for the transparency depth - it is given for the number of times the ray can pass through the transparent object and for accurate results, I don't think we should limit it to lower numbers. As in the real-world the transparent surfaces does not do this to the light rays, to get the accurate result, we should use the maximum number of bounces needed on the transparency and transmission depth values. They are only there to limit the render time if incase we needed to, not to limit the physical accuracy of the lighting and shading calculations.
Also I would disagree on turning off the self shadows as its a hack to get more brighter caustics. That also is breaking the physicality. real-world objects won't do this.
Thanks for the info on the opaque attribute. I haven't really noticed why the glass works even if the opaque is on. I have wondered about this before but I thought it might be some bug in my Arnold version. Thank you again!!
@Swatstuts I'm sorry but you are simply wrong with some of the things you've stated.
Yes there are other render engines that have caustics, it doesn't mean they're all accurate. One of them that is for instance is Disnsey's in-house Hyperion renderer which I have had the pleasure of using.
Vray is far from accurate, Renderman is impressive, true.
I know Arnold is an omni-direcrional rendere and I know it struggles with caustics, I mentioned that in my comment.
Turning self-shadows off is actually an important step, an object that is transparent is not going to cast a shadow onto itself. (On thin or flat sides)
If you take a glass or bottle and render it, notice how the base of the glass on the inside will not have a reflection, turn shelf shadows off, it will.
Again, turning your transparency depth up high removes all contact shadows and depth from the scene. I am a lecturer and I have a whole library to depict the difference in one of the lessons I created whilst studying Arnold extensively.
The documentation actually states that you should only use high transparency depth when you have many transparent objects overlapping each other. (Best viewed when rendering vegetation)
Transmission depth is also based on the complexity of your model. If it has 4 sides that are exposed to air, you need a minimum transmission depth of 4.
And again, if you crank your transparency depth past even 1 on simple objects, you lose all shadows, it looks like your object is floating mid air AND exaggerates caustics to a hugely inaccurate level with no variation in darkness or colour based on the width or depth of your transparent object. (If the glass has a colour, this is exaggerated further)
Case in point i.imgur.com/Q7BwZn4.jpeg
Transparency depth of 2
i.imgur.com/kn9j3oQ.jpeg
Transparency depth of 1
Notice the subtle shadows and variation
@@MCDesign199 Hey, this is interesting. I would like to get more theoretical info on the transparency depth attribute of the Arnold if possible. I tried what you have shared and also looked at the real reference. That makes a difference.
Although I am not sure about the self shadow. Because the shader algorithm handles the surface properties and we shouldn't be altering the shape attributes for that. And the results I am getting with the self shadows off / on, I feel like keeping the self shadows on is the right choice. By the logic that any transmissive object won't cast shadow to his own surface, it shouldn't be casting any shadows to others surfaces as well. But since it casts shadows to the floor, some of that will be casted onto itself as well. It should make sense.
And about the accuracy of the render engine, none of them says physically accurate. The more accurate word they use is physically plausible.
Thanks for sharing this. Worth for a second part of the tutorial.
Super 👍
Thank you!
Good work bro ☺️👍🏻
Thank you bro
Great tutorials . Bro can you please make a tutorial on Procedural Shading and Lighting Terrains/Environments.
Haven't tried that yet. I will try something in the future!! Thanks.
❤❤❤Super🎉🎊🎉🎊🎉🎊
Thank you
Thank you ♥️
hello sir,
I found your channel couple of months ago and it just mind-blowing to have such an amazing quality tutorial for arnold for maya.
please sir I request you to create some premium tutorials on Arnold shader creation ( basic & complex), studio lighting, and abstract shaders ...
would happy to pay for the premium tutorials, since arnold for maya tutorials are not available in internet
I have no plans for paid tutorials. Anything I create will be free always. I will try to make tutorials again which covers all the basics from time to time. And you can also refere to the arnold renderer official channel for tutorials as well. There are some pretty interesting tutorials there that you can learn. And thank you for the comment, it means a lot.
@@Swatstuts thank you sir.. Please Create a tutorial on how to create custom DOF/Bokeh effect using Bokeh maps in Arnold.. I didn't find how to apply bokeh maps in arnold wherein in V-Ray, Redshift, Corona it was prebuilt...
@@ODSA There are no way to add custom bokeh maps to render in arnold. However you can adjust certain attributes like number of blades and curvature to get the shape. That will be under arnold options in the camera shape node.
@@Swatstuts 😒😒
@@ODSA better to control it in nuke. So you will have more flexibility.
Nice❤
Thank you bro ♥️
thanks
You're welcome!!
im confused im beginner in 3D , so its fine finally to use arnold for exemple 3D product design , packaging ?? because i see everyone use redshift or v ray
For product renders people often gp for octane or vray because it supports gpu rendering and it's more widely known for it. But I am sure all these render engines are more or less equal in the quality they produce. If you are comfirtable in arnold and you can create the expected quality in arnold, then for sure you can do it in arnold. I always believe that it's the artist's vision that is more important than the tools he is using.
@@Swatstuts thanks because i feel more comfortable with arnold ...EVen marmoset toolbag😲 this software are usefull to show any asset and props , i dont know why no one use for for presenting there 3d product , packaging and stuff...
@@dubardmickael1961 They have already become an industry standard for product visualization and there might be good reasons for that. Just like Renderman and arnold are more popular for VFX. But that doesn't mean that they cannot be used in any other areas. We should always work with tools that we are comfirtable with. In that way, we are more confident on the final out. There is no right and wrong. Its just preference.
Thanks
Thank you ♥️
Hello Sir , I had Another Question...
We Used AiRange and Stuff to Controll the Details , can't we Use a Mask to Make it Visible at Specific Places ? Let Say Stains Only at Top of Glass.
I tried Using Ramp Node on Stain's Mix(ailayerrgba), but that Didn't Work.
And.. should we Work with Denoiser On ? I have 3060 /16gb Laptop
@@gratefulpixels928 ofcourse you can use masks for that. And masks and ramp works in uv space, so make sure you have proper uvs for the objects before proceeding. And denoiser is used to see faster iterations of the changes we make, without waiting for the final render. If you are already getting faster renders without denoiser, you can definitely disable it. Its always upto us whether to use it or not use it.
🥰🥰🥰👍
♥️
Bro i am stuck while removing the transmission for smudges , it just doesnt seems to work, am using maya 2023. Is it a glitch? Cause i followed every steps and the node setup also seems fine to me.
Please help .
@@gratefulpixels928 are you connecting the right channel? It should be either r g or b. If you are connecting the alpha channel, it won't work.
If its some other issue, send me screenshots on instagram. @Swats_tuts.
@@Swatstuts Thanks i got it solved. I was messing with Contrast /min and max values in ai-Range , way too much!. Regardless will ping you in instagram.
@@gratefulpixels928 cool. Great that you have figured it out yourself.
❤❤❤
♥️♥️♥️♥️
😍😍😍😍😍👌🏻
♥️♥️♥️
🤍
♥️