Thanks for the tutorial! There is one thing that I dont really get: On big surfaces the flakes appear more like a square around the lightsource, instead of being round. Do you have any ideas?
i dont understand why you shrinkwrap there ...i know what that modifier does i just dont understand why its important here, why couldnt you just make the copy with vents look good
You can make the copy with vents look good but it's much harder. As I showed, once you add the edge loops to tighten the edges for the vents, the smooth curve of the panel gets creased too. You could manually move these edges to remove the creases or merge vertices so the edges don't go all across the panel. But these come with downsides such as working with a high poly mesh which is difficult to make changes to while keeping it smooth or artifacts. Using a shrinkwrap gives you a best of both. It's far easier as you can have a low density base mesh (with the density increased by increasing subdivisions) that's easy to keep smooth and editable and a high density mesh with edge loops for details that remains smooth due to the shrinkwrap.
Very detailed and well explained tutorial. Thank you. Please mention that 'Indirect Lighting -> autobake' must be checked, orherwise it will not work (on Blender 3.6.2 Evee)
I can't express how much this shader has helped me . Thanks for sharing. Hope you continue helping us get the most out of Blender, especially the rapid rendering eevee. Best wishes
This is pure genius! I'm pretty new into Blender and drowning myself in tutorials, and THIS is possibly the best one I've seen so far... I have no idea how you figured all these nodes out, but it works brilliantly! Thank you for sharing this technique, and for explaining it slowly and carefully so a new user like myself can follow along. You now have a new subscriber and I'll be looking for your other tutorials... thanks again!
Great tutorial! This is the best result I've achieved so far in Blender. However, there are a couple of things I would like to improve. First one is that the clearcoat should have some thickness and the other is that the metallic value in the base paint never looks quite right. I'm not sure how to achieve this but I think it would bring the material to another level.
Thank you. Clearcoat thickness is certainly something that is real but on most cars it's measure in the 50-200 micron range so it raises an interesting question of when is close enough close enough? As far as I know, the only way to really get thickness for a clearcoat would be to duplicate and scale up your mess a tiny tiny percentage and adding a glossy surface and volumetric to this. But you couldn't add regular Blender materials as Blender breaks some laws of physics when it comes to energy conversion of light passing through objects. If you're going to this nth degree, would you also model the various layers for metallic flakes as they're at slightly different levels too? This all probably could be done using the real physics equations and enough math nodes but I'm not sure how much better it would look or how much worse render times would be. That said though, it would be an interesting challenge to try one day. As for the metallic value, I'd agree. In theory to be correct the metallic value should only be 0 or 1. Honestly though, similar to above, it took about 2 weeks of tweaking to get this material and it got close enough. But maybe if I fancy chasing the clearcoat above, I'll chase the perfect base too.
Hey AutEmotive Design! I am glad to be sub nr 518. I know as a small channel how hard it is to gather subs! Great content for Blender automotive visualization!
You can make cowls in much the same way but instead of moving the vertices down for the vent, move them up. The shrinkwrap technique means you can add the extra geometry for the cowl without ruining the look of the rest of your hood.
I wonder if this is specific to a particular Blender version. I am getting strange camo-pattern (mirror vs. paint) if I keep the IOR of the Fresnel node at 1.450 Blender 3.3.1, Cycles with GPU Compute (CUDA)
I just loaded the MX5 used in this video in 3.3.1 and it renders the same so don't see why it looks different for you. I'm not sure what you mean by mirror vs paint camo pattern so I can only assume you've gotten a node or setting incorrect somewhere. Send me an email to my email address in the description and I'll send you a file with the material so you can append it to your project to make sure it's the same.
@@AutEmotiveDesigns _"so I can only assume you've gotten a node or setting incorrect somewhere",_ that is very likely (and maybe like 1pct chance that my model-scale doesn't play well with some of the Scale values used in some of the nodes) thank you sir, i will 👍🏻
forgot to add a follow-up here, in case anyone stumbles on this too thanks again to the channel owner, in the end we found out I had normals flipped on the model
i find it interesting that you have to darken the plane to match the hdri. I've tried this on multiple projects with multiple hdri's. I've also tried using an image texture from my first frame and projecting from view. my plane is always too dark and casts a dark reflection in the sphere that doesn't blend with the background.
Thank you. Regarding the reflections, it's just a case of using as few vertices as possible as it's easier to keep the edge flow smooth. Then using the shrinkwrap like my in hood vents video to add details.
This is a fantastic tutorial and shader. Thorough, not "hacky" or too focused on a quick/easy result (not that it's not quick or easy to follow), looks great, and setting it up for easy reuse/editing was a super helpful tip for a beginner. Thanks so much!
Thanks for the great tip on AO and multiply node! For me one scene is totaly enough and it's easyer to manage the camera position change (no need to repaste the camera into background scene). So you basicaly need a single multiply node with image routed to the top and AO to the bottom. The only issue is you must use some plate shaped mesh instead of plane for shadow catcher to hide borders in AO.
Such a great tutorial!! you have a great voice for teaching too! I would just say maybe getting a new Microphone would help you even more because it was pretty quiet, but otherwise amazing thank you!!
Let's be honest. People use Blender because it's free. Not bad but not good either. It's difficult to choose when there are so many options. But in the end, learn the 3d package that pays if you're into that. For goofin' around, use whatever.
i think it should be left side so we are staying out stay out in in in lapd cars to overtake the safety car this race that started with i dunno what is ended with i dunno what
How do you mean 'a simulator asset'? Existing UV's shouldn't matter though you would need to add something like alpha masking if you want to mix between my material and an existing UV map. As for existing texture/roughness/normal sets, it would again depend how you mean it. As if you're wholly changing material I'm struggling to think of a reason you'd be wanting to keep using existing sets.
@@AutEmotiveDesigns There are lots of others textures for other parts that shares the same UV’s Texture map. I’m guessing I need to learn/figure out how to bake all of the individual components textures at the same time. If I try to bake this effect, that is all that ends up bake, everything else is missing.
