The normal issue is solved by now (in 2021 and later) in the Chamfer modifier in Inset section you can choose Flow Loop that adds edges to your object that solves everything.
@@ArchVizArtist hm, there is definitely a difference and a big one. Will have to try and compare both in fully textured and lighted environment to see the difference there.
@@ArchVizArtist it's worth the time and all this modifiers to get those round edges that are (mostly) far away from the camera? I mean, just in specific closeups, but for the 90% of the jobs...don't know..at the end we just want those line reflection of the light in the edges ...
Just one more chamfer modifier (turbosmooth not necessary, I use it mostly in cylindrical objects). We made a script out of it so it's just one click. I'm not trying to convince anybody, this is just how we use it :)
@@ArchVizArtist I can't remember In 3ds max 2019, but in 2020 version there is an option on the chamfer modifier in Smooth Output with "smooth chamfers only". It fixes the issue of the "belly" surface. And there's a box with "smooth to adjacent" in that option which makes a smooth transition from the chamfered edges to the surface.
i prefer weighted normals for this. You got perfect smoothing and use less segments for the chamfer itself. But didnt know this trick, good to know now!
Another great tutorial! I've seen its come up in the comments already, but I also use the "face weighted normals" script for this. It's free and usually means you can get away with just having one iteration of chamfer segments. Arrimus has a good tutorial on it called "medium polygon modelling" Again, great tutorial, you're my favourite CG RU-vid channel at the moment!
If you set the chamfer to smooth chamfers only AND (and this is very important) you also set "Smooth to Adjacent" and a Threshold around 90 ( if you are working on a mesh formed by straight angled edges), the smooth you get will be just PERFECT.
The chamfer modifier got a lot of flak for not being a very exciting new feature, but that thing is a massive time saver. Doubling up the chamfer modifier to fix the smoothing issues there's an easier way in Max 2021. Just drop a Weighted Normals modifier on top of the stack. Another option for doing chamfers when using V-Ray is to plug a VrayEdgesTex into the bump slot of the material, provided you're not already using it for a bump map.
Glad seeing new YT channel explaining about all the new tips and tricks in vray and 3ds max, just subscribed. keep it up guys and stay positive you doing great job together. Make sure to give your self some rest. Btw max 2020 and 2021 has huge update on chamfer modifier, maybe they have added this option there?
Normally i adds a 'vray edges tex' to the bump. Or mix it with the existing bump map. For me thats the easiest way to get rounded edges in render. Specially for the walls. 😊
Hello, I see some lag in your viewport, I had the same problem in my 3ds max and I found the solution by lowering the poll rate or report rate of my mouse (logitech g502 hero). Greetings! :)
Hi! Your works are great!Thank you! But I do it so simpler than you! In chamfer modifier, we can determine to assine smooth only on smoothed edges, not other surfaces!
Thanks for all the information that you share , your videos are truly beneficial and i would like to ask if you could do a tutorial on how to create realistic lighting for interior scenes , giving us some tips and tricks , i always work very hardly on that topic but never get the results that i want , and i just don't know whats the problem. Thanks again and keep up the good work
Can you make a tutorial on how to round the ends of a brush using Hair and Fur? I tried to cluster some splines to use as guides, having differing lengths, the longest in the center of the cluster, shorter bristles around the perimeter. Is there a way to intersect an arc cutting off the tops of the cluster to round it off...like a bowl cut (American haircut from the old days)? Please
Explained very well. Good work👍 For past few days i have been going through your videos...and believe me, you are quite impressive. For now... is this method helpful for applying different materials using ID's on same object?
@@ArchVizArtist Thanks for the reply. On second look, I see the genius of this. It's like the first chamfer gives a proper base for the second. Am still on Max 2019, though.
Hi guys. I started to follow your channel few days ago and I like all your tutorials. You have few tricks that I didn't use before. Could you add to your list any tricks to build a stone wall overall the integration between the side and the top?
This video was very interesting and useful. Too many times we see videos on RU-vid about redundant subjects, considered so many times. Your videos have instead that content quality that too often is lacking.
Agnieszka , you are looking beautiful today. 😍🥴 Quick question : Why are we using (Chamfer) modifiers on the objects rather we can use the Vrayedgestex to round the corners? give me an insight please
EdgesTex is just a shader effect, it doesn't add geometry to the objects. If the geometry is there like this tutorial shows, the results are more accurate.
Mr and Mrs Archviz, Im maya user, and i used to be a 3D Max user, but i made the transition before a while for some reasons, I used to be a Game Artiest, but now im trying to get me way into the interior Designers, I don't have friends who are into 3D, nor i know anyone, so it is hard for me to get help, and it is hard to be motivated when you are alone, with no support. I would like to ask few questions if you don't mind. 1: Why 3D max is the choice for most interior Designers? i know that any program that u are good at is good enough. but why 3D max, in particular, is found into many interior Designer' artiest? i would like to know the answer. the only anwser that i could come up with according to my experience between the 2 of them, in my opinion, the only difference it is the "Curve/Spline" workflow between both. so what will u suggest to me, go back to 3D max or keep using Maya?
We actually have never used Maya, I think most arch viz studios use 3ds max, but I'm not sure why ;) I might investigate it more and maybe do some video on this topic in the future ;)
I believe the reason is because of Max's modelling tools. 3ds Max's modelling tools makes it very easy and quick to do hard surface modelling, which means it's easy to make architectural models.
@@JakMesh I didn't say Maya is bad for it or difficult. You can just as easily do Archviz modelling in Lightwave or Modo if you really wanted and are comfortable enough with that software. My point was, the tools in 3ds Max are more geared towards and catered for Archviz modelling. Software like Maya, on the other hand, makes organic modelling easier and better, but that doesn't mean 3ds Max can't do organic modelling just as well, just that Maya is easier for doing it. Hell, you can do Archviz modelling in Zbrush if you really wanted to, but obviously its toolset is more catered for organic modelling.
Thank you for these helpful tutorials. could you please make a tutorial about making a realistic leather and fabric materials in vray? how exactly the fall off map should be set up in the reflection slot? thanks
Great video, thanks! I did not know this method before...I was using smoothing groups method which is lighter on geometry.... and not texture based. Do you know smoothing groups method? You might like it more. Ceers!
Using the method I showed the output is perfect. Smooth to adjacent is a shortcut and the result is not so good. I've just double checked 2 versions side by side and I can clearly see the difference. Test it quickly and decide :)
Render intersection??? Render Iteration is more accurate. Another suggestion, insteade of two chamfer modifire use one chamfer and "weighted normal" modifire.
I'm a bit dissapointed this time, first of all: click bait on the title about solving edges in 5 secs, which honestly just shows how to fix the problem in a long process. Second of all challenging the Smooth adjacent faces toggle in 3DS max, in your video comments, by the way, without the comparison of the actual fast paced solution created since 2018 as a programed software solution after years of facing the geometry problem from autodesk is kind of off the track here. Come on guys, you don't need to fall far from the high edge you've placed yourselves lately! You've been doing great, watch out for things like this before becoming "another" click-bait archviz channel...
Firstly, we show the whole process so everyone can understand it. If you watch till the end we suggest to make a script out of it (or just copy modifiers). So the process is super quick. Secondly the method you refer to doesn't work so great. Just chamfer the edges side by side using both methods and you'll see the difference...
@@ArchVizArtist we have ran hundreds of tests around it, and unless we need a Microscopic zoomed lens in the studio the perception is minimal, speedwise, with a project with 200 edges in geometry or more this methos becomes a very specific process for, maybe asrecalled, a table in front of your lens, or a corner shot, etc most of us in the market use 3 methods depending on distances from camera and I bet you know it: geometry detailed chamfers, smoothened adjacent faces for geometry at mid distance and render engines edge traced materials for long distances referenced objects. Look I didn't mean to offend you, as I said we all admire you guys at your studio, but it really dissapointed me getting hung up on a click bait, that's just not cool, of course your method works! But it is a time dependant task! And arguing about how other methods don't show the same result is also valid, but as we all know, this is a time-dependent industry, and that shall also come into knowledge of users!
Here is the difference: archvizartist.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/chamfer.jpg The difference is pretty clear to us and we do not usually care about poly count.
@@fazeone1212 Its not perfect. You might think its perfect but its not. I just compared the two and Corona edges looks really really bad compared to chamfered geometry .
