Just tested AtomKraft for this and it works. Sounds like you need to
upgrade ;)


On 14 March 2013 03:42, Gustaf Nilsson <[email protected]> wrote:

> Dont get me started on deep! ;) Since Nukes scanline renderer cannot
> render deep(!?!), you have to create a single scanline renderer for every
> card. And if the cards are transparent with really thin smoke... well then
> you are back to square one with clipped z-channels before converting to
> deepiness.
>
> Cranking the alpha up is a workaround, but only in the case above where
> you create one scanline for every card, otherways transparent fg cards will
> totally occlude bg cards.
>
> Jonathan, you shouldnt take "credit" for the neglect of the 3d engine for
> the last five years if you havent been working on it since then. I
> apologize if you personally felt targeted, but its easy to let some sarcasm
> slip out when you have to spend your precious weekend wrestling with nuke
> "features"   ;)
>
>
>
> On Wed, Mar 13, 2013 at 10:12 AM, Patrick Heinen <
> [email protected]> wrote:
>
>> I don't know what you're trying to do, but anyway transparency and zDepth
>> usually don't get along very well until you mention the magic word "deep".
>> And if you're application doesn't have these problems I might have a
>> workaround for you: crank your alpha up, render it and pull your alpha back
>> down...
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: [email protected]
>> To: [email protected]
>> Date: 13.03.2013 02:26:52
>> Subject: Re: [Nuke-users] Z-depth and semi-transparent objects
>>
>>
>> > Well I could, but the last time I piped up I got snapped at.
>> >
>> > -jonathan
>> >
>> > On Mar 12, 2013, at 6:15 PM, Gustaf Nilsson wrote:
>> >
>> >> Hi
>> >>
>> >> Im sure there is a fantastic reason for this, but does anyone dare to
>> speculate about the design decision to clip the scanline renderers z depth
>> to zero if the alpha is quite low (<. 0001)?
>> >>
>> >> Work around suggestions greatly appreciated
>> >>
>> >> Thanks
>> >> G
>> >>
>> >> _______________________________________________
>> >> Nuke-users mailing list
>> >> [email protected], http://forums.thefoundry.co.uk/
>> >> http://support.thefoundry.co.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nuke-users
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > Nuke-users mailing list
>> > [email protected], http://forums.thefoundry.co.uk/
>> > http://support.thefoundry.co.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nuke-users
>> _______________________________________________
>> Nuke-users mailing list
>> [email protected], http://forums.thefoundry.co.uk/
>> http://support.thefoundry.co.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nuke-users
>>
>
>
>
> --
> ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■
>
> _______________________________________________
> Nuke-users mailing list
> [email protected], http://forums.thefoundry.co.uk/
> http://support.thefoundry.co.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nuke-users
>
_______________________________________________
Nuke-users mailing list
[email protected], http://forums.thefoundry.co.uk/
http://support.thefoundry.co.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nuke-users

Reply via email to