Sorry, but the first with the long render looks the best to me(grin).

Yeah I know =/ I am trying to find some way to justify not using a light dome... but it's not working... lol... I am a sucker for long render times...

AMAZING...I love this...Sharen

a better quality image can be found here; http://www.renderosity.com/viewed.ez?galleryid=323417&Start=1&Sectionid=2&WhatsNew=Yes

Great test render, I'm afraid it has to be the first one.

These are JUST opinions; Your render are far too bright to look realistic. I would try to simulate the ground that is in that globe probe for the ground terrain that is directly underneath you spheres. Globe Probes, hdri's, whatever you want to call them, and they really do a LOT of the lighting for you, I know I sound like a broken record, but I've never seriously used anything over 30 lights, and now mostly use around 10-12. Yeah, just using the ambience of the scene will work, but as you said, you get no shadows. I suggest around a dozen lights. And, if you post smaller dimension pics, you can save them at a higher quality. (i.e.; 800x600, 85-90%) AgentSmith

Attached Link: http://www.renderosity.com/viewed.ez?galleryid=264249&Start=1&Artist=AgentSmith&ByArtist=Yes

What is an hdri render? One with shiney balls in it? Every render I see billed as an hdri render has these shiney balls in it.

I have to agree with AgentS. I really don't see such a difference in using 12-20 light sources instead of 100-150 (or even 1200, as someone said lately!), if not in the geological render times the monstruos light-domes imply. Of course, it could be only a matter of personal tastes, but it reminds me of the difference between a good mp3 at 320kbit and a CD: you can notice it only if you have a very finely-tuned hi-fi. Just my 2c, Stefano

GROINGRINDER, do a search on the forum for the original post. Basically it's actually fake HDRI, lighting a scene with just a picture surrounding the scene. You do this usuing reflection (thus the shiny balls :) ) and let the reflections provide the "light" to light your scene.

Well, I can see a huge difference between 10-20 and 150.. But, I was the one who tried 1200 and it didn't look all that good... I am going to render this with a 10 light ring, see how that turns out. 20 minute render, but hey, if it looks decent it's a lot better than 5 hours.

HDRI High Dynamic Range Image. That's just a common term, so that's what everyone calls it. Bryce can't use actual hdri's, which is just a picture with multiple levels, each level being the same pic, but with various exposures. This can give a rendered scene better color, light, etc. But, bryce CAN simulate one of the attributes of using hdri's in higher end programs, which is realistic reflections. Basically, incase your scene in a giant sphere (start at 500 bryce units), wrap a real photo on that sphere. Now anything reflective will reflect said real photo, and viola. Like I said, that's the very basics. I have, I think 10 pics in my gallery that uses some form of Global Image/HDRI technique. AS

But agent, did you not see wip It was a test render, first time I rendered it... just wanted to see how it'd look, I'm matching colors up now etc, lowering brightness, I saw all those mistakes I made, yes, and I am fixing them. Thanks for the input.

Oh, no I did, sorry, I was just blabbering on and on. ;o) (most of my posts can safely be ignored, lol) AS

Ornlu, at least you had the courage to try 1200 and show us the result! :-) The image I'm currently working on has fifteen scattered radials and it's taking days, so I really think 1200 is impossible due to my personal HDRI (Highly Dramatic Rendertime Implications) :) Stefano

rofl....perfect...

(smirks) We all appreciate your level of involvement, Agent Smith, I assure you. Perhaps for the sake of accuracy we can return to calling "HDRI images" merely "images with external Reflection Maps", because that's what they are. And although light-cages are tedious on render times, they sure are beautiful and worth it! Even idiots like me can make photo-quality renders these days!

Oooooo... Yeah but, one thing.... Lol, j/k!, it does look really great. Everything looks awesome, but that terrain REALLY looks real!

Well 20 lights or 135 lights doesn't matter to me if something's "real" or not. To me the first render is way better than the last one. Like you said yourself Ornlu: The last one might loko more real.. but it's certainly less appealing.

I like the first image better, but the floor of the last one was more realistic. I'm working on a new image now. gotta go.

It's a matter of personal tastes, and mine are confused :) I like both images, but I'd say I prefer the last one, the terrain you made is quite awesome and the last one does it full justice. -- Stefano

I like the first and the last. The terrain does look good and I don't think the last is really much less appealing. Both have their own special qualities. Catlin

Any chance of applying the blueish hue on the floor of the last image to the floor of the first? that way it'll look even better. BTW, My image is rendering now. It's also a lighting-test. I hope it turns out the way I want it too.

I didn't know the earth was so well polished {8^)

Ornlu, I think the first image is much better, there are almost no shadows on the last one! But merely because, side by side, the first one really gives your eyes a kick....

There can be a fine line/balance between realistic and appealing. Great terrain work there.

Dragon, maybe something you aren't understanding is what makes a shadow, A shadow is a difference between light and dark. For example, if you stand infront of a white wall, you will have a VERY obvious shadow, however, if you stood infront of a tuly black non reflective wall, you would not see it at all. Now, the same principal applies to those two pictures, the grey one actually has a darker shadow, but you don't notice it as much because of the dark color.

Ornlu, I understand the physics of shadows perfectly, I only meant that you might as well have none. Take some spheres, put them on some bricks. Take a photo. Look at it some more. Just an idea.