Have written it before, and writes it again. It isn't possible to compaire Vue with expensive software. And I can't see the reason why asking for, how do I do this in Vue. If all these goodies is already in hand. And if your people want to make good images with good lightes, get yourself a "photo book". The best way to learn.... :)

Well... As the president of the US once said it : We aren't doing it because it's easy! We're doing it because it can be done!

I can't agree with these last posts : it's hard to obain realistic pictures (prefer to say "quality"), but it's not an excuse to produce low quality pic ! to produce flat landscapes has also no real interest ... It's of course possible to produce high quality pic with Vue ! There are some from time to time. Photorealism is an other level of difficulty, the problem is rendering time. As I said in an other thread, we all are interested by artistic scenes, a photorealistic picture with one sphere has not a real interest for us (has only a technical value). But An other point is that it seems strange to me that some here do not consider photo as an art ...

"We aren't doing it because it's easy! We're doing it because it can be done!" Depends, if it can be done. ;p.... I don't use the word impossible, since I did what I did with Vue2, but vue is far away from 3ds, Maya, XSI, and so on... Done some renderings in 3ds lately, and the reality is far better then Vue. Sure, you end up with time consuming renders, but the images are stunning. :) A scene is always better then a single object. But always remember that, some people are better at modeling objects then scenes. All the objects that people use in the scenes... :)

Mmm this subject needs a reply. I dont get Realism, seems to be a magic word lately. Im moderator on a large Photoshop board and believe it or not, Ive seen so many people trying to make lifeless realistic objects; glass balls, cell phones, calculators, cars, etc Even a coffee machine! Same story here in this thread about realism, cars, planes, suitcases and whatever. I was originally born in Holland, land of masters like Vermeer, Rembrandt, van Gogh, Jan Steen, Frans Hals, Karel Appel, etc. Did they go for nothing but realism? No. Did anyone ask themselves why? Theres a lot more to it than just creating realism. An image needs to have a soul or heart, maybe a reflection of an idea or emotion. People who dont understand this will never learn what art is really about. Ask yourself why certain photographs have such an impact on the viewer. Is it because of the realism? No. If someone ever achieves to render 3 perfect balls on a pool table, does that make him an artist? No. Dont get me wrong, theres nothing wrong with realism, as long as its used to make a beautiful and impressive image thats like a modern version of a painting of one of the real masters of this and previous centuries and not just a perfect render. Three perfect balls cant compete with one of the best images of Thomas Krahn or Pmermino (to name just a few good Vue artists); they know what art is all about! Btw, I also dont understand why someone who can buy a computer and Vue dEsprit, isnt able to save money for a program like Cinema 4D 8 that sells for less than $595 and save himself a lot of headaches in Vue dEsprit, because thats like using MS Paint instead of Photoshop, with all respect for Vue dEsprit which is a great program, but you have to open your eyes for its limitations. Everyone also has to ask himself when hes not a top #D artist whether its worth to spend weeks and weeks on one scene, especially if you also have something like family life. Of course, its not up to me to decide what anyone does with his spare time; Im only defending the wives and kids ;) I didnt want to offend anyone. Im only trying to defend what art should be all about and I do understand that theres nothing wrong with trying to create something realistic in Vue, but please, dont forget the real meaning of art, because it would only make me sad

Yes, I agree with you concerning the simplicity of a scene (one or 3 balls in a scene could not really considered as a scene). But, as Alekssander said we must cheer about the modellers, they are often very talentuous, creating a cell phone, even a coffe machine is not easy (even if it's not art). I personally highly appreciate these persons. Also, the frontier is not so clear with art and design, if a modeller create a new shape of coffee machine and make a great render, in an artistic way, it could become an art work(?). Very often we can see head characters models in C4D gallery, new wonderful models, it could be consider as an art work to do it and render it at high quality (?). C4D for 595$, this soft is a dream, but it's a little high for me as I'm no professional just hobbyist , must feed my family ;=)

Well.. I agree too... but giving a picture a soul or anything else wasn't the goal of this challenge. The single and ONLY goal was/is to achieve something that looks like a photo. Not to make a rembrandt :) But thanks for the kind words Gaussian! - Thomas

YL, I have to feed my family too, 5 to be exact, but the point that I was trying to make is that if someone has the money to buy a descent computer for Vue (that's a lot more expensive than $595) then he also has the money to buy Vue d'Esprit. The only difference is, that everybody makes different choices. What you save here can be spend somewhere else ;) I mean, I hear people say that they don't have money for this or that, but at the same time they buy a brand new car for $25,000 US... it's all about choices ;-) I understand Thomas that nobody needs to make a Rembrandt of course, but instead grabbing some basic ideas about art. That doesn't change the fact that even I am very interested to see how far we can go with realism in 3D, although realism shouldn't be the ultimate goal the way ibanezcollector tries to make some of us believe, at least that's my impression and sorry if I'm wrong.

its not an ultimate goal but it is a tool in the 3D toolbox.. This wasnt about making a scene, artwork, or even anything it was about trying to mess with vue to get some sort of edge on lighting.. With out having to spend 600-4000 dollars on software.. I dont see the big deal why everyone is in a hub bub over this.. If you were say an artist would you limit yourself to one brush, one medium, one style? No then why do it with this program.. Its all about options and doing things from the normal.. Some of todays great artists say Salvadore Dali for instance did some whacky stuff in his day, that Im sure people said was stupid or weird or just plain goofy.. But to others Dali was inspirational, astounding, etc etc.. If you dont want realism then carry on as you were.. If you do then try to change the way normal people think of vue.. Thats what im trying to do. Not create masterpieces for an art museum.. This is a challenge to me.. It stimulates my brain.. It helps me furtur understand the progam and its nuances. It helps me get a better idea of lighting. It helps me learn more about materials and the way they react with lighting. It makes me learn how light reflects off of non reflective objects. Etc Etc.. All things a great artist should know.. So in fact im learning more than just slapping some objects into a scene and pushing render. Even a newbie will eventually come out with a good one that way.. Yes it may sound arrogant but in time I will learn more than just using vue and never exploring its boundaries.. Ibanezcollector