Um....., where's the sword?

times are..she can only afford aa rubber knife and plastic machine gun..

It's the shade version, Num..... Vickie upgraded her weapons...

Message edited on: 09/02/2004 21:41

Good job...but wow, 4 hours to render? More incentive for me to concentrate on improving my Photoshop skills rather than learning a new 3D program; four hours of postwork can accomplish a whole lot. ;) Thanks for sharing though, take care. SnowS

4 hours seems pretty excessive. Even P5 FireFly isn't that bad.

I'm going to have to agree... no sword?

The four hour render isn't that excessive when you take into account the high poly figures in the scene. It also depends on the machine being used which isn't mentioned. Can you lower the GI accuracy in Shade? That could save a lot of render time with no visible detriment.

The colors, soft shadows and lifelike looks are great, but those can be achieved in poser5 with the appropriate lights as well... I seem to spot artifacts in her hair, don't know if they are rendered or due to jpeg compression. But being there no visible reflecting/refracting material, 4 hours seem way too long (unless the pic here shown is a downsized version of a 3000x2000 or so...). In any case, excellent job! and now VNIATWAS is to be changed in ..... With A Submachinegun! ;)

4 hours = 90% accuracy using path tracing to compute global illumination.. at 50% it takes about 10 minutes... but you see some grains.. there are four 3 different methods of calculating GI with shade... and each one has it's correspending settings... wich i know pretty much next to nothing. on my previous post i was able to create a GI solution in 10 minutes.. i'll attach that picture again.. so you can see the difference.. my machine ... windows xp, AMD xp2800 1 gig memeory

If you are seeing graining at 50% then adjust upwards incrementally until you achieve an acceptable result. 70% is a good 'middle of the road' starting point. Not bad for your first post though. Claims are often made that Poser (with a million lights!). can fake GI. That may be so but the results look just that - fake! Poser can't do accurate colour bleeding whereas proper GI can.

There do appear to be artifacts in her hair, looks kinda like she has a few xmas lights under the hair. Also there's an abrupt change in the background about even with the tops of her hips. What's up with that? It's almost like there's a translucent object between the background and the ruins.

i have one more example.. this one rendered in poser p5 using daz's clomplex lighting.. 25 + lights.. i guess thats the best i can do with poser.. u be the judge

Message edited on: 09/03/2004 06:38

Try photon mapping instead of path tracing.

Honestly, that poser render looks much more convincing then the shade one. In the shade one it looks like you've placed some renders on top of each other, each rendered in a different application and layered in PS or so. 4 hrs rendering for just that scene, I don't even want to know how shade handles a huge scene with multiple figures....

Attached Link: http://www.digital-wax.com/download/GlowBall.zip

Of the posted images the 1st Shade render looks the best to me. Poser does not calculate colour bleed and all the fake GI options look - fake! Stick with Shade's GI. With experience of using the software I'm sure you will get those render times down whilst still maintaining acceptable render quality.

I'll try it tonight when i get home... thanks!

Oh, and that crease in the background is most likely the background prop (which dynorama is it, btw?); all of them have multiple transparency planes, and if you don't get the lighting just right, or the transparency setting is off, you get the outline of the polygon plane.

I'd check the material settings on the hair. Looks like one of the layers is "glowing" some -- might have ambience turned up. For someone who has professional experience looking at real lights on real subjects the Shade render is vastly more convincing. However, I'd have to give the Poser render points for drama -- I'd like to see another Shade render with less of the soft light and more of a direct light.

The render specs:

This is just your standard V3 (no morphs) with Vicki's default hi-res maps applied, and Hmann's millenium hair. Imported into 3dsMax as a PZ3 via Bodystudio.

Just standard GI, with low settings, and one direct spotlight. No HDRI and nothing fancy.

Actual Rendertime: 1.3 minutes with medium antialiasing at 640x480. GI calculations took approximately 2 minutes or less.

Total Rendertime: Just over 3 minutes.

As rendered. No postwork (aside from the Max DOF post-render effect), and no special material tweeks.

Render settings of course can be tweeked to death to achieve better/worse results, or to speed up rendertime even further (but with loss of quality).

Message edited on: 09/03/2004 12:16

Rendertime was just over 3 hours at an original render size of 800x600, due mostly to the dynamic hair and caustics. The particles were refractive as well, and had added to the rendertime too.

Does anyone know if Shade allows you to fiddle with the Interpolation samples or subdivisions of your photon map or GI settings? This could assist in getting better quality and less render time. The more options you have in tweeking the GI, the better. Things like "search distance", "max bounces", and "retrace threshold/bounces" can help give you a good tradeoff between quality/speed.

Yes, you can fiddle with the settings.

wow..incredible...so lifelike... especially the last one... something to strive for!

Alamanos: What version of Shade are you rendering all these with? Thanks, Norm