Hello friends, I am a Vue 4 Pro user. I want to ask about the secrets of photo-realistic render. Like lots of samples on the market done with 3D Max, especially the interiors - looks exactly like a photo. What is the secret of a photo-realistic render, Global Illumination, Radiosity or its completely depends on the software's render engine ? Also what is the render time of a photo-realistic project with a P4 2.40 with 1gb Ram and 128 mb of Ge-Froce fx5200 for example ?

Well, having studied 3D animation and rendering for several years, taken a course on 3dsMax, and having been working full time in 3D now for the past 4 years (give or take), I can finally tell you with confidence that photorealism comes more from the artist's skill and knowledge than it does the application used. However, that's not to say the tools don't mean anything. Of course they do. If you're using a renderer that can take advantage of GI/HDRI lighting and deep material editing, then you're definitely a few steps closer to being able to pull off photorealistic results than a guy who doesn't have those tools at his disposal. There's no question, the more advanced the lighting/rendering is in a software, the "easier" your job will be to achieve photorealistic results. Regardless of the technology, however, it's still possible for skilled artists to attain that realistic look and feel. Consider this... GI, for the most part, has not been widely used by any major studios for Hollywood FX all these years. Mostly because of the time it takes to render scenes using it, and these studios work on very tight schedules. Most any movie you see using 3D FX (apart from some very recent ones) have always used traditional direct lighting to "fake" the GI appearance. So clearly, using GI/Radiosity/HDRI lighting is NOT always the key ingredient to photorealistic results. It has more to do with EXCELLENT and realistic texturing of objects, accurate and professionally skilled lighting rigs, and a solid general knowledge of your tools. A good renderer is a must, but contrary to popular opinion, you don't need a lot of bells and whistles... just one that has a good solid, USEFUL feature set that can turn out high quality. Speed also helps. If you have a fast renderer, it will be easier to test your scene's progress along the way during the lighting and texturing phases, and prevent you from getting frustrated waiting for test renders to complete. "Also what is the render time of a photo-realistic project with a P4 2.40 with 1gb Ram and 128 mb of Ge-Froce fx5200 for example?" That's absolutely impossible to say, because it's all based on the scene itself. A large, detailed scene can take hours to render. Smaller scenes can come out in just minutes or so. Depends on the render size, the techniques you're using, and how detailed/complex your scene is.

Also, rendering does not depend on the speed of the graphics card, as has been pointed out frequently here, before. It is strictly based on the speed of the CPU(s), and also to the amount of system RAM (on the motherboard). Graphics card capabilities come into play for real time activities (games, animations, movies, etc.).

"Graphics card capabilities come into play for real time activities (games, animations, movies, etc.)." Right. It's also important for onscreen viewport redraws and OpenGL display.

Hi, photo-realism is my first goal and i agree with maxxxmodelz artist skill is very important, but i think that some sw are "stonger" than others (and more expensive !) cinema4d and max with mental ray angine or Vray angine can make stunning result. But a great software don't create a nice photorealistic image for free ! complex scene, composite materials with many layers, light setting, "sense of art" are artist skills not sw features !! knowledge of sw is very important, my best images are made with Vue (and some tricks in photoshop) 3d studio is perfect for me for modeling, but i don't have patience for a nice scene setup... so i make image more beauty with vue (a "minor league" 3d software) than with 3ds (a "major league" 3d software)!

Thank you Luca Rodolfi ! :)

I have used 3ds max, Maya, Mental Ray, VRay .. you name it. The most photo-realistic interior image I made, at least I think so, was with ---Vue 2---, som million years ago. But I must admit, I haven't worked with interiors for a while.

Message edited on: 01/15/2005 14:21

Most of 3D Studio Max users using Vray plug-in for photorealistic render results. I don't have V-ray and I never experienced it. I'll keep using Vue D'esprit for my creations with following the tuttorials and guidances of the masters (like you guys) to get the top quality results one day.

On the "artist" side of the spectrum, you will have a much easier time getting computer graphics realism if you have a deep sense of what the real world really looks like.

Many (most?) people have forgotten how to "see" well - as they did when they were children and were not so familiar with the world. So most adults look without really seeing.

Practice "seeing" every day, with all that is around you in your daily life.

Use good reference photos or live models.

Doing photography (especially if you can see your results instantly and compare them to your scene) is good training, as is working with artificial lights (like in theatre stage lighting or commercial photography).

Like anything else, it takes lots of practice.

BTW, my background is in fine art photography and i'm now trying to learn photo-realistic 3D modeling. Not there yet and brand new to Vue. Will be putting up my first Vue attempt here tomorrow :o)

Message edited on: 01/15/2005 23:24