Yes I know it's horribly grainy, but I rendered this at a low resolution and low RRP (poor quality)...
...So, I postworked it to try and improve it a little.

Anyway, I've decided that I should try to create a picture for once, instead of just a sample. Obviously, it's no where near finished, as the incoplete office block shows!
This is something I intend to tinker with now and then, when I'm in the mood.

It's going to be that crab thingy, left in the car park of an office block, possibly with someone looking at it thinking "who the hell put that there?"

What I want to know, is this;

Does the scale of this thing look correct? I based the size of the cockpit against the size of the glazing panels of the office - but I realise this is rather crude. I just dont want to go through a long "final" render later on, only to find out that something looks seriously out of place.

I put a seat in the cockpit, so you could judge the scale from that. This is using pro-render? Interesting feel to it anyway. It looks new. Unpainted and everything. What's going on with the triangulation onthe buckets?

I'm happy with the scale, but really I just wondered if it "looked" right in comparison to what will be the building - and yes, it's PRO-RENDER.

Like I said though, it's only very low quality mode 'cause it takes so bloody long to render ;-)

This one took about 90 minutes to render and that's only because there's no lights in the scene.

That triangulation you pointed out has me concerned though. I'm hoping it's because you created the bucket in a different program to the rest of it...

...'cause if you didn't, then that's a new problem :-/

Hmmm...

Afraid not. The buckets are just split cylinders. Could be something to do with Wings intrude. It's the only part of the thing that I used intrude on,(to hollow out the buckets). Which I think makes surfaces 2d. But I'm not enough of a wings expert to tell.

Average man height 6' (72") Commercial Entrance typically 8' (96") Looks very very close. Mapping is slightly off on the buckets. I postworked them anyway. Nice look so far.

Phewww!!! God, I hope so. I had visions of like a couple of hundred-billion more hours of testing to do for a moment there :-P But yes, without even testing, I'm pretty sure that would be the reason for it. BTW, I've just started experimenting with wings, and there's something I can't quite get my head around; I can select POINTS, EDGES, or OBJECT... ...hit the delete key - and they're gone! ...but... ...if I select say just one FACE and hit delete, it doesn't work, I have no idea how to delete a FACE in WINGS! Someone put me out of my misery and tell me how it's done will ya?

LOL, You'll have to consult the resident Wings expert....Guess whooooo? ;)

Hmm, once again... If Pro-Render is so time intensive, how would professionals use it? Remember, most of our computers are faster than what the actual shops can even afford...

But enough of that... I want to tell you that this render is very cool... Gonna be an awesome pic, once you're done with it!

Behold...my friend the stormdragon has spoken again.

Thank's for the pic comment, but not for that other one - lol

Now, if I'd called it SPEED-RENDER or something, I could understand your concern ;-)
Anyway, if DAZ don't pull their finger out, and fix that smoothing bug, it really don't matter what it's called.

right-click -> collapse Cool pic, though the grain and brightness is washing it out too much.

I like the 'look', it's kinda of dreamlike or flashback quality....

cool.

Message edited on: 01/18/2005 22:35

He's useing a different setup then just rendering..he is using TA...

I recently actually hit a polygon limit on Bryce, well, not a poly limit, but as I approached 4.5 million imported polys, my file size went to nearly 500 MB, and since I only had 512 MB of RAM on this PC, it wouldn't work anymore. Took over five hours to import that Rhino file... Total waste of time. The scene was useless.

Hey, those weird triangles are something I've seen when you get non-planer quads sometimes in the model itself. Haven't noticed them in bryce before though (seen them elsewhere though).

Aye, but it also points out the True Ambience bug, which will not do any surface smoothing on imported models. Kinda takes the fun out of TA, if it was even remotely fun to watch your render-times jump up a billion percent...

This becomes even more noticeable when it's brought into Bryce. Also, it will leak light at the seams. With the left-hand cube I've dragged the mouse a tiny bit (way too much, but just for demonstration purposes) to give a thickness to the wall. That way you won't have the inside faces messing up your outside faces and your UVmapping. HTH edit to add love the render BTW. I like that bleached out graininess, very cool. I'd be prepared to wait 90 minutes for that effect :^)

Message edited on: 01/19/2005 01:36

Pog, are those Wings meshes? I've never had that problem with Rhino meshes. I wonder...

lordstormdragon (or may I call you lsd?) - the problem only occurs if you intrude a mesh without stipulating a thickness. Then the 'inside' of the inside wall kinda occupies the same space as the outside wall. So if you have different materials applied, or have the outside wall UVmapped, it will cause problems. In fact, it will cause problems no matter what.

foleypro this might seem a silly question but what is TA, i'm not a master of all these terms or abbreviations yet. IJANBU :)

If you intrude 0 in wings it'll produce co-planar normals. This could be part of your problem with the funny faces. But there is a quick fix using Bryce. If you check the "render as solid" option on the object then normal backfaces will not render. Nips it in the bud right there. (Likewise, turning this on can be a problem with some meshes that use hidden faces to hollow them out. Depends on what you're doing I guess.) Great looking render there pumeco. They look like they go together. I'm tempted to use this model too. Looks like something I could use the STR-7 as air support for.

Foleypro refers to female mammary glands and gluteui, CrazyDawg. I suppose he could be referring to male-such-areas, as well! (joking) TA is short for True Ambience, one of Bryce 5's so-called premium render settings. It's a fun effect, but drives render times so far up as to be completely useless in animation. But it can be great for still-shots! TA only works when a scene is very small, otherwise the falloff rate, which is squared, defeats it's effects. We have been using TA to achieve a varied sort of radiosity in Bryce for the last few years. Search up True Ambience on the Bryce forum, there's a slew of threads describing it and how to use it...

Pog, I wondered (and still think) it is something like that. But the buckets do have a thickness created with inset. I had to do that to give me enough thickness to the metal to extrude the "teeth" on the buckets. SO, I'm thinking that I did it wrong. I used inset first to get thickness and then intrude to cut into it, which isn't enough, it still gives me a metal shell with no thickness, just with a lip at the front edge. Blah, might fix it, but don't feel like putting textures on it again. Len, if you want a fixed 3ds or OBJ version, I can do that easily enough.

drawbridgep - don't know what shape you were working with, but would it not be easier to just Intrude, and drag (or specify a width) immediately? Then if you need an inset, work on the inside edge, drag it up level with the outside lip... Pog (who normally models with a lump hammer)

Yeah, but I didn't know you could do that with intrude. Remember, I'm still a newbie to wings. Learn as I go along, so won't make the mistake again. :-)

For a newbie, you put me to shame :^( Getting back on topic - pumeco, what caused that circular mark on the square pillar? Was it accidental reflection, or put in on purpose?

Message edited on: 01/19/2005 11:00

It looks like a lens flare. With no lights!?

@ICM

Thanks for the height info, avarage height is a handy thing to know ;-)

@Jaymonjay

I tried what you said, but it just merges all points of the face into one :-(

@Zhann

Thanks for the comment you brilliant person! >>>sucks up to the new coordinator<<<

@xenic101

Cheers dude.

@CrazyDawg

Hey, you said you "...renered it on pro-render set on RPP 16 with 48-bit dithering..." - Oh yeah, so you've been hacking have you ;-) Give it BACK! PS, the render setting used can only be described as PRO-RENDER in "PURE" mode, because technically, the only contamination in the scene, are the objects within it! It's the best mode for simulating natural daylight.

@foleypro

Spot on!

@lordstormdragon

QUOTE
"TA only works when a scene is very small, otherwise the falloff rate, which is squared, defeats it's effects."

ANSWER
TA has falloff, yes, but I don't have that scene size problem with PRO-RENDER. I'll irritate you even more now, by telling you that not only has PRO-RENDER overcome this, but the product on which it's based (HALOBIRD), goes one step further. It can effectively allow you to adjust the RECEPTION strength of every material in the scene, which in turn, gives you effective control over falloff on a per-object basis (you can pull MASSIVE amounts of light into the scene, even in "highly-enclosed" low-light/no-light situation).

So whatever you, master Ornlu, and the other Bryceologist's are doing...you're doing it wrong! - So come on flame me!

pulls out tongue and makes rude noises<<<

@Flak

G'day mate!

@pogmahone

Thanks mother pog ;-) But, I'm afraid I'm still no wiser as far as the deleting a FACE in Wings goes. There must be a simple way to delete a face, surely :-/
As for the image, I don't want you to get the wrong impresion here. The grain and bleaching effect was done in postwork (though grain was present), and that circle is an effect of the lens-flare (also done in postwork). I suppose the image looks the way it does because it's a matter of effect over daylight simulation in PRO-RENDER.

@pauljs75

Thanks for the comment mate, and yeah, you ought to use the model - no doubt about it. I gotta say, when I first saw Phil's render of the crab, I thought "wow, that's detailed", but once you download it, it's even more detailed than you might think. I only wish master drawbridge had given it mechanical hands instead of buckets (more abilities).

@drawbridgep

Thanks for that offer of the fixed .obj, but really that's OK ;-) When I do a final render I intend to make sure the cockpit is in view, but I'm gonna remove the buckets altogether - though I don't know what I'll replace 'em with. As for the image, yep...it's a lens-flare with no lights - nothing unusual 'bout that :-)

Chain guns, cup holders, egg whisks....

Hmm, well I'm not going to flame you, I just disagree with things like Pro-Render, especially after playing with Maya lately. Also, you really should research Ornlu's work, and a few key other people here who I care deeply for, before saying that we are wrong. TA's falloff is, in fact, squared. I will prove this to you, if logic can possibly prove anything. Unless you are re-coding Bryce 5.01, that is. I've seen no proof of this. So far, your render technique is limited to the above-type scenes, which is cool, but I'm working on a variety of styles and have no time for barriers. I'm really not trying to mock you, or be an elitist about things, but Bryce simply doesn't have photon capabilities yet. After playing with Mental Ray and Final Gather, I have to say that all of your work here is nice, but obsolete in the face of other technologies. The MAIN difference I'm talking about is render time. That's what makes something professional, time is money. You could never, EVER animate the scene you made above. And without being able to animate, there is simply nothing "professional" about "pro render". No offense intended. Perhaps, "Journeyman-Render"? I've got more respect than most for you, don't ruin it by making uneducated comments. Still, I hope this mesh thing works itself out, that's annoying as hell! I'll agree with you on that...! (I don't flame people, I incinerate them)

I wonder if it's just a fancy calculator that provides "corrected" rgb values or setting #'s to simulate render effects through materials. I doubt it does anything to the actual render engine. Perhaps that's all it is.

@drawbridgep

lol - but you missed the obvious one for around here...
...FLAME-THROWERS!

@lordstormdragon

lol - I thought that one would provoke a response, it was meant to ;-)

It's like this; I remember you once called me a beginner, and as an artist...yeah OK...I'm a beginner - I'm WELL aware of that. Now that didn't, and never will bother me, because I have NO intentions whatsoever of EVER becoming an "artist", I simply don't have the time, patience or talent.

However, when you hint at me being a beginner in terms of technical knowhow with a render engine - that pisses me of BIG-TIME!

On more than one occasion now, you've told me that I should check out Ornlu, as if to say...unless you do, you're going nowhere fast.

Wrong again, I don't need to look into other peoples work in order to develop my product.

PRO-RENDER exists because of one thing...INNOVATION!

You cannot innovate if you live by a Bryce 5 manual, or simply build upon what "others" are doing - so I won't ;-)

Just because someone says something isn't possible, doesn't make it so.

(QUOTE)
"TA's falloff is, in fact, squared. I will prove this to you, if logic can possibly prove anything. Unless you are re-coding Bryce 5.01, that is. I've seen no proof of this. So far, your render technique is limited to the above-type scenes..."

(ANSWER)
First of all, it's not limited to any kind of scene, if you wanted dark'n'moody with soft lights, it'll work equally as well. Now 'bout the TA, like I said, YES, it's got falloff...but like I also said, PRO-RENDER solves it.

INNOVATION - remember! Just because you and Ornlu haven't solved this problem, it doesn't mean that I haven't.

I hope that final comment is enough to make you realise that whenever you make such "likewise" comments, it's both pathetic in it's nature and in it's intention.

You say you have respect for me, so I hope that's still the case - if not then that's fine as well. But Jared, more than anything, I hope you're not going to be one of the "idiot brigade" who'll get a kick out of dissing something which is actually f*cking good at what it was designed to do (make PRO-fessional output easy).

Hmmnnnn....KPTEqualiser looks very interesting. pumeco - could you post a picture of the circumstances in which you want to delete a face (i.e. screenshot with the face selected)? One clunky method could be to put Hole material on it, but a screenshot would help clarify........

Does Wings use NURBS? I'm not sure, but I've never had any of these problems in Rhino, and I'm wondering why?

No, it doesn't do NURBS, it only does box modelling. The problem mentioned above only occurs if you intrude without allowing a tiny bit of distance between the inside and outside surfaces.

"Wrong again, I don't need to look into other peoples work in order to develop my product." This reminds me of this figure from sesame street from back when I was little... It was this scientist who would make amazing inventions, only to find out that it had been invented before afterwards, but because he ignored other people, he only found out when it was too late. hint hint "PRO-RENDER exists because of one thing...INNOVATION!" BULLSHIT! no coding means no new features, means no innovation of such kind! You sound like my ex-gf.. nice stories but no proof, lotsa promises but never living up to them. And guess what? my ex was a lying bitch! makes ya wonder doesn't it...? -- Ray (I'm sick of imposters, I'm outta here)

Ok I'm no expert and this is all just guessing, but with regards to the Intrude in Wings issue. I always use the Extrude region and move it in instead of out. Might just be me, but it works better for me than using intrude. Just an idea to try.

Neat example Pog, I didn't know this. Also could you do a comparison between extrude and extrude region, maybe a visual would help me figure out what the difference is between those two. :-D Thanks!

@pogmahone

Thank's for taking the time to create those examples. I think I get it now, so if Wings cannot allow a "physical hole", it kida takes away the spark for me. I don't think I could get along with not being able to just delete a face, even though the program is excellent.

@Ang25

Thank's for the suggestion, but like I said to pog...

@lordstormdragon

You've gone strangely quiet on me, hope that's not my respect gone out of the window (I'm doing my job my friend, I kinda hoped you'd see the person, and not the job he does).

@Rayraz

You say "no recoding = no innovation" - since when?

Oh and lying?

I'm economical with the truth when I need to be (that's what people connected with marketing do), I don't lie - period.

And finally, that "intruder" comment was a long time coming wasn't it? Couldn't have put it better myself. That's what I've been seen as since day one, so what's new?

@EveryoneReadingThis

You're probably expecting me to "pull-a-fit" and leave again aren't you - but no, I'm gonna have to dissapoint some of you because I'm not going to do that.

What I'm going to do, is say this;

Your all members of the biggest Bryce forum bar none. Are you surprised that commercial interest flows through it? I'm sorry to have to break this to you, but I'm afraid you've had it before pumeco, during it, and you're gonna get it after it, as well. Forums like this are a breeding ground for "marketing", and far too much a temptation to be ignored.

Everyone who has flamed pumeco, have done nothing more than create even more publicity for PRO-RENDER than they might ever imagine (you're well aware of PRO-RENDER).

The reason I've told you this, is not to "show off" or "rub it in". I'm telling you this because I GENUINELY have grown to like the members here, and I'm thankfull for the FEW friends I've made.

I'm sorry if I offend, but most of you really do seem to be very innocent as to what REALLY goes on in an industry like this.

At the end of the day, our product will be released, and pumeco WILL have control over how it get's handled (MERCHANTS WATCH AND LEARN)! As with product's, "maketing" can be innovative, so watch the pumeco developed STM-BETA business model do it's worst!

Not realy, it is actually interesting subject, i'm glad you girls talk about it, modeling is always ON TOPIC cuz, simply, Bryce modeling abilities are almost equal to zero, I say, if needed, open another thread :P I'm also glad someone is blowing topic in this one, i'm sick and tired of reading ppl bashing Len and not actualy doing something more productive, like RENDERING !!! :D And, BTW Pog, there are two different approaches to sub-d, closed type and open, dunno why, but Wings is made that way from the beginning, bigest obstacle in it i believe, Silo, in the other hand supports both, closed and open type, i guess it's all about what you like or u are more comfortable with ! :D

Yeah, I can see it could be a problem. Because I'm a 'physical' sculptor it hardly ever occurs to me that the inside of an object exists in any useful way. I guess if I was still working with metal (I worked for five years as a silversmith after I left college) I'd view the outside more as a 'skin' without thickness, and the inside space as something that could be exploited. Lately I hafta admit I've been looking at the reflective properties of Bryce, and thinking that a lot of interesting things could be done with polished stainless steel. But it's so high-tech and expensive (you have to hand over the manufacture of the finished work to 'the experts') that I've been reluctant to go that route. The way I work at the moment I can make my moulds and do my casting myself, which means I can work on a very large scale. Once you start working in metal of any kind the cost leap from 4000 or 5000 to 50,000 and on upwards towards the sky. So the foundry and finishers make all the profit, you just get the kudos, and you can't eat kudos :^( @ pumeco - as I mentioned above, you can place Hole material on any area you don't want to appear in the render. Not the same thing, but the beauty of Wings is its ease of use. Quite a lot of Maya and Lightwave people do their modelling in Wings, then move the model into the other apps at the finish.

I don't know about THAT, Pog, but I'll take your word for it... My problem with Wingz wasn't it's potential, but it's UI. For the same reason, I moved from Lightwave to Maya. I love both, but can THINK better inside of Maya. I still have yet to finish an image with it that would compare to my Bryce work, though... SO, I stick with Rhino. I really flow with it. Other modelers have frustrated me to no end. Z-brush, Amapi, Truespace, Wings, Blender... I've tried them all, but Rhino just works for me!

Truespace was blow-your-brains-out for me :^(( had to return it and get my money back :^((

Aye, I remember when Truespace 5 first came out, with the ridiculous title, "Reality Designer". Whatever.