i only used preset atmos up to now but when i look at galleries it seems you can do so much more with tweaking ... so i am wondering if there is a basic path to follow, what to change first etc.

any tips here?

thanks in advance
chris

Atmospheres for me a re like painting. Start with a blank canvas and just add and tweak till you get we hat you like.ALWAYS start with a plain black sky...or for me anyway :D

You can also dissect presets and compare the differences.

I never use presets (only when I was starting with Vue, 2 years ago). I start with the default atmosphere and change and change and change until I get what I want.

How to become an expert at this? After your first 200 images done like this you officially become an expert.

omg ... i have to do 200 images until tomorrow then ;-)

ok, i will take the clouds and atmosphere section home to read tonight for starters!

I often start with a preset that's close to what I have in mind then tweak the living hell out of it until it either looks good or I wreck it and start again :)

Check tutorials at www.geekatplay.com

there are so many! i have switched from watching tv to watching geekatplay days ago ...

I am with Frank T.  I use a preset and alter it from there until I destroy it

Mr. Miller, for shame. You are a moderator and by default supposed to be a software guru...I am appauled by your behavior...

Anyway...hherm...(;

Yep - another preset tweakerdestroyer here. In any creative field there are broadly two kinds of creative mind - this is my theory anyhow:

1. The "Composer" - starts with blank sheetscreendefault and design from scratch.
2. The "Remixer" - starts with something existing and messes around with it.

A blank screen doesn't get me going - I usually like something to work with, and then my imagination begins to flow. There are exceptions of course, but this is the general rule.

Anyone agreedisgreehave a theory of your own?

Richard

Quote - i only used preset atmos up to now but when i look at galleries it seems you can do so much more with tweaking ... so i am wondering if there is a basic path to follow, what to change first etc.

any tips here?

One tip - easy to fall into "rightwrong" thinking i.e. as if there is a path that should be followed. Instead there are good practices to learn, better and worse ways to do things, but no path. Each of us figures out a way to do things, and the best have gained a level of mastery and are always learning.

Concentrate on creating images you like, and don't worry too much about becoming an expert. Do you want to be an expert, or do you want to creative amazing artwork? Create what you want to create and let your expertise grow in the creating.

My $0.02 :)

well my topic maybe was too provocative ... i dont need to become the ultimate guru :) what i have meant is that i have often seen that in the lifetime of using a software by a community a path of steps to be learned reveals itself. like "know these basics first" then "start playing with these settings" and only at the end "tweak these ultimate complicated but resulting in great results buttons".

when i look at clouds and skys there are so many factors that i feel overwhelmed. do i start with experimenting with different light models? do i start with cloud attributes? how does camera and sun stuff factor in? this kind of clarification is what i was hoping for.

when i was starting with indoor rendering my first attempts years ago where so disappointing that i completely ruled vue out for this kind of requirement. after reading more tutorials, examples and getting a feel of what does what today i see that actually it might become my preferred tool for indoor rendering (esp when it comes to integrate outdoor stuff seen in windows ... MR with Maya is great but once you load a couple of trees and grass with billions of polys it starts to get tricky).

of course i am aware that everybody learns differently, expect different results and basically is very unique. so i guess i was asking if someone was able to read my mind and produce a magic quickfix to help with supertight deadlines in the office life ... which of course is absurd and more than anything else a sign of my impatience to fully learn this great piece of software. come to think of it "patience" is one of the requirements that should be put on the box :)

anyhow ... in any case i'm very happy with all the feeback one receives in this nice forum and hope i will be forgiven if sometimes i produce silly post!

chris

Indoor rendering is a tricky art in Vue - I am still wrestling with it myself.

Another route for interiors, if you have time to invest, is in two free tools - Google Sketchup (modeller) and Kerkythea (photorealistic renderer). 

i am doing all my modelling in blender (free open source 3d do-it-all) although we have maya in the office. but i know blender and i am much faster with it. for rendering i work with luxrender (also free open source unbiased render) but as soon as i come close to landscapes i prefer vue. the nice thing about luxrender is it's directly exportable from blender and has nice material presets that i can use right away. the output takes some time but is really great. no tweaking just takes long. but then comes the plants outside ... i start to turn to vue :)

so for outside shots i use vue and for the interior i think i will have to do some more experimenting. if i need tight integration its great to do in vue. but for ultra realistic light behaviour i might mix luxrender for the interior plate and add the vue outside in post processing.

i have heard about Kerky but never used it. was it always available for windows? how do you rate it?

Monsoon has a very bad habit of using the default atmo and not tweaking anything except shadows. I'm trying to get better at that. Recently I've been trying the advice  found here in the forums to some success. I am also extending my collections of the sky masters such as Bruno and Trepz, Bountiful Knight, etc.

I think I may have gotten into that habit by focusing on showcasing product textures instead of making full blown art compositions. I'm trying now to do more of the latter.

My favorite trick gleaned here in the threads is using a second sun per Chipp's instructions. I think it lends a great ambience.

hoi! second sun? which instructions?

come to think of it ... the lighting on a planet in a twin star system must be much better :)

Forgive the omission........

You create a second sun opposite the first one with a tint about the same color as the Rendo blue, turn shadows off and set softness to 5. Makes great secondary light.

M

Yeah, it is a good way to light, but it is seen as an object not an actual sun as they cannot be saved with atmospheres, nor can they have the "visibility" of an actual sun ala Tattooine. Really sucks.

In landscapes, I never use secondary lights as ambient light. Instead, I use the "sky dome lighting gain". I find the result much more realistic and natural than that of a secondary sun. Only my opinion. :-)  It renders faster too.

Quote - "when i look at clouds and skys there are so many factors that i feel overwhelmed. do i start with experimenting with different light models? do i start with cloud attributes? how does camera and sun stuff factor in? this kind of clarification is what i was hoping for."

I don't think there's a start. Every one of these things contribute for an atmosphere. You have to use it all in parallel. This is why I said that experience is the key thing. With experience, you immediatelly know what you have to change to get the look you want.

Each person has different opinions on all of these things, I think. For example, I only use GR lighting model (only in one or two images I used GI), so this choice is easy for me. :-)
Another easy choice for me is the atmosphere model. I only use Spectral.
Another easy choice for me is clouds type: I only use spectral or spectral2 (never volumetrics or others).
Another easy choice is secondary suns: I don't use it.
Sky dome lighting gain: always use it.
Many people prefer atmospheres with light balance more towards ambient (20% or 30%). I prefer around 80%, I think the scenes become more vivid (I compensate the darker shadows with the sky dome lighting gain). But this is because, personally, I prefer bright, happy scenes.

With practice and experimentation, you'll discover what you like. Above is what I like, not necessarily the best for you. :-)

Rutra, what do you set your sky dome gain to?

It depends on the light balance, the sun position, the radiosity gain, etc. Generally, it ranges from 0.5 to 4, but sometimes I use more.

I could give you examples:
Gain of 4: http://www.renderosity.com/mod/gallery/index.php?image_id=1806409
Gain of 2: http://www.renderosity.com/mod/gallery/index.php?image_id=1816961
Gain of 4: http://www.renderosity.com/mod/gallery/index.php?image_id=1812624
Gain of 3.5: http://www.renderosity.com/mod/gallery/index.php?image_id=1782571
Gain of 2: http://www.renderosity.com/mod/gallery/index.php?image_id=1746289

Thank you.
:)

 Yes, Artur, I agree with your conclusions for sky dome lighting gain over a second light. Especially now with Vue 7's super fast radiosity renders, it works very well.

If one wants more control over the sky color/fog/haze, then many times standard atmospheres provide a good solution-- and it renders fast. In these cases, using a second light per Mark's instructions above, works well for me.

Quote - Forgive the omission........

You create a second sun opposite the first one with a tint about the same color as the Rendo blue, turn shadows off and set softness to 5. Makes great secondary light.

M

Mark, why would you set softness to 5 if shadows are turned off?  Softness only affects the edge of shadows.  If you turn off shadows for the light, then softness has no effect.

I agree with your idea however of using secondary diffuse light sources in a scene, particularly if characters are involved because it delievers a greater amount of specular light.  Indirect lighting even with boosted sky domes produce no specular light so you will need additional diffuse light sources in order to generate specular highlights. 

Artur, I was looking at your examples and wanted to know where you get the pink clothed girl? My boss wants the kindergarden populated with children ... and I have no idea how to do that fast.

Dave, that's because I'm atmospherically challenged and really have no idea what I am doing most of the time.

Quote - atmospherically challenged

LOL

Quote - "atmospherically challenged"

• also LOL....
  Rutra's "sky dome lighting gain"
• He's right.  There is so much to play with here, but before we start adding lots of lights, let's start with the basics.... and you know what? - The basics are good!

:-)

-grins--- but you know what? I can't for the love of *** get any godrays! Still trying.....

Quote - "Artur, I was looking at your examples and wanted to know where you get the pink clothed girl?"

That's Maddie, from Daz3d. The clothes are from Hansel and Gretel, I think, also from Daz (I changed them from conform to dynamic and removed some bits).

Quote - "I agree with your idea however of using secondary diffuse light sources in a scene, particularly if characters are involved because it delievers a greater amount of specular light.  Indirect lighting even with boosted sky domes produce no specular light so you will need additional diffuse light sources in order to generate specular highlights. "

True, but if the light balance is high enough (I use it around 80%) specular highlights are not a problem at all. There's no need to use secondary lights for this purpose, with this kind of light balance.

Besides, if secondary lights are used to iluminate the shadows, this can cause specular highlights in the shaded areas, and that's not very realistic, IMO.