rokket opened this issue on Apr 30, 2011 · 260 posts
anupaum posted Mon, 02 May 2011 at 2:53 PM
Every render presents a different set of demands. Personally, I struggle with lighting more than anything else, despite working with Poser since version 3. When I look back on early renders, I roll my eyes in disgust. However, that work represents a "place in time," and all of us who persist at this will improve, eventually. (There's also a fairly substantial difference between my renders done in P6 and those I created when I upgrade to PPro 2010. The creative tool improved significantly, and now, bagginsbill says the newer version will be even better!)
Photorealism is a bit of a slippery term. I have a collection of photos that I took in high school that are uniformly blurry (I needed glasses, what can I say?) and often suffer from exposure problems. I can do bad lighting in Poser without difficulty, too! (I'm highly skilled at that, in fact . . .)
:)
Having written all of this, I try to evoke some kind of response out of the viewer when I create renders. Most of you are much better at the technical aspects of the program than I am, and honestly, some of the talk in this forum lies beyond my ability to understand. But if I look at the figures I was using a few years ago and compare them to the quality of the figures we have available now, the difference is quite glaring. Clothing is better, too! (In some cases, a LOT better!) Those of you who are pushing the frontier of what is "photorealistic" wind up dragging people like me along for the ride. Personally I'm grateful for that, because the less my viewers have to complain about with respect to realism in my renders, the easier it is for said viewers to understand what I'm trying to portray.
Soft tissue dynamics? Nice! Improved rigging, so that elbows, knees and shoulders don't distort when they're bent? Yeah, I can handle that. Bring it on, ladies and gentlemen . . .