Forum Moderators: wheatpenny, TheBryster
Vue F.A.Q (Last Updated: 2024 Nov 21 4:12 am)
Oops - forgot to mention: contains various DAZ stuff ;), Mike with just a tinge of a Boris morphing, some textures I'm beta testing for someone (Michael's Changing Fantasy Suit), saddlebags by cooler, and Bill's bass is one of the fish. It doesn't do it justice, I know, but I've just got so many ideas in my head at the moment it's impossible to implement them all at once...LOL. The atmosphere is one of Guitta's with a few slight modifications (thanks Guitta :)). The base of the image is actually my chemical landscape. I liked the way the ground looked so much I didn't want to change it. Laurie
Did a helluva job, Laurie, as I would expect. :) But, you know, the guy must be crazy for wanting to save that bass for eating. ever eaten a largemouth bass before? I have...let's just say, "yecchhh!". Unless he's keeping it as a trophy, that is. ;) Simply beautiful texturing on the horse, and the atmosphgere looks very convincing. I think Mike needs a little skin bump though.
Skin bump?! SKIN BUMP!!! Do ya really think? Oh boy, here we go again! LOL. Thank goodness I can stop and start the renders again...whew!! Thanks Mike...I'll see if I can't convert that bum file. Or maybe I'll use one of Catharina's...I think I have one of hers in .jpg format. Hmmmm. I have to say, I've never eaten a bass, small or largemouth. But the poor guy's a nomad - he may be starving to death! In which case I'd eat doggie doo as long as there's ketchup. LOL!!!! Laurie
HA!...the first person I know to use my bass texture!....this I have to say :) Anyway, Laurie...the bass is still alive!...so is the trout/salmon! I saw its tail end flapping outward. How did Mike caught it? Just curious Laurie, what size is the file?...how many objects and lights and polygons? Curious mind wants to know because 31 hours is helluvah lonnnnnnnnnnngg..........! Conslusion : Great image!
Damn, looks like another image I'll need you to do wallpaper size for me ;D Excellent work Laurie, the way the lighting hits the foreground subjects is easy to not notice but is perfectly set up...just how it should be. Keep them ideas comming! Cheers
Website: The 3D Scene - Returning Soon!
Twitter: Follow @the3dscene
--------------- A life?! Cool!! Where do I download one of those?---------------
That image/scene is stunning, Laurie. Wish I could come up with something half as good as that. So please don't kill me for these two suggestions, just try'em out in lo-res, small-sized renders AFTER you finish the present 30-hour one, pleeeeze. #1 (Very small point) : Mike's right foot would be rotated outwards when sitting like that. You might want to try sitting like that, just to get a feel of it. #2 (Big point) : Yes, Poser figures look good in Vue, and they do need a bit of shine. But some fiddling with Vue's too-much-ambient light can make stunning differences. You might want to try settting the light to 0% ambient and create a second, no-shadows sun pointing in the exactly opposite direction to the main sun. By moving these two around the object (keeping them in opposite directions), and keeping the second sun subdued, you can achieve some very nice, form-modeling shadows. By adding a third sun pointing directly out of the camera (VERY subdued, no-shadows), you can subtly vary the color mood and general light/dark feel of the image - if that makes any sense. Have fun - and forgive me if I sound critical, it's meant in a purely constructive sense.
Laurie, you did a really fabulous job, I can't believe how great this picture looks. Let me ask you, the grass, how did you do that, is it a lot of the weeds on the ground? And why did it take so long to render, did you do it in Ultra? Whatever, it really is beautiful. You are really talented. Sharen
Content Advisory! This message contains nudity
Heheheh...thanks guys :o). Who first? 'Kay: Mike: I think you are right about the skin bump...gonna try it :o). Bill: Glad I was the first to use your Bass!! And they "may" still be alive...he IS by the water ;o). There are only about 16+million polys (low for me usually), 2 lights, 232 objects, volumetric atmosphere with VERY soft shadows, 1.5% blur on the camera, rendering at 1024x768 @ 300dpi with User Settings - 12 Subrays per pixel, quality slider about where the word "Best" starts on the slider. That volumetric atmosphere, camera blur and user settings are what's making the render so long. I don't have a really fast processor. Only 700mhz Celeron and 384 megs of ram ;o). thip: I would NEVER kill anyone for making constructive criticism. I see it like this - no one is so good that they don't need criticism. For instance, I proofread a lot at my job. I'm good at it too. But when someone is staring at words all day, especially stuff they've read 3 or 4 times already, it's really easy to miss things...even obvious things. Those things may pop right out to someone else who hasn't been looking at it as much :o). It's the same way with images. Especially when you are the one that made them...it's really hard to see the obvious mistakes that someone else may see right away. That's why I put the picture here in the first place. So criticise as much as you like! I learn from that :o). And you ARE so nice about it...LOL! Sharen: there is no grass, only reeds and a few dry weeds :o). The reeds are right behind the figures in the water because they are right by a body of water :o). Thanks everyone for the comments....they really help alot! Laurie
I would not let that stop me trying I think Laurie has the quality slider set too high. I bet if you turned it down just slightly you would not see any difference and it would render much faster. Of course for her it's too late to adjust it now. I just did a test render. Amazing what ya learn by just doing a test to check the numbers. 72 and 300 dpi. Render times the exact same 9 mins 24 seconds. That should not be the same. So drag it into photoshop to check why. 72 dpi is a 5 X 7 inches 300 dpi 1.8 X 1.3 inches. That really never changed anything. If I just set it to print the 72 dpi at 300 dpi I would have got the same effect a smaller printed picture. The dpi in Vue is really not doing anything just changing the header. So I took the 72 dpi and changed it to 300 dpi and tooky a picture magnified 300 times of one if the lens flares. and took the same picture of the same lens flare that Vue says is 300 dpi and magnified it 1200 X. I think I'll forget Vue's dpi settings there useless. The picture I made would print 10X better than the one Vue made. Oh and it would still be 5 X 7 inches in size.
Laurie, it's excellent !
30 hour of rendering for a 1024 x 764 pixels image... Why ?
I'm definitely not an expert in VUE, but I've been dealing with little pixels for
quite a while now. So here a few advices :
using a 300 DPI setting instead of 72 DPI is useless. It won't produce
a better image. It's just an indication for printing. In fact, there will be
exactly the same amount of pixels. VUE will render exactly the same
image. 72 DPI or 300 DPI are only "printing" settings.
If you really want outstanding results use higher resolutions (i.e. 4000x4000).
Using more subrays per pixels and "best" quality anti-aliasing doesn't make very
noticeable differences. With a higher resolution, you get more details and
anti-aliasing becomes not even necessary. Anti-aliasing doesn't produce better
images, it only "hides" mystakes on low resolution images by averaging pixels.
You always lose details in this process.
The same image would have been of a higher "quality" with a "final" rendering
at 2048 x 1528 pixels. And for an optimum quality use 4096x3056 pixels with
anti-aliasing off.
Then, reduce the resolution to 1024x764 in Photoshop (or another editing software).
Modifying the resolution of an image always results in an amount of "blur". To correct
this, copy the image on another layer, apply a "sharpen" filter on it with the lowest setting
(if you use Ulead PhotoImpact try "focus" - level 1), and set the opacity (or transparency)
of this new layer to 50 %. Finally, merge (or "flatten") the layers.
It will gently rectify the bluring.
Even on a 700 MHz processor, the VUE rendering time should last only a few hours.
Eric
Wow! I just got my copy of Vue a few days ago. Been sick with an asthma attack, so I have just read the guide - helped me fall asleep! I've been using Poser and Bryce for about six months. Just could never get the Poser figures into Bryce to look good, and couldn't get the background on Poser to look like I wanted, so therefore, I have migrated to Vue. Looks like I made a good choice! This picture is just fantastic. Can you tell us more about the textures you are beta testing for the changing fantasy suit? That and the Adventures are my two favorite outfits for Mike. Thanks! Peggy
LVS - Where Learning is Fun!
http://www.lvsonline.com/index.html
You know I tried sharpen just to give it a try and it makes it worse. The data is missing so sharpen can recreate it of course. It was just interesting to me to try all the sizes to see what comes with them, 2400 X 3000 is not a impossible size to render so I guess If I ever need a good print I'll just render it. That will be 8 X 10 at 300 dpi so that's almost max size for my printer. 4 X 5 at 600 dpi. I thought the Vue dpi did something else. I don't need that option I can set the printer to do that already. I can tell it exactly how and what dpi to print at. From 72 dpi all the way up to 2400 dpi. It was interesting from the pont of view as to what is actually going on. Ya I know you can gain a lot by down sizing a image. 31 hours something is wrong man.
Well maybe not I think one I did took 5 days to render 1280 X 1024. I had the setting too high. It turned out of course but I could have rendered the same image at lower quality bigger and just resized it and I bet you would not be able to see the difference.
This site uses cookies to deliver the best experience. Our own cookies make user accounts and other features possible. Third-party cookies are used to display relevant ads and to analyze how Renderosity is used. By using our site, you acknowledge that you have read and understood our Terms of Service, including our Cookie Policy and our Privacy Policy.