Well, being a 3dsMax user myself (and having a Bryce background), I have to say the person who left the comment is most likely thinking strictly in terms of "working in the industry", and not regarding the artwork in question at all.

The reason I say that is, the only validation someone should have to criticize another for working in an app like Bryce or Poser is the fact that having skills in those applications will not land you a job in a major studio or movie FX house or game developement company, where having a career in the 3D industry can earn you a comfortable living.

Before someone spins what I'm trying to say as being yet another anti-Bryce/Poser argument in itself, let me just point out that I drop by this forum because I still feel Bryce is a great 3D program, being used by talented 3D artists, even though I had to eventually move away from it (not by choice) for production purposes.

THIS is where the perceived bias comes in, and how it's easy to spot a professional 3D artist who's making legitimate crits from a wanna-be who's simply trying to sound important.

Professionals usually don't frown on an image or animation simply because of what program was used in it's creation. They will simply critique the image/animation on it's own merit, and point out any esthetic flaws that might be improved upon. Wanna-be's, who are still in school or trying to break into the 3D visual FX industry, will ALWAYS frown upon someone working with lower-end applications because they have the common but mistaken belief that EVERYONE working in 3D endeavors to land a job at ILM, Pixar, Dreamworks, or LucasArts. They think that everyone should learn Maya, 3dsMax, or Lightwave, because those are the apps that can land you a job at a big name company.

Most of the wanna-be's can't get their head around the idea that some folks simply enjoy 3D as a hobby, or perhaps have no intention on working for someone else, but instead wish to start up their own small company (like I did).

For me, the quality of a piece of art has NOTHING to do with what program you used, and any crits on such an image or animation should not begin with a bias to that factor. I made the move from programs like Bryce to what I'm working with now (3dsMax) for the simple fact of productivity. While working with Bryce and other programs some years ago (non-professionally), I decided to start my own small, indepentant company dedicated to graphic design and 3D illustration for print and advertisements (more currently moving into animation and game developement as well). We do everything from commercial website design (2d) to technical 3D illustration and compositing for commercial print advertisements that have appeared in internationally distributed magazines, etc. Since making the move to a more complete 3D package, I have found the production rate and output speed to be much more efficient than can be done in most so-called "low end" apps. This isn't a bias, it's a simple fact of the way things are as of right now. If future editions of Bryce incorporate a more efficient, production-capable renderer and toolset, then I may consider using it again if it would enhance my workflow.

Anyway, the thing to do has already been mentioned. Simply do not state what application you have used to make your art unless asked. If you state what you are using, you're going to predispose your art to bias. No way around that.

:-)

.3ds is not a file format that can be opened directly, it can only be imported. Only .max files can be opened directly. All other formats should be imported, including OBJ, which requires an additional plugin (OBJ2MAX). Max6 can import any .3ds file, regardless of what program it was created in originally, so long as it was exported correctly, and the file doesn't contain errors. You might want to ask him what exactly he gets when he tries to import the file (ie. an error message, a blank scene, or an abrupt program failure). This could better pinpoint the problem.

IMPORTANT NOTE: Also keep in mind that .3ds file fomat has a size limitation of 65535 polygons, vertices or texture coordinates per object. This means if any one object exceeds that amount, your file will be bad, and the import will fail. So, if you have a 3ds file you cannot import, this is usually the cause, and it has nothing to do with Max itself.

Message edited on: 08/11/2004 17:34

I see nudity in the thread he linked to at the top, hence the nudity flag. I must say, the renders he has shown are quite impressive. I have to wonder why there are no rendertimes included in the examples (that I have seen).

Hi. What kind of advice are you looking for? Constructive crits? Or do you have a pending question. I'm not a Bryce user, so I'd be of little use regarding technical advice, but anything to do with the asthetics of the render itself I'd be more than happy to contribute to. :-)

One reason I like visiting this particular bryce forum is the willingness it's users seem to have at improving their works and accepting constructive critiques from "outsiders" so to speak. That, and the fact I'm a former Bryce3D user myself, and still have an interest in observing the application's progression.

PS: I saw your post in the 3dsMax forum, and I have what you're looking for if you haven't obtained it already. Let me know.

Message edited on: 07/30/2004 01:49

That article is good, but seems to be rather old. They say "The next release of LightWave will also be the first to feature a radiosity renderer that can be set up in such a way that scenes can be animated (a first)." As we know now, there are renderers out there with irradience mapping and photon mapping that make animation with accurate radiosity faster than ever.

The page is stamped April 24, 2000. So keep in mind many advances have taken place in the rendering genre since that was written. But the same principals to how each rendering type works still applies. The only difference is that hybrid renderers have become far more advanced since then, and Global Illumination/radiosity render times have been cut dramatically from just a few years ago.

There are a new generation of raytrace engines out there like Brazil and Vray that are so good, they're probably going to find a permanant home in major studio pipelines in the not to distant future. Like Mental Ray, they're already being used for serious production purposes. :-)

Message edited on: 06/26/2004 23:18

Supposedly, there already is a Maya/Poser integration of sorts. The same company that does the dreaded plugin for Poser/3dsMax has one for Maya and Lightwave as well. I haven't personally used their product, but from what I understand from those who have, it fully translates a Poser scene on import and keeps all materials including trans maps and animations intact. I'm a 3dsMax user, and find it amazing how many Poser people come to the forum with questions about RENDERING in Max. I don't have a problem with Poser itself, but just wonder why they would feel the need to invest in a $3000+ piece of software simply to render Poser scenes? It's some people's worst fear realized. ;)

"Ive recently got accepted into Expos with a couple of images. Expos is read by some of the major studios/advertisers in the industry, and ive already recieved two job offers thanx to that mag, and its not even released yet. Free, excellent advertisement, and a LOT of money involved for me." One of my 3ds images was supposedly "considered" for Exp2, but never made the final cut. Congratulations in a big way. That's like the holy grail for most aspiring 3D professionals. Aside from landing a job at Pixar or ILM or course. Kudos!

" New in version 5! Network rendering - speed up processing time by rendering your images on multiple computers at the same time" Bryce has network rendering? If that's true, I might have to dusty off my old copy that's been sitting around for years and give it a whirl for ol time's sake. ;)

"still not as slow as Bryce but as an example the car scene linked takes about 30 seconds - 1 minute to render with no raytracing, with the water rayraced it takes about an hour! (in Max)"

Well, there's tons of different ways to get faster results in your raytraced water in Max. That's the beauty of a powerful render engine... options and tweaks. I'm sure those knowledgable about Bryce could tweak it's renderer to move faster too, but there's simply not that many options.

Max's renderer is a hybrid scanlineraytrace engine. It's really not the best render solution out there either. I use a plugin renderer when working in Max. My renderer of choice is Vray, but Brazil is also very good. Both of these plugins for Max will blow away the rendertimes benchmarked with the standard scanline hybrid, and also the engine in C4D. I'll bet you could render your scene with true GI as well as raytraced water in one of these plugins in under 30 minutes at 1600x1200 standard resolution.

My point is, Bryce is VERY slow, and if indeed someone takes it over, that should be the very first thing they address... the render engine.

Message edited on: 06/23/2004 06:20

I'm not a Bryce user anymore, but I have to say this is a highly impressive little animation and excellent use of fake HDRI... Considering you did it in Bryce, I'm even more impressed. Looks great. (The HDRI is faked, correct? Or did Bryce actually impliment real HDRI into the software recently?) Nice work.

Attached Link: http://www.splutterfish.com/sf/gallery_view.php?photo_id=231&screen=8&cat_id=2&action=images

I should point out also, that standard scanline rendering and raytracing work "backwards" from the camera: the rays start at the camera, and only the rays from the camera are bent or bounced by raytracing. Renderers like Brazil and Vray (and Mental Ray as well) calculate photons of light starting at a light source (like real light), which can be reflected, refracted, bounced off mirrors, or concentrated by a lens, accurately simulating more of the ways real light can move through a scene. Otherwise known as caustics. Standard scanline renderers aren't capable of doing real caustics, and must resort to tinting shadows to "fake" the result. However, these renderers combine raytracing and photon mapping to calculate light bounced off mirrors onto walls, etc.

Attached Link: http://www.vrayrender.com/gallery/

I can't speak for the other engines I mentioned, but Vray (at least) calls itself a Raytrace engine, and is always referred to by everyone as one. Or more specifically, an Advanced Raytrace engine. So I tend to agree with them on that formality. hehe. ;-) By the way, I certainly wouldn't expect Bryce to adopt any of these renderers as part of their package, since as you pointed out... it would spike the overall cost of the software, and completely alienate it from their base consumers.

"They want to Turn Bryce6 into a Higer end software that will eventually rival Max or maya Or Lightwave...The first thing they have said they will change is the Rendering Engine..." They definitely need to change the rendering engine regardless of who they're trying to compete with. But as for making Bryce into a higher end software... that might be a BAD move. With more features comes a higher pricetag, and they'll lose their base market. The higher end software are very expensive as you know (Lightwave is the cheapest of the high end stuff), and are so packed with features, it would take Bryce another 4 or 5 upgrades to catch up to where those programs are at now. I don't think that's a great idea at all for the software. I use 3dsMax almost exclusively now, and for all the stuff it can do, it's well worth the heafty pricetag for professionals. I don't see why Bryce would want to go that direction when their core user base is probably not going to be interested in most of the features. Faster rendering (up to 10x faster or more is possible now with the new generation of raytrace engines like Brazil or Vray or Mental Ray), and true GI would probably be the holy grail for most users. Then they can keep the price relatively low to please everyone. But I'm not even a user now, so maybe things have changed a lot since I used it. You guys know what you want. ;-) Later/

So Corel purchased Bryce only to sell it out, and not develop for it anymore? That sounds like Corel alright. But seriously, why discontinue it on PC? Any way you look at it, it seems like a damn shame. I'm sure all you guys have talked about this eternally here in this forum, but it's the first I've heard about it, having not used the program in years. Hope it works out for you all in the long run, because you seem to be very loyal to the program. I don't understand how it wasn't profitable for Corel.

"you have to know painting , lighting, composition, anatomy{to fix joint folds and such} It is not click click work at all." I agree completely, but that's my main "problem" with Poser is that you really do need to postwork 90% of what is rendered. I work mainly in animation, so doing that is out of the question usually. Again, this is why I'm hoping for animation and performance improvements in future upgrades. "One of these two is poser and one is an acrylic painting, now which is which? disregard who did the works and the subject just pick which is the poser made pic :-) " To be honest, BOTH could be made with Poser, but the one on the left just got much more attention in postwork. There's people who could do paintovers of a render and make them look as good or better than that. Yet there's people I know who work only in 3ds who can make ANIMATIONS that look as good as the one on the left too... with no postwork at all. It depends on what your outcome is to be used for, and how much time you have to do it. ;-)