If your into just 3D Landscaping, I agree, Vue is better, hands down. If you like to use Bryce to do interior pics, models, and so forth, then Vue can't compete. If your wanting to do the things we are doing in Bryce through Vue, it can't be done. There is a bug in Vue 4 that I found in regard to soft shadows the e-On will not talk about. You can see my post in the Vue forums to that regard. But, it just matters what your objectives are. If 100% realism isnt your thing, then Vue will work wonders with vegetation, better landscaping, and of course has support for other formats. But Bryce leaves it in the dust with its other uses and possibilities. I have both, which to me is the best way to go :)

Ok, here is the $65,000 question. What is the POINT? You have already had to make the scene, render it, turn into a HDR, put the HDR image back into the scene. WOuldn't it have been quicker and looked better to have at step one just added the ball to the scene and it would have reflected that scenery anyay? To me its like driving 50 miles out of your way to avoid a left turn.

// Code for Less Lazy Reaction to Message by MadMax Br5 // version: 0.1a // 02/11/2003 // ---------- // include cricket.h insert crickets_chirping.wav Sleep 500 //Loop If madmax = new post then restart else goto LOOP : LOOP Echo "Ok.. That made no sense what so ever." Echo " Make a square, the turn it into a blur," Echo " Then map it back onto a sphere??????" Do Action(Bang_Head_Against_Wall)x4 CLS Return

What I did was make another spehere outside the HDR textured sphere, made it pure white. This helps allow the HDR picture shine more. White circle in same place as HDR sphere, but slightly bigger than HDR sphere. Then on HDR sphere give it slight transparency. The "light" from the white textured sphere will shine through the "light" spots on the HDR boosting the HDR image onto your scene.

Antevark, I feel your pain brother(or sister :) What I have learned in 6 years of 3D is there is never a "formula" Its 10% technic and 90% mickey mouse. In other words, there is no set sure fire way to get realism. There are too many variables when making your own scene that any technic could cover. Yes we can use things people here share as was to get a certain color, light and so forth but it all depends on what that scene needs and what you want it to express. Myself, personally when I do a scene <-- For some reason I think Im spelling that wrong ? Anyway, when I do an image I go for realism. I used to get harassed to no end by my High School Art teacher years ago becuase he was of the belief that art was expression, not mimicing the real world. For some, maybe, but not for me. To me true art is the ability of the art to make the viewer believewhat he is looking at is real. The idea or story behind the picture is icing on the cake. Of course, that's all my humble opinion and you can do with it what you will.

Sorry Madmax, I see you already posted that enough... DOH! GOt too excited about helping ;)

Sorry I meant SPECULAR HALO's Color, not Specular Hue

WHoa guys.. Agent said: "This is a cool technique overall, but I still would use my old technique and not use blurry reflections, only because I myself would want realistic relections. (see link in post #8)" You CAN control reflections and transparency EVEN when using blurry transmissions (transparency, like glass) and blurry reflections. All you have to do is set the SPECULAR HUE from either pure black (Renders that materials reflection without any blur) or to pure white (renders that materials reflections or transparency blurry) Any hue in between is a mix. The more black you go the clearer the reflection or transparency will be and the whiter you go the blurrier it will be! The really cool thing about that is for each object you can set the apparent blurr or clearness without worrying about blurred transmissions or reflections screwing up say a car window :)

The true amb. probably only does one bounce in one direction. Your light is hitting the walls at a 45 degree up angle so the light bounces off at a 45 degree angle. Just a guess. The other idea is the wall on the back and up top are receiving too much of the reallight thus washing out the color light. They are closer to the light source than the floor or ball.

"Are you using a sphere just outside the HDR sphere? The outside sphere is the light, the inside sphere, the HDR sphere, is just a pinch transparent to let the 'light' through. " ROFLMAO.. Uh no.. Nobody told me to. Could be thats what Im missing! Back to the drawing board.. lol Thanks TMG ;) Very nice pic btw

Im sorry but your wrong. The colors bleed into other objects. That image doesn;t show that but youcanclearly see it when your working on it.

Well, It's like anything else ShadowDragonLord, you can make things the easy way, or put more work into it and the results will show. Just to let you know, for the last 3 days I have done nothing but Bryce HDR work for 12+ hours a day. Ask Agent if you don't believe me. Ive pestered him plenty.(I'm disabled so Im home all day, thats why my typing is so bad :) So who is the lazy one? The ones that look for more realistic lighting, or the ones who just use whats there? Im not coming down on you, don't get me wrong, but if we just accept how things are, things will never improve or get better. When HDR, Radiosity, and true lighting are done correctly the results are outstanding. Go to Lightwaves website , newtek.com and look at there gallery. That is what Global illumination and radiosity can do for you.Or go to splutterfish and look at those renderings. Again, that realism is acheived with what we are attempting to do. If that doesn't float your boat and your happy slapping a few poser figures into a poorly lit scene, then by all means. But if your like me, and Im happy to see that a few are, and your biggest thing is realism, then you should look outside the box. Im sure when Corel was working on Bryce 5 they never intended for people to be using lightdomes or "tricking" the render engine into doing pseudo radiosity. Im not upset, but it does bother me to see a person make a comment about laziness when they don't have all the facts or can't appreciate the work some people put in to bring these "lazy" features or ideas. .. Stepping of the soapbox now.

you screwed up somehow! (And Don't Blame Me!!!) Thats what I got when I went to that URL Madmax.. lol I like the goathead dude. hehe

When you read this, remember that I am very grateful for your help folks :) That being said... ARGHHHHH!! I don't know what Im doing wrong. Either my objects in the scene come out too dark, or everything has to have its reflection and ambiance bumped way up. To me that makes the materials and textures look like crap. The only thing that seems to work for me is to make everything at least 25% reflective, but when I do that I loose the color of the object, so I increase ambaince, then the object looks like a darn washed out mirror. I just don't grasp what I am doing wrong. If anyone could be so kind as to send me a scene with everything set right (The teddybear one looks great btw) maybe I can finally see what is wrong. -Maybe- my HDR jpg Im using isnt a good to use. Its a snow covered one from a web site that was giving one away for free.

Umm..Go Where TMG? ;)