46 threads found!
Thread | Author | Replies | Views | Last Reply |
---|---|---|---|---|
pumecobann | 12 | 221 | ||
pumecobann | 4 | 106 | ||
pumecobann | 7 | 145 | ||
pumecobann | 6 | 236 | ||
pumecobann | 40 | 1175 | ||
pumecobann | 3 | 186 | ||
pumecobann | 32 | 533 | ||
pumecobann | 12 | 321 | ||
pumecobann | 13 | 266 | ||
pumecobann | 26 | 319 | ||
pumecobann | 12 | 61 | ||
pumecobann | 9 | 56 | ||
pumecobann | 9 | 59 | ||
pumecobann | 54 | 275 | ||
pumecobann | 28 | 42 |
1,234 comments found!
Hi Phantast,
You can already do that in Bryce!
Just select Cube 39 and change the material properties for it, and tada!
I can't tell you which properties to change because that would all depend upon your lighting setup. To start with though, try reducing the diffusion level of the material on your Cube 39.
Regards,
Len.
The wait can be horrific, but the outcome can be worse - pumeco 2006
Thread: Good news for Bryce 5 users. | Forum: Bryce
Hi everyone.
A few replies this time, so I had better seperate them.
TMGraphics:
First of all thanks, and as far as your question about having liquid in a bottle goes, I can tell you with absolute certainty that it would indeed be possible. I can think of no reason why not.
TheBryster:
I dont' blame you for staying out of this :-)
Oh and by the way, I know I'm propbably going to be the butt of a few jokes because of this but, I need to ask, what is LOL or lol. I keep seeing LOL and lol, and I have absolutely NO idea what it is. Does it stand for something or is it some sort of smiley. And, if it is some sort of smiley, what does is express? I have'nt been at this long enough to find out!
Swade:
Thanks for the support and opinion. I think a couple of more renders should be forthcoming before PRO-RENDER's release, hang in there!
Cris Palomino:
Eh... dont' know how to reply because I dont' know what is suggested by your posts. Got me thinking though!
Rayraz:
Thanks, and yes, will do!
PJF:
I'm assuming you read post number 78. If so, I'm glad to see your still prepared to post here, thanks! Also please know that you are MORE than welcome to post your images and knowledge in this thread, never believe otherwise.
Now then sourpuss! Trust you to spot it :-) Actually, I made a bit of a mistake in my writings, I should not have said that the excessive ambience problem has been sorted. What I meant to say was that it's been minimised.
However, that said, I have recently made yet another improvement to PRO-RENDER, and now, the ambience problem is at present just about non-existent, and the scattering of light has taken on a whole new level of smoothness. By the time PRO-RENDER is released I think the ambience problem could well be TOTALY non-existent, let's hope so. But for now, renders are now smoother than the first four images I posted, it's looking good.
waldomac:
All being well, I hope to have PRO-RENDER online in August 2004. Other 3D projects are slowing things down a little, but it's getting there!
shadowdragonlord:
Thanks, I hope you'll find something usefull in PRO-RENDER, even if it's not perhaps as much as what you wish for. Hope you'll like it anyway :-)
Regards,
Len.
The wait can be horrific, but the outcome can be worse - pumeco 2006
Thread: Good news for Bryce 5 users. | Forum: Bryce
OK, so there's the Cornell Box renders, made with PRO RENDER. PJF kindly uploaded his version to this thread earlier ( post number 40 ). This is great, because it gives me a way to demonstrate to members, some of the problems that have been sorted. First of all, take a look at the image by PJF, where the bottom of objects meet the floor. You will notice an EXCESSIVE amount of ambience, due not only to the amount of ambience being used, but also to the intensity of the colours themselves. Please also note, that PJF pointed out that the image in question was brought about by a lot of tweaking. Now then, let's take a look at PRO-RENDER's version ( CORNELL BOX 1 ). The first thing you'll probably notice, is the sheer intensity of the colour. This is because I have made the single area light more intense than would normally be called for. I have done this for a VERY good reason, and here is that reason... If, in PJF's example, he were to increase the intensity of the light, the EXCESSIVE ambience problem displayed, would be even MORE amplified, and would result in a worse image, and PJF would probably need some strong form of medication to contain his sanity :-) ...however, please note that in the PRO-RENDER version ( CORNELL BOX 1 ), even though the light is much stronger, and the colours more intense, the problem of EXCESSIVE ambience has been sorted. Please also note, that this was managed WITHOUT having to tweak anything, and also, that the box LEAKAGE problem has been sorted :-) Moving on, CORNELL BOX 2 shows the same type of scene, again rendered with PRO-RENDER, only this time, without any lights. Also, the cube has been changed to a sphere to show how PRO-RENDER handles transparency, reflection, and refraction. Please note that every material used in the four images I have posted here, are PRO-RENDER specific, and will be included among many other PRO-RENDER specific materials when the package is released. Finally, if nothing else, the two Cornell Box images show how the PRO-RENDER method handles the extemes, going from a STRONG light, right down to NO light at all! Be back soon. Regards, Len.
The wait can be horrific, but the outcome can be worse - pumeco 2006
Thread: Good news for Bryce 5 users. | Forum: Bryce
The wait can be horrific, but the outcome can be worse - pumeco 2006
Thread: Good news for Bryce 5 users. | Forum: Bryce
The wait can be horrific, but the outcome can be worse - pumeco 2006
Thread: Good news for Bryce 5 users. | Forum: Bryce
Now then PJF, what's all this then! Come on, you don't seriously believe my previous post was aimed at you, do you?
For what it's worth, I consider you a friend here at Renderosity, and HOPE that you have posted something when I log-on here. After reading your recent post's, I was shocked that you thought I where pointing the finger at you,
...no way man, NO WAY!
I wasn't even pointing the finger at Catlin, even though it was Catlin's recent post's here and on 3D Commune, that triggered such a response. I'm sorry, Catlin, if I've offended you in any way, it's just that, what you seem to be saying is SO not true, and gives the wrong impression of myself and pumeco. You say you would like to get your grubby little paws on PRO-RENDER. Well, now more than ever, I hope you do! Maybe then you'll forgive me for giving you the wrong impression, enjoy PRO-RENDER, and see myself and pumeco in a BETTER light.
The truth of the matter is that I was pointing the finger at this thread in general, not at a single member. It was really starting to feel as if people had it in for PRO-RENDER, though I can't for one moment see why they should.
Sorry for any misunderstanding.
Oh by the way, I forgot to mention to PJF that the reflection problem demonstrated, has been worked out, though not demonstrated in the images below,
...all will be revealed on PRO-RENDER's release!
Regards,
Len.
The wait can be horrific, but the outcome can be worse - pumeco 2006
Thread: Good news for Bryce 5 users. | Forum: Bryce
In response to catlin mc ( post number 72 )
First of all, I have NEVER painted Renderosity or it's forums in a bad light. EVERY reply I have EVER made on ANY site has been given with GREAT consideration. I would urge anyone in doubt, to go and check out the threads on the other sites, and please know that I am NOT responsible for the feelings of OTHERS towards Renderosity or it's forums. If you read my replies carefully, you will see that any references to Renderosity have been made because I have been prompted to do so, and those references have always been in good humour. Also, I try to be as fair as I can by posting links to other website forums ALWAYS in alphabetical order, to show ZERO preferences.
It became obvious in the early days of these threads, that PRO-RENDER had become a VERY controversial product, and that I must make a decision on it's future.
I made the decision to complete PRO-RENDER, and I made that decision, secure in the knowledge that no financial reward would be coming my way. May I point out that, this is NOT the sort of decision one would expect to hear from a man with BUSINESS ONLY logic. I decided to continue PRO-RENDER because I love Bryce, I'm proud of what I've developed, and I want to share it with other Bryce users.
I am consistantly being informed that PRO-RENDER is some sort of re-working of other peoples work. Well, if that's the case, and you're minds are made up on that, you won't be wanting to download PRO-RENDER then will you.
The best I can say on that matter is this: If you're all happy with the excellent work that has already been done here ( and so you should be ), I am happy for you all.
However, I am not prepared to sit back and watch my own work being ripped apart by the childish attitude of some members here. It's plain to see from the posts here, that any PAINTING that's been done, has in fact been done by a select few members on this very site. The impressions that other sites' members have about Renderosity are based on what THEY read here, so please, even the thought that I alone could generate these impressions is absolutely laughable! No, I'm afraid people already had their own impressions of Renderosity LONG before I came along, now I wonder why that could be? A few lessons to be learnt here maybe, so perhaps this thread is a blessing in disguise.
Just because I'm proud of what I've developed, that does not make me an egotist. In fact, as far as I can see, the only egotism displayed in this thread has been by others, NOT myself. Please know that members of Renderosity are NOT the only people with a love of advanced rendering for Bryce at heart. There are OTHER sites and OTHER people, and it actually IS possible for others to have developed their knowledge WITHOUT help from Renderosity or it's members. If anyone doubt's this, then perhaps they had better look closer to home as far as egotism goes. I'm not sure if that SINGLE SHY MALE line has given people the wrong impression that I might be a pushover. But if it has, then you have a LOT to learn. I might be shy around females, but I'm certainly not shy in general, and I'm no pushover, especially in business.
I apologise to the members with a GENUINE need for PRO-RENDER, that you've had to read through large amounts of text in order to get very little information. It's an unfortunate fact that most of my text has been written in order to rectify suspicions and accusations. To you members, all I can say is please bear with me, I am doing my best to get PRO-RENDER online. But having to constantly write lengthy explanations like this tends to slow things down a little. Oh, and by the way, I write a lot here because I CARE!
I truly believe that I have written enough text in this thread to explain away peoples suspicions and accusations. That fact alone, should be enough to make people see that I really DO care about Renderosity and it's members. So, starting from this post onward, I am simply going to ignore ALL suspicions and accusations. I will now, reply only to CONSTRUCTIVE posts, good or bad.
Finally, I hope to get those radiosity room images up shortly, so that members can compare them to the methods used here on Renderosity, I'm sure that you can all decide then, weather or not you will be downloading PRO-RENDER.
Either way, it WILL be released.
Regards,
Len.
The wait can be horrific, but the outcome can be worse - pumeco 2006
Thread: Good news for Bryce 5 users. | Forum: Bryce
Here are some other URL's on PRO-RENDER in alphabetical order:
3D Commune:
http://www.3dcommune.com/3d/forum.mv?Bryce+read+8912215408
DAZ Productions:
http://forum.daz3d.com/viewtopic.php?t=5331
Renderotica (ADULTS ONLY):
http://www.renderotica.com/postt2560.html
The wait can be horrific, but the outcome can be worse - pumeco 2006
Thread: Good news for Bryce 5 users. | Forum: Bryce
PJF: Thanks for pointing out that thread to me, but hey, I've been there already and left you a comment, go check! The remarks in my previous post where in fact, partly to respond to the findings you've put forward there. After everything I've read so far, it's obvious now that, the method you are using is correct, it's just not shall we say, "fine tuned". Your radiosity room sample alone, tells me why you are'nt "quite" getting what you want. I have'nt got round to it yet, but when I do recreate your radiosity room, I have a feeling that it will indeed display the same traits as your render, BUT to a much lesser extent. Whilst on the subject of method, it's great that you posted the information about volumetric material. If you recall, I suggested in my previous post that glowing objects don't work with the PRO-RENDER method. Well, thanks to your volumetric tip, I think that perhaps it could be possible after all. I have'nt tried it yet, but I'm pretty sure it will work, let's hope so! shadowdragonlord: I'm sorry to hear you're not impressed. Please know that I don't see myself as an artist, I realise I have a LONG way to go before I get close to the standard of work here, and as such, I've no intention of uploading those images to the galleries. The only purpose of the images is to demonstrate the standard of illumination accuracy that can be obtained from PRO-RENDER. You ask why the images are monochromatic. Well, basically I wanted the first images to demonstrate how smooth and even the light distribution can be, without colour detracting from the effect. Please know however, that although the images may "look" monochromatic, thay are in fact colour images, and no desaturation or colour balancing was performed on those images. And now a word about those render times. I'm afraid the render time specified for MOONLIT ROOM was NOT a typo. However, PLEASE bear in mind that the image was rendered at a MASSIVE virtual RPP of 1024, and remember, that's RAYS PER PIXEL, not PIXELS WIDE. Based on my knowledge, I would say that if the same image where to be rendered at 256 RPP ( Bryce's maximum EFFECTIVE RPP ), I reckon it would take a LOT less time, say 5-6 hours max. When you consider that the result of the first image took only 1H:42M:16S, it's not too bad really. At this point I think I had better clear the air about animation with PRO-RENDER. ...forget it! Unless you've got half-a-dozen computers purring away to the rhythm of Bryce Lightning, you won't be animating your PRO-RENDER scenes. PRO-RENDER was developed for accuracy, not speed, stills YES, animation NO WAY! Finally I would just like to say thanks to everyone who has commented. I have started work on the PRO-RENDER manual, and hope that many of you will give it a go when the package is released. Regards, Len.
The wait can be horrific, but the outcome can be worse - pumeco 2006
Thread: True Ambience 'radiosity' -summary. | Forum: Bryce
Hi PJF, Just spotted this thread, and thought I'd pop in for a nosey peek. It's great that you've decided to explain this sort of thing in great detail, hopefully novices will get on the bandwagon as well as the power users. Great stuff, I just know I'm going to love looking through the threads here, I will look at them all sooner or later. Thanks for your comments and advice, I think we're gonna have some seriously interesting chats in the future! Respect!
The wait can be horrific, but the outcome can be worse - pumeco 2006
Thread: Good news for Bryce 5 users. | Forum: Bryce
PS: GREAT news about the DAZ/Bryce partnership. Let's hope they update the renderer eh!
The wait can be horrific, but the outcome can be worse - pumeco 2006
Thread: Good news for Bryce 5 users. | Forum: Bryce
Right, first of all, thanks for making me feel welcome with those recent replies. I'm pleased about it, and look forward to some interesting discussions with you all. I am really VERY proud to become a member of your long list of idiots :-) Well there you have it, the first two renders from PRO-RENDER. I know... You've seen it all before right? Well don't be too sure about that fellow idiots! I say this because, that thread I mentioned in an earlier post got me thinking. You know, that image of the sphere being illuminated by a bright white object. Well, that image said to me, "God, they have to be using a different method to that of PRO-RENDER". And why? Because in PRO-RENDER, that effect is "i think" impossible. As far as I can tell, PRO-RENDER simply won't allow for that kind of effect. Of course you could simulate it, but you would have to use an "actual" light source to do so with PRO-RENDER. You've told me of the problems you members have come up against during your journey through the Bryce render engine. Well, you're not the only ones you know! I have come accross the same problems as well. As far as the "smoothing" problem goes, I am about to try out a new theory I have about this problem, I think I've cracked it! But don't hold your breath, you could well turn blue. As far as transparency goes, I have to say I don't recall there being a problem there. In fact, transparency seems to be the least of the troubles I had. And finally, the lack of power with illumination. Well I'm glad to say it's well and truly "sorted" in PRO-RENDER, that's assuming you mean what I think you mean. Next, I will recreate that image posted here of the radiosity test room, to see how the PRO-RENDER method handles it. That should be interesting! I will do two versions, and they will be the next images to be uploaded. Until then... see you all soon, and thanks again!
The wait can be horrific, but the outcome can be worse - pumeco 2006
Thread: Good news for Bryce 5 users. | Forum: Bryce
The wait can be horrific, but the outcome can be worse - pumeco 2006
Thread: Good news for Bryce 5 users. | Forum: Bryce
The wait can be horrific, but the outcome can be worse - pumeco 2006
Thread: Good news for Bryce 5 users. | Forum: Bryce
Hi everyone! I've decided that PRO-RENDER is going to be FREE!
But before I say how and when, I wish you would all take the time to
read what I have to say on the matter, at least grant me that wish.
Here goes...
Right, first of all, I need you all to know, that when I post a reply
to the posts made in this thread, I come here to have a read,
and then go OFFLINE to prepare and write a reply. The problem with this
method is that inbetween the time I read the replies, and the time I
get back to Renderosity to post my own reply, even more people have
asked questions. So obviously, your questions might not get answered in
the reply DIRECTLY after your question. Whenever this may be the case,
please bear with me, I will answer ALL questions one way or another.
I think this needs to be pointed out because of one comment inparticular,
i.e. "Ah....never mind." from RubiconDigital.
I was'nt ignoring you, I would never do that without good reason.
It`s just that I had'nt read your question before I posted my previous reply.
So, here is an answer to your question. No, Bryce does'nt have a plugin
architecture, or at least, as far as I know, it does'nt. And as described
in my previous reply, no, I did'nt write a new Radiosity solution.
Also, as far as your comment "...you Bryce folks are being led by the nose."
I think that's a little unfair to say the least. As far as I am concerned,
I'm just doing my best to publicise a product which I thought would be
of interest, and to answer questions in the best way I can.
Up until VERY recently, I was not a member of Renderosity, and as such,
I had no Idea of just HOW passionate some members are about Bryce.
The only tutorials I could find on Global Illumination where found
on "non-membership" websites, which where found through web searches etc.
During that time I found the following methods:
1 - To use weak shadowless area lights.
2 - To use light domes/planes etc.
3 - To use full-on blurry reflections.
So, I set about trying to better the situation by developing my own method.
What I came up with is PRO-RENDER.
However, because of what has been pointed out to me in this thread,
I realise that I`ve MASSIVELY underestimated the abilities which have
been under development by you guys. Without Renderosity, I felt like
a loner, and just a nobody who has a great interest in something, which
would bore the pants off the avarage Bryce user. I had the impression
that people would'nt really be that bothered about such highly technical
matters as Global Illumination, but if I could crack it, the results would
be welcomed with open arms.
Well, now I can understand where I've gone wrong here. Because after
I'd read that post by PJF giving advice, I decided I may well have to
change my strategy. So, streight away, I searched the name PJF, and it
threw up threads which can only be described as MINDBLOWING.
Well, PJF and the others in the associated threads, REALLY know their
stuff. Being dropped into a thread like that was absolutely amazing
reading for me. I only wish I had known about the place sooner.
So, the point being, I think you guys saw me as someone who had come
along, only to make some quick money out of a re-assembly of the work
you guys had been working on for ages. In reality, that's simply
not true. I would have loved to have been around here from the very
start of those threads. I would have been only too happy to give input
on those matters, just as I would love to do so now, and in the future.
That is of course, if I am welcome here, after this unfortunate mess.
I hope so.
The PRO-RENDER method uses true ambience, just as some of your methods do.
But after reading some of the threads, I have to say that PRO-RENDER
seems to differ in method in some respects. For example, in post number-31,
PJF shows an image, and goes on to say that he has'nt yet been able to
develop it any further. Well PJF, I think PRO-RENDER is possibly the
method you are seeking! PRO-RENDER does have it's quirks, but it does
render really clean'n'bright looking images with minimal grain,
and no leakage. I've also got some extra information on control of
aperture, film grain, and abberation that might interest you, and others.
Returning to the main matter now, I totally agree with what has been
said, regarding the marketing strategy behind PRO-RENDER. Knowing what
I know now, I would feel bad about "selling" the product, even though it
is my own work. I'm sure everyone here is well aware that scene files,
material presets, and tutorials are all valid merchant products
on their own, but not it seems, when they are packaged together as a
product, which is essentially what PRO-RENDER consists of.
No, I see the points being made here, and would like to make things right!
As I stated to Slakker, I would make PRO-RENDER available for free.
As a man of my word, that's exactly what I'm going to do. Even though
I'm not sure the methods are the same, NO WAY would I try to "sell"
PRO-RENDER, and never would have in the first place, if I'd known then,
what I know now.
So, that leaves just one more thing to decide, that being, how best to
distribute and promote this now FREE product. I suggested, the "Free Stuff"
area or Renderosity already, and that should be great, but I think I have a
much better Idea, and it's an idea which again, I would like some feedback on.
What I propose is this...
The website for my business (www.pumeco.com) has been paid for in advance.
But now, because of the change in strategy, it would be idle for a long time,
at least until the completion of the Poser projects I'm developing.
So, why waste it? It could still be the homepage of PRO-RENDER, but with
a totally different strategy.
What I would like to do is dedicate space and bandwidth to PRO-RENDER
on www.pumeco.com However, I would like PRO-RENDER to become a sort of
evolving "open project" as opposed to JUST a product. The name PRO-RENDER
would become public property, to be used as a sort of "by-word" for
anything related to serious Bryce rendering, whether it be files, knowledge,
tips, tricks, tutorials, or pics. Therefore, PRO-RENDER becomes a product
of the best of everything any member has to offer. Just as people might
think of Renderosity when they think about 3D art, people could eventually
think of PRO-RENDER when they think about Bryce rendering, visit the
PRO-RENDER homepage, and hopefully get what they want.
Heres an example of how it could work...
The options included on the official PRO-RENDER homepage might go
something like this...
HOME - NEWS - GALLERY - TUTORIALS - SUBMIT - DOWNLOAD - LINKS
HOME -
This would be the welcome page, and could be used to describe what
PRO-RENDER is all about to newbies etc.
NEWS -
This is where there could be all the latest announcements about the evolving
PRO-RENDER. The announcements could be made by ANYONE who contributes
anything to PRO-RENDER.
GALLERY -
This is where images created with the help of PRO-RENDER, could be displayed.
Images not only by contributors, but also by general downloaders who
have made use of PRO-RENDER in their image.
TUTORIALS -
PRO-RENDER tutorials could go here.
SUBMIT -
This is where people could make a contribution to the PRO-RENDER download.
(Files, Knowledge, Tips, Tricks, Pics)
DOWNLOAD -
This is where people could get the very latest download of PRO-RENDER
for FREE. The download could be updated when needed, as methods and knowledge
evolve. The download could consist of a compressed folder containing
setup files, documentation, and more (all public property).
LINKS -
This is where links to other websites could go.
Well, there you have it, I would consider this for sure, if I thought there
was sufficient enthusiasm for it.
So, I think now, I will give around a week or so to see what happens here.
What I see when I return to this forum, will ultimately make my decisions
for me.
As far as questions go, I apologise for not answering them all at the moment.
I WILL answer them, I promise. Some test screenshots will follow no matter
what happens!
Oh yeh, it was suggested that I thought you where idiot's. Hell, you really
have got the wrong impression. I think it was that "VERY unlikely" bit,
am I right? Well if it is, then I can only hope that, after reading this post,
you will realise it was because I was aware ONLY of those tutorials I
mentioned earlier. That's what made me think it was "VERY unlikely" the
knowledge was out there. So, here's another apology, please don't think
like that, it was'nt meant to give that impression, sorry!
The wait can be horrific, but the outcome can be worse - pumeco 2006
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.
Thread: This light and that object | Forum: Bryce