bagginsbill opened this issue on Jun 16, 2012 · 56 posts
bagginsbill posted Sat, 16 June 2012 at 11:22 PM
In order to avoid certain (rare) artifacts, I have been shipping shaders with a large ray bias.
Suddenly I noticed that this is actually shifting the reflections. Instead of ignoring surfaces that are too close, it is virtually moving the reflecting surface (or the reflected objects - not sure which) by the bias distance.
If I reduce the ray bias back to the .1 I used to use, the reflections appear in the correct place.
This is really scary. I may have shipped a thousand busted shaders.
Has anybody else seen this? Is this new behavior to P9/PP2012?
I'm using a ray bias of 2. I no longer know what the units mean - I am forced to question everything I know.
In the attached image, look at the table - the clock legs reflect in the wrong places.
Renderosity forum reply notifications are wonky. If I read a follow-up in a thread, but I don't myself reply, then notifications no longer happen AT ALL on that thread. So if I seem to be ignoring a question, that's why. (Updated September 23, 2019)
bagginsbill posted Sat, 16 June 2012 at 11:24 PM
Renderosity forum reply notifications are wonky. If I read a follow-up in a thread, but I don't myself reply, then notifications no longer happen AT ALL on that thread. So if I seem to be ignoring a question, that's why. (Updated September 23, 2019)
richardson posted Sat, 16 June 2012 at 11:43 PM
Nice catch. It' seems to clip the reflection. Can you try one at say, 4.0? Not worth a recall.. you can just have a new download update.
btw, I looked at it for quite a while and saw no flaw brfore I read your post..
jmper4 posted Sun, 17 June 2012 at 12:02 AM
jmper4 posted Sun, 17 June 2012 at 12:03 AM
jmper4 posted Sun, 17 June 2012 at 12:04 AM
I guess I could have used better color but I just put it together real quick. :(
basicwiz posted Sun, 17 June 2012 at 12:36 AM
What are you trying to accomplish with a ray bias that high? (I have no idea what ray bias actually does...)
shvrdavid posted Sun, 17 June 2012 at 12:49 AM
Ray bias should only be raised enough to eliminate artifacts due to the errors it creates in the reflections. The error you are seeing is technically correct based on the bias length you used.
Let me explain.
The bias setting is how far the ray offsets before it disperses and starts the calculations. If it disperses at the actual relection point it can cause tons of problems.
Think of the ray bias setting as a wine glass sitting on a table. The table is the surface that will reflect, the ray bias is the length of the stem, and the globe is the calculation of the effect. You loose the reflection from the table to the globe because it was never calculated to begin with. The reflection starts at the base of the globe, not on the table surface.
The light is hitting the clock then reflecting to the table, and clipped by the bias setting. Then reflects off the table, and gets clipped again. If the objects are further apart than the ray bias lengths, you will not notice it. But if they are closer, you will see it, and the ray bias has to be shortened to get rid of it.
Just don't get it to short or it can cause a ton of problems. It will take forever to render and can give really strange results if it reflects off the wrong side.
Some things are easy to explain, other things are not........ <- Store -> <-Freebies->
shvrdavid posted Sun, 17 June 2012 at 1:34 AM
I made this real quick so people could see how, and why it happens.
The Yellow line is where the reflection is calculated based on the ray bias length.
The Red line is where it is displayed based on the Z axis of the camera.
The Blue area is what was lost due to the ray bias length. That area was not included in the calculations, so it is not in the reflection.
Some things are easy to explain, other things are not........ <- Store -> <-Freebies->
Snarlygribbly posted Sun, 17 June 2012 at 2:43 AM
This is of interest to me too.
Has anybody seen a similar effect while using EZSkin?
EZSkin uses a very large ray bias for the 'Avoid nose in reflections' option!
Free stuff @ https://poser.cobrablade.net/
aRtBee posted Sun, 17 June 2012 at 3:24 AM
in my observation, ray bias does the same to raytracing (*) as the light property Shadow Min Bias does to shadow: it helps to avoid - in this case reflections - within the additional geometry created by displacement mapping. As I don't want the pores in my skin to be involved in shadowing, so I don't want small irregularities to be involved in raytracing.
Ray bias is measured in user units, that is: the value changes when you switch units in Preferences (switch Rooms back and forth to see the effect). For BB and Snarly, RayBias = 1 means: 1 inch. For me RayBias=1 means: 1 meter. Or something proportional to it.
The explanation from shvrdavid is not entirely correct. The yellow line lifts from the table but not from the clock, unless the clock itself has an raybias too. And when I use a standard cube (size 26,2 cm = 0,1PNU) and I set raybias to 1 I miss the bottom 10cm in the reflection. When I set it to 2, I miss the bottom 20cm. So my "1" apparently means: 10cm, there is a factor 0.1 involved. When I set it to -1, the render result goes bezerk.
The Poser Ref Manual is sort of clear, except for the obvious errors:
RayBias: The RayBias attribute helps to prevent false shadows and other artifacts that may occur as a result of using raytracing techniques in conjunction with displacement maps. RayBias offsets the starting point of the rays above the geometry of the surface, so as to avoid the displacement geometry in the raytracing calculation. Be aware that if your RayBias setting is too high, your shadows will migrate in the scene.
And indeed, reflections are migrating,
I don't see why a smooth surface like under the clocks, which does not have any displacement mapping at all, should have any RayBias. I don't experience artifacts or rendering performance issues either even when using negative values, except when using very negative values. On a smooth surface that is. On a displacement-intensive surface I can imagine that raytracing, especially with a very low RayBias and a high Ray Bounce setting, can take a while.
As the examples from jmper4 show, raybias can be abused to create some bathroom mirror effect: the object close to the frontside of the glass is actually reflected by the silverlayer on the backside.
(*) the actual issue of course is that FireFly is not really raytracing but using some incremental environment mapping instead, while we continue to squeeze a photoreal result out of it. A man should know his limitations (Dirty Harry). But that's OT.
- - - - -
Usually I'm wrong. But to be effective and efficient, I don't need to be correct or accurate.
visit www.aRtBeeWeb.nl (works) or Missing Manuals (tutorials & reviews) - both need an update though
lmckenzie posted Sun, 17 June 2012 at 4:32 AM
LOL. Actually, Harry was perhaps a bit more emphatic - "A man's got to know his limitations." OTOH, it would be a bad render indeed that got you blown up :-)
"Democracy is a pathetic belief in the collective wisdom of individual ignorance." - H. L. Mencken
aRtBee posted Sun, 17 June 2012 at 5:13 AM
haha,
given my size one needs a lot of ammo to blow me up anyway :) But the Dirty Harry scene was as good as big Arnold's "I'll be back".
In the meantime, there are a lot of people out there using BB's and EZSkin shaders, so we all need to put in the effort we can to help anyone around getting the issues sorted, and eventually corrected.
@Snarly: I'm not that much into EZSkin but to Avoid Noise in Reflections, shouldn't reflection Quality and Sharpness not have some place? I would not have picked RayBias myself to establish that. just thinking out loud.
- - - - -
Usually I'm wrong. But to be effective and efficient, I don't need to be correct or accurate.
visit www.aRtBeeWeb.nl (works) or Missing Manuals (tutorials & reviews) - both need an update though
Anthanasius posted Sun, 17 June 2012 at 5:18 AM
Anthanasius posted Sun, 17 June 2012 at 5:19 AM
Snarlygribbly posted Sun, 17 June 2012 at 5:59 AM
Quote - @Snarly: I'm not that much into EZSkin but to Avoid Noise in Reflections, shouldn't reflection Quality and Sharpness not have some place? I would not have picked RayBias myself to establish that. just thinking out loud.
LOL
'Nose', not 'noise' :-D
Free stuff @ https://poser.cobrablade.net/
aRtBee posted Sun, 17 June 2012 at 6:34 AM
I really thought it was a typo. Why should one avoid noses in reflections? It would scare the hell out of me while shaving!! Better have "invisible from reflections" as a property then. What more can we avoid from reflections? LOL
To avoid noses on shiny cheecks, RayBias can't be the tool as a nose is not the result from displacement mapping (I hope). Scars and the walls under my eyes are different. When noses are an issue, then the reflections are far too strong, and/or too sharp. In my opinion.
- - - - -
Usually I'm wrong. But to be effective and efficient, I don't need to be correct or accurate.
visit www.aRtBeeWeb.nl (works) or Missing Manuals (tutorials & reviews) - both need an update though
bagginsbill posted Sun, 17 June 2012 at 6:55 AM
So this is new behavior. I expected a gap, as shown jmpr4's image. I thought the gap was solved in P9/PP2012 but I didn't realize how, nor its implications.
The furniture props do not need a large bias - in fact the tops are perfectly flat and need no bias at all. But I included it in the shaders with the expectation that some people are buying these entirely for the purpose of using the shaders elsewhere. Artifacts can appear not only with displacement, but also with polygon smoothing. Smoothing is rather more common than displacement.
I was trying to make them as trouble-free as possible - to the point where I don't even explain a single thing about them in the product docs, other than that you get a boatload of them. While the wood shaders are mostly on flat surfaces, the metals, plastic, glass, and paints included are not so easily dismissed as being always on flat things.
The next product is a bedside table and includes a clock and lamp - whose reflections are rather obviously wrong. Sigh.
Thanks for the posts.
Renderosity forum reply notifications are wonky. If I read a follow-up in a thread, but I don't myself reply, then notifications no longer happen AT ALL on that thread. So if I seem to be ignoring a question, that's why. (Updated September 23, 2019)
bagginsbill posted Sun, 17 June 2012 at 7:02 AM
Both lamp and clock have slanted legs and the ray bias mattered here more than with strictly vertical objects.
Renderosity forum reply notifications are wonky. If I read a follow-up in a thread, but I don't myself reply, then notifications no longer happen AT ALL on that thread. So if I seem to be ignoring a question, that's why. (Updated September 23, 2019)
aRtBee posted Sun, 17 June 2012 at 7:28 AM
yeah, looks good. Nice props BTW.
In the end, my opinion on this is that the raybias should match any displacement mapping, so all is kept within Material Room territory. The moment we start using material settings to adjust for geometry issues (nose reflection, surface curvature, ...) trouble is around the corner.
As BB said, people might use materials for other purposes than originally intended. We'd better not trouble them with "if your surface is like this than your material should be adjusted to that".
We keep on learning, thanks for that (and everything else).
- - - - -
Usually I'm wrong. But to be effective and efficient, I don't need to be correct or accurate.
visit www.aRtBeeWeb.nl (works) or Missing Manuals (tutorials & reviews) - both need an update though
jmper4 posted Sun, 17 June 2012 at 7:43 AM
Nice props, the lamp looks gorgeous as well.
shvrdavid posted Sun, 17 June 2012 at 8:50 AM
Quote - The explanation from shvrdavid is not entirely correct. The yellow line lifts from the table but not from the clock, unless the clock itself has an raybias too. And when I use a standard cube (size 26,2 cm = 0,1PNU) and I set raybias to 1 I miss the bottom 10cm in the reflection. When I set it to 2, I miss the bottom 20cm. So my "1" apparently means: 10cm, there is a factor 0.1 involved. When I set it to -1, the render result goes bezerk.
In BBs example there is a reflection on the clock, which makes the yellow line just the way I put it. Unless what you see on the face is burned into the texture, the face is affected as well. I assumed it was a reflection of an enviroment sphere.
Any surface that has a relection node on it is affected by the bias length setting in the node. There is no way around that unless you resort to an algorythm that is designed to account for the angle you are looking at it. And they take forever to render. Technically, you can not set the bias to zero on a flat surface. Doing so gets two relfections, one on the top, and one on the bottom. Both will be calculated if you do.
If anyone can come up with an algorythm that can take the viewing angle into account and render at a respectable speed. They will have pulled something that no one else has yet.
With the bias node set to negative, you will force the reflection to be calculated on the wrong side of the mesh. Whis is not what you want.
Some things are easy to explain, other things are not........ <- Store -> <-Freebies->
MistyLaraCarrara posted Sun, 17 June 2012 at 9:14 AM
Poser doesn't know which unit of measure to calculate with from the file?
if you mix and match from different sets created with different measure units, you'll have unexpected render results?
♥ My Gallery Albums ♥ My YT ♥ Party in the CarrarArtists Forum ♪♪♪ 10 years of Carrara forum ♥ My FreeStuff
Winterclaw posted Sun, 17 June 2012 at 9:50 AM
Assuming nothing was changed or moved save for the bias, here's something I noticed but maybe its just me: in the two images, the one with the large ray bias seems to shift the mesh up like displacement was going on. It wasn't the reflections that were shifting.
WARK!
Thus Spoketh Winterclaw: a blog about a Winterclaw who speaks from time to time.
(using Poser Pro 2014 SR3, on 64 bit Win 7, poser units are inches.)
aRtBee posted Sun, 17 June 2012 at 10:26 AM
@Misty
Poser internally works with Poser Native Units (PNU), all translation is done in the user interface. If you save something with 2 inch, then it reads 0,0508 mtr when I open your file. The only people who have to worry are the ones making (Posing/animating) scripts: all their measures should be PNU.
In various cases Poser is presenting just values, which have meaningful units in life but Poser is unaware of that, and no translation takes place for everyone. The only people who have to worry are those who translate real life phenomena into Poser values. That's some Hair Room and Cloth Room mainly.
@Winterclaw
Increasing the ray bias eats some portion out of the bottom of the cube, only the portion above that gets reflected. I thich the rest is a lighting / camera thing, I did not see it in my tests. Just use a tile node on the cube to see for yourself.
@ShvrDavid
I tested with a refecting table and a non reflecting cube. That's why I wrote ...unless the clock itself has a raybias too ... . Then the clock shifts surface, according to its own setting. So we agree.
The other remarks are a mystery to me, that's me, not you. So please elaborate.
I do know that Firefly is actually not raytracing at all. It wasn't in when / before MetaCreations bought it, and it was never put in afterwards - as Pixar did when modifying Renderman. It does mimic refractions / reflections to some extend (by incremental environment mapping). This implies that I'm not that fast stepping into arguments based on rays and tracing: they might just not apply to FF. Sorry for that.
So I hope to learn more. Thanks in advance.
- - - - -
Usually I'm wrong. But to be effective and efficient, I don't need to be correct or accurate.
visit www.aRtBeeWeb.nl (works) or Missing Manuals (tutorials & reviews) - both need an update though
bagginsbill posted Sun, 17 June 2012 at 10:40 AM
I am sailing and so cannot type much. Couple quick points to make:
My first and second pictures have different table props as I was testing the possible issue of prop curvature. There is no differrence in shift of the prop surface itself. I showed a differerent table.
Poser is doing real raytracing, not environment mapping. I suspect we disagree not on what Poser is doing, but what those words mean.
Renderosity forum reply notifications are wonky. If I read a follow-up in a thread, but I don't myself reply, then notifications no longer happen AT ALL on that thread. So if I seem to be ignoring a question, that's why. (Updated September 23, 2019)
shvrdavid posted Sun, 17 June 2012 at 11:03 AM
Quote - - algorithms: most diffuse nodes, specular nodes and especially the fresnel node respond depending on viewing angle, and render fine. I just don't get what you're referring to.
Look at the example I posted again. The viewing angle is 20 degrees from the table surface, which cuts off part of the clock reflection. If you increase the viewing angle, the cutoff will change based on the relection angle and bias depth. (the blue line will change in size) Once you exceed a 45 degree viewing, the reflection calculation cutoff will stop changing the length of the blue area on the clock (it will be somewhat fixed based on the bias length from 45 to 90), and start to change the cutoff area on the table (the blue line that would be on the table) as the viewing angle continues to increase. (assuming both reflect). That is what I was refering to concerning that reflection algorythm.
Almost every reflection algorythm leaves a dead spot in the reflection based on the bias length, the angles involved in the reflections, and the viewing angle. There really is no easy way of getting around it.
I am not sure if I am explaining it right, I know why it does it, just not how to explain it so well. I don't think I would be the best teacher, lol.
Somewhere I have seen an algorythm that can deal with this, but it requires seperate reflection passes. It has to do seperate passes that compound the render time based on the number of reflective surface bias settings, and total bounces involved. Algorythms like that will never be mainstream until the video hardware on everything is waiting for something to do most of the time.
Some things are easy to explain, other things are not........ <- Store -> <-Freebies->
aRtBee posted Sun, 17 June 2012 at 12:48 PM
see my renders in next post.
I understand the following. To overcome displacements, the reflective surface is raised (black to brown) according to the RayBias. It reflects a box, I picked points R, G and B.
If the shifted surface reflected into the cam, we would see point R*, G*, B* which causes us to miss the box till the raybias, and the reflections thereof. But we see the box in its entirety. The reflection on the surface is shifted down so we can still see the whole box, and the reflections of RGB to R** G** B** (last not in scheme). Unfortunately, we keep missing the reflection of the part of the box up to the brown line.
This explanation gives results which do not depend on camera angle. Comparing with your scheme, my "blue bar" always equals the height of your yellow line and will not shift upwards when the cam moves up.
So, the render can tell.
- - - - -
Usually I'm wrong. But to be effective and efficient, I don't need to be correct or accurate.
visit www.aRtBeeWeb.nl (works) or Missing Manuals (tutorials & reviews) - both need an update though
aRtBee posted Sun, 17 June 2012 at 1:01 PM
RayBias 1.0 resp 2.0, I see the (bottom) rows disappear in the reflection. First one leaves 6, last one leaves 3.
RayBias 4.0, and HighCam - first has a disappearing reflection (brown line above the box), and the result of the HighCam is a bit harder to see but I count as many reflected rows (=6) as in the lowcam 1.0 result. So, camera angle does not matter. For the moment, I prefer my explanation over yours. I like to see renders that show otherwise.
RayBias -0.1 and -1.0 - artifacts kick in.
I still don't understand why any algorithm leaves black spots, unless you refer to the non-reflected part due to the raybias. This raybias, shift of reflective surface etc never ever occurs in a real (unbiased) raytracing algorithm that really traces rays from the lightsource into the camera. I just don't see what you mean. It's me.
- - - - -
Usually I'm wrong. But to be effective and efficient, I don't need to be correct or accurate.
visit www.aRtBeeWeb.nl (works) or Missing Manuals (tutorials & reviews) - both need an update though
shvrdavid posted Sun, 17 June 2012 at 2:13 PM
Unbiased raytracing will give the same results. It has nothing to due with the type of render engine, and everything to do with the bias distance offset.
If the shader is excluding an area do to the bias distance calculations, it will not be in the reflection. No math in the world can put something back into a reflection that is not in the equation and processed by the algorythm to begin with.
Some things are easy to explain, other things are not........ <- Store -> <-Freebies->
aRtBee posted Sun, 17 June 2012 at 2:45 PM
@BB: happy sailing and good winds. We both know what we're dealing with, and why.
Firefly is an implementation of the REYES algorithm, and as such having severe problems with rays bouncing around like in reflection and refraction intensive scenes. The vast amount of micropolys which are a solution in regular cases become a problem now: there are just too many of them, and while rays traveling within a bucket are less of an issue, rays bouncing between buckets become one. This is why Pixar extended Renderman to their PRMan, including techniques as found in "regular" raytracers. It's not in rays going around in general, it's in handlig the geometry to get it done efficiently.
Firefly lacks features like that, and as a result:
So we struggle on, and some are really great in squeezing out the last available drops. Usually at the cost of the usability of Poser scenes in other software, like Vue or Luxrender or you name it.
My point - regarding to this thread - is that we have to be careful to draw conclusions from schemes and rays and tracing alone, as in the end FF might be different. Any consideration should be supported by actual renders that a) support our point of view and b) prove alternative views wrong.
- - - - -
Usually I'm wrong. But to be effective and efficient, I don't need to be correct or accurate.
visit www.aRtBeeWeb.nl (works) or Missing Manuals (tutorials & reviews) - both need an update though
aRtBee posted Sun, 17 June 2012 at 3:14 PM
@shvrdavid
you're absolute right of course, once ray bias is in it's hard to get its effects out.
So the question is: to what extend to "regular" raytracers use ray bias like above in their material settings? I only can find the use of Shadow Bias (global setting, not tight to a material or light), and the bias to handle reflections from coinciding - and hence interfering - surfaces.
Ray Bias to handle reflections (aka: prevent self-reflections) from surfaces with displacement mapping seems to be Poser (and so; Firefly) only. So to me, for the moment, this concept results from Firefly missing "regular/conventional" raytracing capabilities as said in my previous post.
I've got a proper model of the situation supported by FF renders now, and a better undersanding of the FF workings. I look forward to a change of that. So please prove me wrong.
- - - - -
Usually I'm wrong. But to be effective and efficient, I don't need to be correct or accurate.
visit www.aRtBeeWeb.nl (works) or Missing Manuals (tutorials & reviews) - both need an update though
monkeycloud posted Sun, 17 June 2012 at 3:19 PM
Whoops. So does this mean new versions of BB shader based products, EZMetals and EZSkin then?
Guess I'm fortunate my renders to date are surreal enough that this effect is probably just a bonus, if it manifested at all, visibly, in any of them 
shvrdavid posted Sun, 17 June 2012 at 3:36 PM
Very true, no render engine is perfect, thats for sure.
Even with the limitations present in them, you can get really good results.
That is all that really matter is the end anyway.
Some things are easy to explain, other things are not........ <- Store -> <-Freebies->
aRtBee posted Sun, 17 June 2012 at 3:56 PM
agree completely. Even nature itself isn't perfect either :)
And we don't need photorealism for good results, its just a way of working. Recently, a new artist entered the Rendo stage: nakatoni. Great story-telling images. Recommended.
Plus, some people don't need 3D to get photoreal. Just visit http://www.sergebirault.fr/portfolio.php and scroll for his "My Little Lemmy". 100% Photoshop, complete workflow presented in the new Digital Art Masters #7.
Closing down now, was a good discussion, learned a lot underway. Thanks for that.
- - - - -
Usually I'm wrong. But to be effective and efficient, I don't need to be correct or accurate.
visit www.aRtBeeWeb.nl (works) or Missing Manuals (tutorials & reviews) - both need an update though
shvrdavid posted Sun, 17 June 2012 at 7:47 PM
On another note. I hope you had good weather and a great time on the water BB!!
Some things are easy to explain, other things are not........ <- Store -> <-Freebies->
bagginsbill posted Mon, 18 June 2012 at 9:37 AM
Well - the weather was nice, but some crazy shit was going on.
We're out in the boat having a nice time. All of a sudden, it seemed that a war broke out.
A couple of planes started really mixing it up.
I didn't think too much of it at first.
Renderosity forum reply notifications are wonky. If I read a follow-up in a thread, but I don't myself reply, then notifications no longer happen AT ALL on that thread. So if I seem to be ignoring a question, that's why. (Updated September 23, 2019)
bagginsbill posted Mon, 18 June 2012 at 9:38 AM
Renderosity forum reply notifications are wonky. If I read a follow-up in a thread, but I don't myself reply, then notifications no longer happen AT ALL on that thread. So if I seem to be ignoring a question, that's why. (Updated September 23, 2019)
bagginsbill posted Mon, 18 June 2012 at 9:38 AM
Renderosity forum reply notifications are wonky. If I read a follow-up in a thread, but I don't myself reply, then notifications no longer happen AT ALL on that thread. So if I seem to be ignoring a question, that's why. (Updated September 23, 2019)
bagginsbill posted Mon, 18 June 2012 at 9:39 AM
Renderosity forum reply notifications are wonky. If I read a follow-up in a thread, but I don't myself reply, then notifications no longer happen AT ALL on that thread. So if I seem to be ignoring a question, that's why. (Updated September 23, 2019)
bagginsbill posted Mon, 18 June 2012 at 9:40 AM
Renderosity forum reply notifications are wonky. If I read a follow-up in a thread, but I don't myself reply, then notifications no longer happen AT ALL on that thread. So if I seem to be ignoring a question, that's why. (Updated September 23, 2019)
bagginsbill posted Mon, 18 June 2012 at 9:41 AM
Renderosity forum reply notifications are wonky. If I read a follow-up in a thread, but I don't myself reply, then notifications no longer happen AT ALL on that thread. So if I seem to be ignoring a question, that's why. (Updated September 23, 2019)
bagginsbill posted Mon, 18 June 2012 at 9:42 AM
Renderosity forum reply notifications are wonky. If I read a follow-up in a thread, but I don't myself reply, then notifications no longer happen AT ALL on that thread. So if I seem to be ignoring a question, that's why. (Updated September 23, 2019)
bagginsbill posted Mon, 18 June 2012 at 9:43 AM
Renderosity forum reply notifications are wonky. If I read a follow-up in a thread, but I don't myself reply, then notifications no longer happen AT ALL on that thread. So if I seem to be ignoring a question, that's why. (Updated September 23, 2019)
bagginsbill posted Mon, 18 June 2012 at 9:44 AM
Finally I was able to go back to drinking calmly, but it took a while.
Renderosity forum reply notifications are wonky. If I read a follow-up in a thread, but I don't myself reply, then notifications no longer happen AT ALL on that thread. So if I seem to be ignoring a question, that's why. (Updated September 23, 2019)
aRtBee posted Mon, 18 June 2012 at 9:56 AM
:b_funny:
nice shots. Some good movies start like this...
- - - - -
Usually I'm wrong. But to be effective and efficient, I don't need to be correct or accurate.
visit www.aRtBeeWeb.nl (works) or Missing Manuals (tutorials & reviews) - both need an update though
mysticeagle posted Mon, 18 June 2012 at 10:08 AM
and some bad wars :)
OS: Windows7 64-bit Processor Intel(R) Core(TM)
i5-2430M CPU @ 2.40GHz, 2401 Mhz, 2 Core(s), 4 Logical
Processor(s) 6GB Ram
Poser: Poser Pro 2012 SR3.1 ...Poser 8.........Poser5 on a bad
day........
Daz Studio Pro 4.5 64bit
Carrara beta 8.5
Modelling: Silo/Hexagon/Groboto V3
Image Editing: PSP V9/Irfanview
Movie Editing. Cyberlink power director/Windows live movie
maker
"I live in an unfinished , poorly lit box, but we call it home"
My freestuff
link via my artist page
shvrdavid posted Mon, 18 June 2012 at 1:18 PM
Is that Rocky Point in the first pictures?
Some things are easy to explain, other things are not........ <- Store -> <-Freebies->
bagginsbill posted Mon, 18 June 2012 at 1:50 PM
Quote - Is that Rocky Point in the first pictures?
Close, but no. Quonset Point, aka Quonset State Airport.
Renderosity forum reply notifications are wonky. If I read a follow-up in a thread, but I don't myself reply, then notifications no longer happen AT ALL on that thread. So if I seem to be ignoring a question, that's why. (Updated September 23, 2019)
shvrdavid posted Mon, 18 June 2012 at 2:21 PM
Its been a long time since I was up there, about 25 or 30 years if I remember right. My father lived near Dartmouth and then in East Weymouth.
Some things are easy to explain, other things are not........ <- Store -> <-Freebies->
monkeycloud posted Mon, 18 June 2012 at 2:39 PM
Love a good air show...
...so, when are those morphing fighter planes, with bonus fireballs, coming out? I hope Dreamland Tom is busy modelling those already based on your excellent reference shots?
Of course the bedside cabinet is equally exciting 
monkeycloud posted Mon, 18 June 2012 at 2:42 PM
I actually found myself trying to work out which of those images were actually Firefly renders by the way...
But then it's pretty hot here and I'm a few glasses of red into the evening...
Miss Nancy posted Mon, 18 June 2012 at 4:03 PM
if one notices any stray aircraft misbehaving or dropping napalm on one's village, notify the FAA at once (week-ends and holidays excluded).
moriador posted Mon, 18 June 2012 at 4:06 PM
Quote - I actually found myself trying to work out which of those images were actually Firefly renders by the way...
But then it's pretty hot here and I'm a few glasses of red into the evening...
I was thinking the same thing, and wondering about that "napalm" shader.
PoserPro 2014, PS CS5.5 Ext, Nikon D300. Win 8, i7-4770 @ 3.4 GHz, AMD Radeon 8570, 12 GB RAM.
GeneralNutt posted Mon, 18 June 2012 at 4:38 PM
grichter posted Mon, 18 June 2012 at 5:19 PM
Shoot I thought he was about to take the riverboat smoke shader of a while back to a new level....but I agree a napalm shader would be major cool.
You could level one of Tom's Movie sets-City blocks with that! :blink:
Gary
"Those who lose themselves in a passion lose less than those who lose their passion"
