Warp wrote:

>   Don't you hate it when you meticulously model something from the real
> world and you get an exact replica of the real thing, and then someone
> thinks it looks irrealistic, fake?

By definitition, a model (3D, math, anything) is not an exact replica, but an
approximation. Real-life objects have a complexity that is out of reach for,
well, anyone: if you have at your disposal all the monstrous amount of
information necessary to recreate, say, an apple, you're probably some sort of
god. So there are two solutions: you can be happy with what you have (which may
be quite enough), or you can use the model as a starting point and add "fake"
(i.e. not made according  a precise model of reality) elements that will deceive
the eye of the viewer.
For instance, I didn't try to model the rain drop by drop, but added "rain" clues
that participate in the illusion. In other parts of the image, I relied too much
on the quality of the models used and should have spent more time on figuring out
ways to make them look better.

G.

Post a reply to this message