Although I have been poving this (in an off-and-off-and-off-and-on
manner...) since v2.2, I am obviously not skilled enough to get
photo-quality scenes rendered. Not that I would like to. Getting the perfect
kitchen rendered is not one if my goals, but having a perfectly believable
non-exixting object sitting on top of a table or, better yet, a tiled floor
is what I want. So I guess I do shoot for realism. One day I'll get it, I'm
sure.

Ruy

"Bill DeWitt" <bde### [at] cflrrcom> escreveu na mensagem
news:3bc84ecc@news.povray.org...
>
>     Just wondering how many people try to model reality, and how many try
to
> model an appearance of reality. For instance, when you need a crowd of
trees
> in the background, are you more likely to make a bunch of trees, or will
you
> put up an image map of some trees on a box? When trying to make a texture,
> do you make it in detail every time, or do you let it slide if it is too
far
> back for all the normals to be seen?
>
>     Since I always tend towards animation, I try to make things real. It
> means that some projects just don't get done. But if I ever want to do a
> walk through of one of my scenes, nothing ends up looking bad from the
other
> side.
>
>     Just curious, no intent to disparage either method or assume that
people
> should use one exclusively of another. I just get the feeling that people
> who aren't as hung up on reality are the ones that send us such good
scenes
> more often than others.
>
>

Post a reply to this message