John VanSickle <evi### [at] hotmailcom> wrote:
> The only way an unbiased renderer could be used in animation 
> work is to let it render the first frame of every shot, decide on an 
> acceptable quality level, and then allow that much time for each frame, 
> and hope that the movement of some object or the camera doesn't increase 
> the time requirement significantly.

  Even if the quality level is consistent in all frames, if there's *any*
graininess visible at all, it will probably flicker randomly from frame to
frame, which is probably not something very pleasant.

  I have been thinking about one thing when I look at some of the example
images made by those renderers, especially the ones which show a car.
If I understood correctly, it takes the renderer quite a humongous amount
of time to render such a picture (I think someone mentioned 12 hours
somewhere?).
  Many of the car pictures look like you could create an almost identical
picture with POV-Ray (at least with POV-Ray 3.7, thanks to its HDRI support)
and make it render it in far less than an hour. Probably less than a half
hour.

  It just feels that sometimes using "less accurate" rendering methods
which nevertheless produce a completely acceptable image is more feasible
than using 12+ hours to render a "physically accurate" picture which to
the layman doesn't look any different... :P

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message