Maybe you refuse to bother because of all these spheres, but they're my
recent attempts at realistic raytracing. What do you think; is there a photo
hiding? What is definitely not photo? Why?

Regards,
Hugo

Post a reply to this message

Attachments:
Download 'Real_experiments.JPG' (72 KB)

Preview of image 'Real_experiments.JPG'

Very very nice photorealistic work.


Mathieu

Post a reply to this message

Mathieu

Post a reply to this message

"Hugo" <hua### [at] post3teledk> wrote in message
news:3caf13cc@news.povray.org...
> Maybe you refuse to bother because of all these spheres, but they're my
> recent attempts at realistic raytracing.

1) A photo, only the lamps reflections bother me somehow. This might be real
ball bearings on a plastic carpet.

2) Nearly a photo, the largest spheres material looks unreal. The black one
is great and needs to be shared with us.

3) Not a photo, the spheres material looks unreal. Same as the big in no. 2.

4) Dunno, without the sphere might be a photo, it's the highlight.

5) A photo, good plastic on the white object.

6) Nearly a photo, the grey object should be lifted slightly off the surface
or the edge needs a bit roundess.

Ari-Matti

Post a reply to this message

I think they're all renders, though some are good.

1. Very good, probably the best. but the pattern on the floor looks a bit like a
standard noise function variant. The blur adds so much to the realism.

2. Would look rendered even if it was a photo! (though I don't think it is).
This style of lighting/radiosity/camera would look great for real world objects.

3. The ball looks like it's been composited onto the backdrop. I think maybe the
shadow needs to be darker.

4. The shadow of the ball on the sticking up object seems to have a double image
effect, as if you had an area light of too low resolution.

5. very nice. The only give away that it's traced is that there's nothing else
in the scene (which would be seen in radiosity and reflections). That in itself
is possible if you take the photo in a studio, but the light source is so far
away that it looks like sunlight... um, I guess what I'm saying is it looks
exactly like two objects photographed in an infinite flat white desert!

6. There's radiosity artefacts at the base of the shiny thing. Also it has a bit
of that disconnected feel that was in 3.

Very nice on the whole. Now do it with real objects!

--
Tek
http://www.evilsuperbrain.com

Post a reply to this message

Nr. 4 is definitively not a photo. It stands for waxlike objects. But the
texture is too transparent, so you can see edges through, which is not
possible with real wax.
I think everything can be made in Pov-Ray. If anything, no. 5 can be a
photo.


Norbert

Post a reply to this message

#1: highlights are to perfect, or I'm missing the lamp in
    the reflections... averything else looks real here...
#2: naa... white material is a bit unreal, and the reflecting
    environment of the black sphere doesn't fit here ...
#3: To sharp sphere in contrtast to the "blurry" floor...
#4: again, the highlight on the sphere is talking to
    me: "I'm unreal... I'm traced"
#5: dunno ... can't find a detail, where I would be 100% sure,
    that it is a traced one. The shadows are very slightly blurred,
    so it would be a very small arealight, and, it must be at a huge
    distance, as the shadows are nearly parallel...
    This would be very hard in a studio, (and I see no other
    reflections), but who knows...
    The highlights are somehow "real" to me ...
#6: The Ref-Map of the "thing" doesn't fit, looks somehow the
    same as in #2, and is missing in the floor.
    IMHO, If you have the objects mirroring in the floor, you
    also have the sky there ...
    2nd, there is something with the shadows, but I can't tell what

So, if there's any pic of these one a photo, I'd stick on #5 ...
but I'm sure, you could also trace a pic like this one ...

Post a reply to this message

"Hugo" <hua### [at] post3teledk> wrote in message
news:3caf13cc@news.povray.org...
> Maybe you refuse to bother because of all these spheres, but they're my
> recent attempts at realistic raytracing. What do you think; is there a
photo
> hiding? What is definitely not photo? Why?
You mean that they aren't all photos ;) ?
the sphere in 3 is obviously not a photo (the sphere looks wrong), but
that's all I can tell.


--
____________________
 RAY

Post a reply to this message

Hugo wrote:
> 
> Maybe you refuse to bother because of all these spheres, but they're my
> recent attempts at realistic raytracing. What do you think; is there a photo
> hiding? What is definitely not photo? Why?

1. Not a photo. Sphere material seems unrealistic.

2. Not a photo, but it might be with different material for center and
right sphere. Reflection in left sphere and ground convincing, as is shading.

3. Definitely not a photo. Shadow on white sphere darker than shadow on
gray ground, especially considering only one highlight on sphere!

4. Definitely not a photo. Good texture on ground, but left object seems
blurry somehow. "Halo" effect on inside edge of sphere seems to have no cause.

5. Could be a photo. Extremely convincing.

6. Not a photo. Unsure exactly why, but heavy shading under the blue
objects where they (maybe) should be better lit may contribute to failure.

I would like to say, though, that all in all these are very nice, and
could probably put a lot of other renderers to shame, or at least match
them. Thanks go to everyone who's gone to lengths to play with radiosity
and lighting and show the rest of us how it's done; Kari Kivisalo comes
to mind, but there were many other contributors, including yourself as
we can see here.

-Xplo

Post a reply to this message

"Hugo" <hua### [at] post3teledk> wrote in message
news:3caf13cc@news.povray.org...
> Maybe you refuse to bother because of all these spheres, but they're
my
> recent attempts at realistic raytracing. What do you think; is there a
photo
> hiding? What is definitely not photo? Why?

    Hmm.. Nice, very nice. The dark sphere in number two is very close
to a black pearl, not sure about the two spheres beside it though... The
black pearl needs some lustre and then bingo.

   As for the rest? I'll stick my neck out and say all .pov apart from #
6.

   Just hope I'm right...  ;)

      Nice.

    ~Steve~




>
> Regards,
> Hugo
>
>
>

Post a reply to this message