Just kidding I'm no where near his level, especially artistically. Just
always wanted to say that:-) Anyway I am proud of this image though. For a
better looking hi res version go here:

http://www.geocities.com/~thomaslake/Temp/kitchen_big.jpg

--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------
Home Page: http://www.geocities.com/~thomaslake/
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------

Post a reply to this message

Attachments:
Download 'photorealistic kitchen.jpg' (89 KB)

Preview of image 'photorealistic kitchen.jpg'

Thomas Lake wrote:
> 
> Just kidding I'm no where near his level, especially artistically. Just
> always wanted to say that:-) Anyway I am proud of this image though. For a
> better looking hi res version go here:

Wow ... a lot of work has gone into this image, that is for sure. Just
one comment though: It's way too clean. ;-)

j/k

I've just done the dishes, and I tell you - my sink does not look like
that, not even just after cleaning the dishes. ;-)

Cheers,

-- 

------------------------------------------------------------------------
  +47 90 62 71 78          DoD#2101, DoDRT#017, NIC#015, PJ#006, OGM#007
  azo### [at] dodno, Ducati M600, Clementine  Ubesudlet: Aldri eid en J&%#PS.

Post a reply to this message

A wee observation - the areas light fading shadow edges part (can't remember
what to call them) look a bit grainy, I'd increase the number of point in
your area lights.  Yes this will probally increase render time by quite a
bit but if I'd put this many hours of my time into an image (you must have
put alot in, the detail is amazing) I'd want ot put the CPU time in to match
:).

Also the surface of the cooker looks too bright to me, too much glare off
the white.

And if you happen to be a perfectionist; the neck of the wine bottle is too
short and thin.

But great picture.  :-)


"Thomas Lake" <tla### [at] REMOVE-THISshawca> wrote in message
news:3cdec7a7@news.povray.org...
> Just kidding I'm no where near his level, especially artistically. Just
> always wanted to say that:-) Anyway I am proud of this image though. For a
> better looking hi res version go here:
>
> http://www.geocities.com/~thomaslake/Temp/kitchen_big.jpg
>
> --
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
> -----------
> Home Page: http://www.geocities.com/~thomaslake/
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
> -----------
>
>
>

Post a reply to this message

Amazing! Who's living there?

Thomas Lake wrote:

> Just kidding I'm no where near his level, especially artistically. Just
> always wanted to say that:-) Anyway I am proud of this image though. For a
> better looking hi res version go here:
>
> http://www.geocities.com/~thomaslake/Temp/kitchen_big.jpg
>

--
Tim Nikias
Homepage: http://www.digitaltwilight.de/no_lights/index.html
Email: Tim### [at] gmxde

Post a reply to this message

Very good modelling, very realistic. You'll need to increase the
anti-aliasing... maybe use the focal blur method, to reduce moire and stuff.

Lots of detail and realistic lighting though. Very nice.

 - Slime
[ http://www.slimeland.com/ ]

Post a reply to this message

> Wow

Thanks!

>... a lot of work has gone into this image, that is for sure. Just
> one comment though: It's way too clean. ;-)

Yes actually I am thinking of adding more stuff.

Post a reply to this message

> A wee observation - the areas light fading shadow edges part (can't
remember
> what to call them)

Umbra?

>look a bit grainy, I'd increase the number of point in
> your area lights.  Yes this will probally increase render time by quite a
> bit but if I'd put this many hours of my time into an image (you must have
> put alot in, the detail is amazing) I'd want ot put the CPU time in to
match
> :).

I did some tests before rendering this image to see the effect of changing
the number of psuedo lights in the area lights. I thought at the time that 4
would prove a nice balance. I actually don't mind some of the grainyness
because it gives the scene more of a "dirty" look. Sometimes when rendering
I think people make the mistake of making things look too perfect that is
too smooth. However there is more grainyness around the candle than I would
have liked to I might change that.

> Also the surface of the cooker looks too bright to me, too much glare off
> the white.

I'm going to practice some artistic license here, yes it is brighter than it
would be in reality however I like the mood the glare creates. It sets a
nice contrast from the rest of the scene.

> And if you happen to be a perfectionist; the neck of the wine bottle is
too
> short and thin.

This I noticed to and I'm definetly going to change.

> But great picture.  :-)

Thanks!

Post a reply to this message

> Amazing!

Thanks!

>Who's living there?

Me:-) It's my kitchen.

Post a reply to this message

> Very good modelling, very realistic.
> Lots of detail and realistic lighting though. Very nice.

Thanks!

> You'll need to increase the
> anti-aliasing... maybe use the focal blur method, to reduce moire and
stuff.

Yes I noticed some of the jaggies while rendering, like the seam where the
cupboard doors meet. I think I can get rid of that by just increasing the
size of the gap there, this might be a coinsidence surface problem. As for
the grainines around the candle I plan to up the light count of that array
light. However I rather like the small amount of grainyness in the rest of
the scene. What AA settings would you recommend I use, it would be nice to
smooth things out a bit but I don't need/want perfect smoothness? I just
used the defaults.

Post a reply to this message

Oh by the way here are some specs if anyones interested:

Peak mem used:    194,563,457 bytes
Time For Parse:     1min, 14sec
Time For Trace:     15Hrs, 10Mins, 12 Sec

As you can see this render time is not horrendous so I'm going to increase
the quality settings on some things, I might add photons to the wine glass
and bottle.

Post a reply to this message