> "St." <dot### [at] dotcom> wrote:
>> Was there a point to this and your original 'Vector' post?
> 
> I think it's just a bit of a mental game.  We often try to get our computer
> renders to look super-realistic, but tend to think that fine photos look
> rendered...

Or like when you see a rendered simulation (eg. fluid) and you find some 
details that don't look real. Then you watch nature very closely and 
notice the simulation was actually right.

I find that more often with skies. Most "good" rendered skies are 
similar cyan-sky-white-clouds, wjem om fact a lot more strange 
variations (colors, cloud shapes, etc) happen in nature.

Post a reply to this message