This is true, it takes an artist to get something really good, but admittedly,
the software will play a part. I can take Bryce 1 and get a really nice sunset
and it will take all of five minutes. To do it in POV-Ray takes  a lot longer
because there is a much more challenging learning curve than in Bryce. The
sample image you posted is impressive, yes, but my questions involve how the
thing was made. Are those bricks an image map? Are they a plug in someone
other than the artist devised? How much of the image was made by the computer
and how much was actually made by the artist?

Josh

Fabian BRAU wrote:

> For those who believe that 3ds Max is not
> good for rendering. Don't forget that the
> quality of an image depend strongly on the
> capabilities of the artist and not only on
> the capabilities of the software :).
>
> Fabian.
>
>   ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>  [Image]

--
Josh English -- Lexiphanic Lethomaniac
eng### [at] spiritonecom
The POV-Ray Cyclopedia http://www.spiritone.com/~english/cyclopedia/

Post a reply to this message

What seems to make a big difference here is the radiosity, Giles' 
recent tests with radiosity come very close to this, and he wasn't
even trying to produce realistic scenes as such just realistic
radiosity. 

This is the type of image I had hoped we were going to see back in
the Gardens round of the IRTC, but for some reason everyone wanted
their garden to look unrealisticly clean and tidy, nobody came close
to this.  

-- 
Cheers
Steve              email mailto:ste### [at] zeroppsuklinuxnet

%HAV-A-NICEDAY Error not enough coffee  0 pps. 

web http://www.zeropps.uklinux.net/

or  http://start.at/zero-pps

  2:31pm  up 24 days, 12:57,  2 users,  load average: 2.15, 2.08, 2.02

Post a reply to this message

Josh English wrote:

> This is true, it takes an artist to get something really good, but admittedly,
> the software will play a part. I can take Bryce 1 and get a really nice sunset
> and it will take all of five minutes. To do it in POV-Ray takes  a lot longer
> because there is a much more challenging learning curve than in Bryce. The
> sample image you posted is impressive, yes, but my questions involve how the
> thing was made. Are those bricks an image map? Are they a plug in someone
> other than the artist devised? How much of the image was made by the computer
> and how much was actually made by the artist?

Precisely. Now I'm not saying a really good 3DS artist doesn't put a lot of effort
into a really good image, nor am I saying that POV invariably makes better
pictures. What I'm saying is that some people pirate the fancy software and have
the computer make half a scene for them, then claim they have some kind of special
talent that most POVers lack.

--
David Fontaine     <dav### [at] faricynet>     ICQ 55354965
Please visit my website: http://www.faricy.net/~davidf/

Post a reply to this message

> a select gallery (there are four galleries).
> Particulary look the public toilet picture : amazing!!

You're right that is an amazing picture but there seems to be something odd
about the shape of the urinals and the dividing walls, they seem out of
proportion, too thick, this unfortunately destroys the photo quality of it. Of
course this could have been exactly what the artist was going for?

>
> Fabian.
>

> >
> > "Fabian BRAU" <Fab### [at] umhacbe> wrote in message
> > news:398FEFA6.413541D5@umh.ac.be...
> > > Sorry I don't understand :(
> >
> > sorry-- "AWSOME ROLEX" roughly translated means  "this image looks far to
> > good to have been done in POV"-- I know it was done in 3DS Max, I was just
> > making a lame lame joke :-(

--
Come visit my web site:-) : http://www.geocities.com/~thomaslake/

Post a reply to this message

Are there bricks that have that particular angle for non-90 degree corners?
:-)
I believe this belongs in the povray.off-topic group.

P.S.... 3DS envy!

Bob

Post a reply to this message

Gee !!!!!!
If I can take back what I said about 3DSMAX, I will.
It's the first time I have seen such realistic pictures rendered with it.

Fabien




> For those who believe that 3ds Max is not
> good for rendering. Don't forget that the
> quality of an image depend strongly on the
> capabilities of the artist and not only on
> the capabilities of the software :).
>
> Fabian.
>
>   ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>  [Image]

Post a reply to this message

Here is a link if you ever lack inspiration :........

http://raph.com/3dartists/artgallery/ag-ii1.html

Fabien



> For those who believe that 3ds Max is not
> good for rendering. Don't forget that the
> quality of an image depend strongly on the
> capabilities of the artist and not only on
> the capabilities of the software :).
>
> Fabian.
>
>   ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>  [Image]

Post a reply to this message

I went and checked out the link Fabien left:
http://raph.com/3dartists/artgallery/ag-ii1.html
Very impressive stuff!  Makes me a little jealous actually... wish I were so
good!

--
Doug Eichenberg
http://www.nls.net/douge
dou### [at] nlsnet

Post a reply to this message

> 
> This is true, it takes an artist to get something really good, but admittedly,
> the software will play a part. I can take Bryce 1 and get a really nice sunset
> and it will take all of five minutes. To do it in POV-Ray takes  a lot longer
> because there is a much more challenging learning curve than in Bryce. The
> sample image you posted is impressive, yes, but my questions involve how the
> thing was made. Are those bricks an image map?

Certainly, like almost all the textures in the scene I think.
Professional use
only procedurial (shader) texture for glass, water (actually almost all
transparent texture), sometime sky (this is the case in Riven), for
some metal texture, fire (not always), glowing effect, etc.... But for 
wood, rock, brick etc... this is almost always image map. 
But personally I don't see the problem. If you want to make "photo 
realistic" (this is not the goal of everyone) picture, it doesn't matter 
the technic you use to get the result : all technic is ok if the result
is good. 
And this is more easy with image map, but you need to be able to work on 
this image, this is sometime a lot of work:

1) make the photo
2) scan the photo (if this is not a digital one)
3) make it seamless (you need to know the technics)
4) correct the quality in photoshop (not always "easy"), etc...

Fabian.

Post a reply to this message

I have already see several example but I agree this is very
very rare :)!

Fabian.


> 
> Gee !!!!!!
> If I can take back what I said about 3DSMAX, I will.
> It's the first time I have seen such realistic pictures rendered with it.
> 
> Fabien
> 

> 
> > For those who believe that 3ds Max is not
> > good for rendering. Don't forget that the
> > quality of an image depend strongly on the
> > capabilities of the artist and not only on
> > the capabilities of the software :).
> >
> > Fabian.
> >
> >   ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >  [Image]

Post a reply to this message