Amazing- in detail, photorealism, and render time ;-)
It's about time I got some new wallpaper..

Post a reply to this message

Jaime Vives Piqueres wrote:

> Hi!
> 
>   I wanted to know how slow this scene will be, with all the "hard" 
> features turned on:
> 
>   Comments/criticism about the lighting and blurred reflections are welcome 
> (most of the modelling and texturing is still "temporary").
> 


Looks quite amazing!

I could only find one small thing to nitpick about:  the highlight in 
the top right-hand corner of the bookshelf looks a bit out of place.

Oh!  And i didn't know you could still smoke in spanish offices!

-- 
/*Francois Labreque*/#local a=x+y;#local b=x+a;#local c=a+b;#macro P(F//
/*    flabreque    */L)polygon{5,F,F+z,L+z,L,F pigment{rgb 9}}#end union
/*        @        */{P(0,a)P(a,b)P(b,c)P(2*a,2*b)P(2*b,b+c)P(b+c,<2,3>)
/*   videotron.ca  */}camera{location<6,1.25,-6>look_at a orthographic}

Post a reply to this message

Now that looks like a busy office. One complaint allowed?  OK - the
files in the rear cabinet are too tidy :)

Myself, I still have not got the patience to play with radiosity.

Alf

Post a reply to this message

First glance of this looks like a photograph, always did really.

The pens in the cup might be better if more random and leaning against the
side in a more obvious way, even if you didn't ask for comments on those
kinds of things.
The small normals seem to cause a little too much noise IMHO, as can be seen
on the foreground desk drawers.  Maybe averaging those with another to blend
them out some could be an improvement?  You say you are not finished with
the texturing though.
Far as radiosity and lighting goes I can only say that it looks very good.
--
text{ttf"timrom""bob h"0,0pigment{rgb 7}translate 7*z}

Post a reply to this message

Hi Hugo:

> I am very impressed by this! Both the lighting and modelling. There are
> many well defined objects. I suppose you've made them over the years..Your
> homepage has many objects too.. great stuff!  :o)  But 30 hours rendertime
> is scaring, a little..

  Thanks! Yes, most of the objects are "stock" objects, some other are 
still placeholders. And 30h is very fast, really. Without saved radiosity 
data it would take at least a 50% more. At first, it was even more slow 
because I've put the lights inside CSG diference objects. Now, with unions, 
it renders much faster (I must remember this).

> Will you explain the lighting technique for us, once
> you are satisfied with it? 

  Yes, it is an include file with a very short macro and some constants. It 
is mostly based on using very strong intensities and very short 
attenuation.  Not a try to get something "physically correct", but 
arbitrarily based on real color and lumens data to mantain a realistic 
relation between diferent lights in the same scene. Basically, you call the 
macro this way:

  lamplight(COLOR_INCANDESCENT,LUMENS_INCANDESCENT_60W)

  or 

  lamplight(COLOR_FLUOR_UNIVERSAL_WHITE,LUMENS_FLUOR_18W)

  and it returns a light_source properly adjusted, taking into account two 
global constants previously defined: REFERENCE_WHITE and 
MAXIMUM_LUMENS_ALLOWED. It's up to you to build the light container (bulb, 
lamp, etc...).

  Pretty simple in code, but I expended some months understanding some 
concepts about light. I will show it soon...

> Did you find out why radiosity artifacts were
> gone when using a saved rad file?  

  Oh! Yes... I followed the advice from Kari of using this setup for the 
load scene:

  radiosity{
    pretrace_start 1 pretrace_end 1
    always_sample off
    load "rad_file"
  }

  But as this is using default error bound, wich was greater than the one I 
used for the saved data, the final render "smoothed" the artifacts. Seems 
that when loading rad data error_bound is taken into account. For ideal 
results with high quality settings you should use also the same error bound 
as in the "dummy" render. But it also helps to get "quick-but-clean" 
results with radiosity.

> Does it really work to use a rad file
> taken from a lower-resolution image?

  I tried it with the "official" cornell-box scene done by Kari (very 
good!), and it shows very similar results with saved data from a previous 
render at 1/3 resolution. Substracting the original image from the "tricky" 
one shows an almost black image (I had to increase brightness to see the 
diferenced zones). Of course, the original image is better, much more 
smooth, but this is still a great trick for lazy people like me (or you...;)

  Bye!

-- 
Jaime Vives Piqueres

La Persistencia de la Ignorancia
http://www.ignorancia.org

Post a reply to this message

Francois Labreque wrote:
> Looks quite amazing!

 Thanks!
 
> I could only find one small thing to nitpick about:  the highlight in
> the top right-hand corner of the bookshelf looks a bit out of place.

 I've not used hightlights, only reflection and normals. That highlitgh is 
the blurred reflection of one of the ceil lamps. I think it is realistic 
for the kind of "plastic wood" look I'm trying to create. :(
 
> Oh!  And i didn't know you could still smoke in spanish offices!

  No, you can't, but no one cares. Ashtrays are still a classic object for 
spanish offices., and only on very public places people is forced to not 
smoke. No-smokers are too tolerant here. :)

-- 
Jaime Vives Piqueres

La Persistencia de la Ignorancia
http://www.ignorancia.org

Post a reply to this message

Alf Peake wrote:

> Now that looks like a busy office. One complaint allowed?  OK - the
> files in the rear cabinet are too tidy :)

  Totally right! I must measure a real one...
 
> Myself, I still have not got the patience to play with radiosity.

  This "save and load" trick is a good excuse to start. Give it a try!

-- 
Jaime Vives Piqueres

La Persistencia de la Ignorancia
http://www.ignorancia.org

Post a reply to this message

bob h wrote:

> First glance of this looks like a photograph, always did really.

  Thanks, I think this is my first real photorealistic attempt.
 
> The pens in the cup might be better if more random and leaning against the
> side in a more obvious way, even if you didn't ask for comments on those
> kinds of things.

  Yes, the pens are really poorly placed at the moment. :(

> The small normals seem to cause a little too much noise IMHO, as can be
> seen
> on the foreground desk drawers.  Maybe averaging those with another to
> blend
> them out some could be an improvement?  You say you are not finished with
> the texturing though.

  You're right, but I can't decide if it is more slow to use realistic 
normals with focal blur, or averaged textures with heavy aa. When almost 
all the textures are blurred, it is hard to tell... I will continue testing.

> Far as radiosity and lighting goes I can only say that it looks very good.

  Thanks, that was the primary purpouse of the scene: to test a light 
macro. It seems that it works convincently. Now it's time to clean the 
macro, and create a nice and simple test code to show it...
  
-- 
Jaime Vives Piqueres

La Persistencia de la Ignorancia
http://www.ignorancia.org

Post a reply to this message

3 Comments:

1) What focal blur?

2) I'd make the black cushion of the chair on the right a bit bigger. I
don't like the way the metal cuts through it. Seems flimsy.

3) That's a pretty long render time! Good luck with the final. :)

Post a reply to this message

Very good, I'm impressed. I just can't do interior scenes!

Mick


"Jaime Vives Piqueres" <jai### [at] ignoranciaorg> wrote in message
news:3c246b4d@news.povray.org...
> Hi!
>
>   I wanted to know how slow this scene will be, with all the "hard"
> features turned on:
>
>   + Blurred reflections, with the use of very fine normals and focal_blur
>   (little aperture, 32 samples, variance 0).
>
>   + Radiosity data reused from a "dummy" version of the same scene, with
>   1/3 resolution, no area_lights, no normals and plain colors. This faked
>   version uses the same geometry, but more intense lights to add some
>   brigthness to the final scene.
>
>   + 18 big area_lights
>
>   Render time was about 30h, on AMD 1.2Ghz. Fortunatelly, I think adding
> more objects and details for the final render will not slow down it much
> more... will see.
>
>   Comments/criticism about the lighting and blurred reflections are
welcome
> (most of the modelling and texturing is still "temporary").
>
> --
> Jaime Vives Piqueres
>
> La Persistencia de la Ignorancia
> http://www.ignorancia.org

Post a reply to this message