 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Fri, 25 Nov 2011 06:18:29 +0200, jhu <nomail@nomail> wrote:
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-_IKqjb9TRY&feature=colike
>
> This is the Titanic recreated in Cryengine 3. Holy crap! And it's better
> than
> what I can do in Povray...
>
I'm sure that if you can get the same models you can do a render that
looks better with pov-ray.
It may take a couple of weeks to render though...
--
-Nekar Xenos-
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Nekar Xenos <nek### [at] gmail com> wrote:
> I'm sure that if you can get the same models you can do a render that
> looks better with pov-ray.
> It may take a couple of weeks to render though...
Actually if you had the same models, textures and lightmaps as the
game engine has, it wouldn't take all that long to render. After all,
the scene consists of a bunch of meshes and lightmaps. That's very light
to raytrace.
If you wanted soft shadows, that would take a little longer, but not
a whole lot.
--
- Warp
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Warp <war### [at] tagpovrayorg> wrote:
> One thing where the real-time engine has an "unfair" advantage is that
> the radiosity is pre-calculated [...]
No it's not. Cryengine3 renders global illumination in real-time!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FqeXuO2AlEE
http://www6.incrysis.com/Light_Propagation_Volumes.pdf
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Roman Reiner" <lim### [at] gmxde> wrote:
> Warp <war### [at] tagpovrayorg> wrote:
> > One thing where the real-time engine has an "unfair" advantage is that
> > the radiosity is pre-calculated [...]
>
> No it's not. Cryengine3 renders global illumination in real-time!
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FqeXuO2AlEE
> http://www6.incrysis.com/Light_Propagation_Volumes.pdf
Oh, thanks. I was going to clear that up.
In any case, here's what I found:
http://freesdk.crydev.net/display/SDKDOC4/Static+vs.+Dynamic+Lighting
Scanline tech has come a long way thanks to massive investments from such a
thriving industry.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Roman Reiner <lim### [at] gmxde> wrote:
> Warp <war### [at] tagpovrayorg> wrote:
> > One thing where the real-time engine has an "unfair" advantage is that
> > the radiosity is pre-calculated [...]
> No it's not. Cryengine3 renders global illumination in real-time!
Since all the lighting in the titanic scene is static, calculating
lighting dynamically is an enormous waste of resources. That exact same
scene could be rendered just with static lightmaps. (Turning lights on
and off does not require dynamic lightmaps, it just requires switching
between alternate sets of precalculated lightmaps.)
--
- Warp
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Warp <war### [at] tagpovrayorg> wrote:
> Roman Reiner <lim### [at] gmxde> wrote:
> > Warp <war### [at] tagpovrayorg> wrote:
> > > One thing where the real-time engine has an "unfair" advantage is that
> > > the radiosity is pre-calculated [...]
>
> > No it's not. Cryengine3 renders global illumination in real-time!
>
> Since all the lighting in the titanic scene is static, calculating
> lighting dynamically is an enormous waste of resources. That exact same
> scene could be rendered just with static lightmaps. (Turning lights on
> and off does not require dynamic lightmaps, it just requires switching
> between alternate sets of precalculated lightmaps.)
>
> --
> - Warp
I know. Still, the engine is capable of rendering global illumination in
real-time and that's what it does. The fact that it is able to do that makes me
doubt that there are any resources being wasted ;)
Though, I assume the calculation heavily relies on reusing samples from scene
parts that have not changed, thus saving calculation time.
Either that or deciding which parts to reuse is actually more time consuming
than just re-rendering everything from scratch each frame.
Anyway, it works, and it's real-time.
The point being: Whether the scene is static or not, there were no
pre-computations!
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 26/11/2011 10:55 AM, Roman Reiner wrote:
> Warp<war### [at] tagpovrayorg> wrote:
>> One thing where the real-time engine has an "unfair" advantage is that
>> the radiosity is pre-calculated [...]
>
> No it's not. Cryengine3 renders global illumination in real-time!
I was under the impression that it only approximates GI using
screen-space methods.
> http://www6.incrysis.com/Light_Propagation_Volumes.pdf
...or not...
--
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
The definition of loser is thinking you're beaten before trying your
best. Evolve as a POVer and when you think you are good, try even
harder, try to be an expert and you can be an expert and then can't
think of a way to render that Titanic then give up...
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 11/26/2011 05:48 PM, Saul Luizaga wrote:
> The definition of loser is thinking you're beaten before trying your
> best. Evolve as a POVer and when you think you are good, try even
> harder, try to be an expert and you can be an expert and then can't
> think of a way to render that Titanic then give up...
Or as Master Yoda says ... Do or do not, there is no try ;-)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Saul Luizaga <sau### [at] netscapenet> wrote:
> The definition of loser is thinking you're beaten before trying your
> best. Evolve as a POVer and when you think you are good, try even
> harder, try to be an expert and you can be an expert and then can't
> think of a way to render that Titanic then give up...
And what do you call one who looks at a joke and takes it seriously?
Surely enough povray can render real reflections and GI with more than 1 bounce
with radiosity -- though as the Crytek guys noted, 1 bounce is good enough for
movies. For bonus with povray folks, you could even render a complete CSG
Titanic made up from boxes and cylinders. But surely enough the video shows how
amazing to be able to do it real time with graphics that look good enough
running on off-the-shelf hardware rather than some renderfarm.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
