"Bernard" <ber### [at] flyonahookmeuk> wrote:
> "Kenneth" <kdw### [at] gmailcom> wrote:
>  Make the lights into area_lights, to add a bit more
> > realism.
>  I am struggling with the lighting. Will keep your comment in mind.
>
> Just before I move on to my next, here is a close-up. It occurs to me that there
> is no point in modelling more detail than can be seen at the intended field of
> view - if, of course, there is an intended field.

Great modelling for your first proper CSG image especially on the table.

For lighting I find area lights, choosing the correct colour for the light,
adding light_fading settings and of course radiosity settings are vital when
aiming for realism.

Also, the thing that I find makes a very big difference to the quality of an
image is abandoning antialiasing and adding focal blur settings on the camera,
if the scene does not require blur just set the aperture to a very small value.

I usually use something like below in my camera section then adjust the variable
from 0-10 to go from test renders to high quality final renders.

#declare useFocalBlur = 10; //0=off 1=low quality 10=high quality   50%

camera {
  location  <0.65 , 2.5 ,-4.0>
  look_at   <0.85, 2.1  0>
  right     x*image_width/image_height
#if(useFocalBlur)
  aperture 0.001
  blur_samples 10*useFocalBlur
  focal_point <1.0,2.5,0.4>
  confidence 0.9+(useFocalBlur*0.0085)
  variance 1/(2000*useFocalBlur)
#end
}

Only downside is focal blur is a lot slower than AA but IMO well worth the wait.

After that, the best advice ever given to me (really should remember who it was
but it was a comment on an early IRTC entry) is to start to think about the
lifetime of the object you are modelling, if it is not a new object it would
have knocks, dents, chips etc and adding dirt to places/parts that are more
likely to be dirty etc..

Sean

Post a reply to this message