Digital Art Zone

 
   
3 of 10
3
The Wonderful Dynamic Puzzle of 3D (or, What’s my Work Flow)
Posted: 24 April 2013 07:33 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 31 ]
Active Member
RankRank
Total Posts:  360
Joined  2003-10-09

that’s odd, I just downloaded for a closer look and the attached image shows what I get, with a before and after render

Image Attachments
Untitled-1.jpg
Profile
 
 
Posted: 24 April 2013 08:56 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 32 ]
Addict
Avatar
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2745
Joined  2004-04-25
larsmidnatt - 24 April 2013 01:36 PM

Definitely don’t use JPG, and certainly store your files in the native format of your image editor.

TiFF is just one option and one of the best, but it will depends on what you are doing and looking for. When I did animation we used TGA because they are smaller files, while still retaining data very well (and other reasons).  For years I have mostly used PNG as the quality is the same as TIFF or TGA, but file size is smaller. All three are lossless, but PNG and TGA support compression. I don’t think TGA does transparencies though…PNG does.  So TIFF is the strongest, but if you don’t need layers you may have another option.

The disadvantage of PNG is that it uses more CPU to save a file than the other formats because of its compression.

If you need thousands of files for an animation file size may become a factor, I know it was for me!

Using one of my own images here are the file size differences

PSD file with 2 layers 20.8mb
Tiff with 1 layer 21.7mb
TGA 9.65mb
PNG 3.59mb

JPG max quality 1.2mb (remember max quality is still lossly!)
JPG medium quality 167kb (set @ 30% in PS)

Not a big deal when working with a single image, but it does add up. Not just hard drive space,  but impacting speed of file reads if you are creating a video from an image sequence.

 

Our printing house requires all files be tiff’s.  Especially those for 4 color offset.

 Signature 

“...not world enough nor time…” 

Profile
 
 
Posted: 24 April 2013 09:44 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 33 ]
Power Member
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  2322
Joined  2011-11-16

One of the great things about products here are that the PA’s are often quick to respond, Stonemason being one of the better ones. I of course defer to his experience and assume there is some issue on my end as for the ambient lights. When I sort it out I will post what it was I found.

The reason I chose his product in the first place was that it was such a good product. The other aspect of that particular demonstration is still valid notwithstanding any issues on my part re.. the lightset. Remember, the idea isn’t really to focus so much on a particular product but rather how we can work with the products. I was able to produce a particular look I was after, not better or worse, just specific to some goal I had.

 Signature 

Just because I may have a strong opinion doesn’t make it any more (or less) correct than any other, just that I feel passionately a particular way at that moment.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 24 April 2013 10:45 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 34 ]
Power Member
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  2322
Joined  2011-11-16

Ok so as a followup to “The Dark Star” and the ambient lights not applying for me. It ends up I was selecting the root node and trying to apply the material which didn’t work (at least not for me.) Once I selected the top subcomponent, the one with the first bone titled ‘The Floor’ and applied the mats all was good. This is actually a good point because I’ve had this happen to me before. Perhaps it’s that the root node doesn’t actually contain geometry? I’m not sure, and perhaps it’s something I should know… but I’ve never seen documentation on this particular aspect myself.

Image Attachments
floor.jpg
 Signature 

Just because I may have a strong opinion doesn’t make it any more (or less) correct than any other, just that I feel passionately a particular way at that moment.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 24 April 2013 10:54 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 35 ]
Power Member
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  2322
Joined  2011-11-16

The result was this (basically the promo image and what Stonemason posted):

Render time 28s vs over 20m for the first example.

It is a very respectable image in a very short amount of time. If one compares the two side by side however one will see they achieve different results. This is with the same render engine. Neither is right or wrong ofc… just different.

Image Attachments
08.jpg
 Signature 

Just because I may have a strong opinion doesn’t make it any more (or less) correct than any other, just that I feel passionately a particular way at that moment.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 24 April 2013 10:57 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 36 ]
Addict
Avatar
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4963
Joined  2008-03-06

It has some nice effects, and some very good interaction of light with surfaces.

 Signature 

My store at DAZ.

My Deviantart gallery.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 24 April 2013 10:58 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 37 ]
Power Member
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  2322
Joined  2011-11-16

Which? Both I’m guessing.. If you were referring to the original example, it was designed to be much closer to an unbiased render image at the added cost of time.

 Signature 

Just because I may have a strong opinion doesn’t make it any more (or less) correct than any other, just that I feel passionately a particular way at that moment.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 24 April 2013 11:04 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 38 ]
Addict
Avatar
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4963
Joined  2008-03-06
Gedd - 24 April 2013 10:58 PM

Which? Both I’m guessing.. If you were referring to the original example, it was designed to be much closer to an unbiased render image at the added cost of time.

I meant specifically the last one, but yes, they’re both excellent renders.

 Signature 

My store at DAZ.

My Deviantart gallery.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 24 April 2013 11:06 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 39 ]
Power Member
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  2322
Joined  2011-11-16

Ok, that was the original one Stonemason included with the product and which only took 28s to render smile

The different lighting will play out differently if one adds characters, robots, etc… also.

 Signature 

Just because I may have a strong opinion doesn’t make it any more (or less) correct than any other, just that I feel passionately a particular way at that moment.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 25 April 2013 02:41 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 40 ]
Power Member
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  2322
Joined  2011-11-16

Here’s an example using Neo Station. The camera was a poser camera and all poser cameras come in at 95mm focal length which is not usually what you want, but it did give a good starting point for the camera. After adjusting the focal length down to 65 and adjusting the position slightly it worked well. Lighting was again replaced with UE/UA Lights with a Distant Light for a moon. I purposely left the sample rate low as the grittiness of it worked for the image. If I was adding characters, I might have to adjust that. Again, it’s not a finished piece, but it’s a good starting point for working from.

Render time was 9m15s

Image Attachments
01.jpg
 Signature 

Just because I may have a strong opinion doesn’t make it any more (or less) correct than any other, just that I feel passionately a particular way at that moment.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 25 April 2013 02:48 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 41 ]
Power Member
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  2322
Joined  2011-11-16

Here was the out-of-the-box render for it using the poser lights. Note, there were no changes in the textures other then the ones converted to UberArea Lights. The differences are entirely due to lighting.

Image Attachments
01.jpg
 Signature 

Just because I may have a strong opinion doesn’t make it any more (or less) correct than any other, just that I feel passionately a particular way at that moment.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 25 April 2013 07:52 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 42 ]
Power Member
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  2322
Joined  2011-11-16

Robert Melo posted a great topic of his work that is in keeping with the goal of this topic so I wanted to cross reference it for anyone who might stumble upon this thread and might not have seen it. It is here for anyone who might not have seen it. smile

 Signature 

Just because I may have a strong opinion doesn’t make it any more (or less) correct than any other, just that I feel passionately a particular way at that moment.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 25 April 2013 11:35 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 43 ]
Addict
Avatar
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4963
Joined  2008-03-06
Gedd - 25 April 2013 02:48 AM

Here was the out-of-the-box render for it using the poser lights. Note, there were no changes in the textures other then the ones converted to UberArea Lights. The differences are entirely due to lighting.

Well, yes, you’re not usually going to want to use Poser lights and cameras out of the box in DS.  At the very least the shadow and DOF settings will be wrong (as you’ve found).

 Signature 

My store at DAZ.

My Deviantart gallery.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 25 April 2013 12:17 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 44 ]
Active Member
Avatar
RankRank
Total Posts:  665
Joined  2006-11-10
Gedd - 25 April 2013 02:48 AM

Here was the out-of-the-box render for it using the poser lights. Note, there were no changes in the textures other then the ones converted to UberArea Lights. The differences are entirely due to lighting.

The streaks in the floor on the first one that look like distorted reflections, how did those turn up?

 Signature 

Old post count: 3,394,206

Profile
 
 
Posted: 25 April 2013 12:24 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 45 ]
Active Member
Avatar
RankRank
Total Posts:  665
Joined  2006-11-10
SickleYield - 25 April 2013 11:35 AM
Gedd - 25 April 2013 02:48 AM

Here was the out-of-the-box render for it using the poser lights. Note, there were no changes in the textures other then the ones converted to UberArea Lights. The differences are entirely due to lighting.

Well, yes, you’re not usually going to want to use Poser lights and cameras out of the box in DS.  At the very least the shadow and DOF settings will be wrong (as you’ve found).

Which is what makes it so important for someone discussing workflow. Even if a render is done in Poser or with DS lights or in another program with the appropriate presets for such, tweaking things will almost certainly be necessary; I think this example just points out some of the more drastic differences moving away from ‘default’ presets can make. [I know you know this, I’m just saying.]

Hey, Gedd. -pokes- Do mood lighting next.  LOL

 Signature 

Old post count: 3,394,206

Profile
 
 
   
3 of 10
3