Old Dog New Tricks

13468920

Comments

  • IceDragonArtIceDragonArt Posts: 12,408

    Gorgeous!

  • deathbycanondeathbycanon Posts: 1,139

    That is adorably cute!  :)

     

    What a cutie!

    Thanks ladies, and thanks KM for the comment on the last one too, sorry I missed thanking you. I have a lot going on at home right now, the more stressed I get, the more that old neurological issue creeps back up. I start forgetting things.  I've mostly recovered, but got hit with a BIG stressor late this week so it's hitting me harder then usual again....

  • deathbycanondeathbycanon Posts: 1,139

    Gorgeous!

    Thanks Sonja, it was really fun to do and the posing on the girl was a real challenge, and still has issues but good practice. :)  

  • TabascoJackTabascoJack Posts: 856

     

    Thanks ladies, and thanks KM for the comment on the last one too, sorry I missed thanking you. I have a lot going on at home right now, the more stressed I get, the more that old neurological issue creeps back up. I start forgetting things.  I've mostly recovered, but got hit with a BIG stressor late this week so it's hitting me harder then usual again....

    Hope things lighten up for you soon..

  • deathbycanondeathbycanon Posts: 1,139

     

    Thanks ladies, and thanks KM for the comment on the last one too, sorry I missed thanking you. I have a lot going on at home right now, the more stressed I get, the more that old neurological issue creeps back up. I start forgetting things.  I've mostly recovered, but got hit with a BIG stressor late this week so it's hitting me harder then usual again....

    Hope things lighten up for you soon..

    Not something that's going away anytime soon, an it's sooo bad. Not much I can do but worry and offer support to the one that needs it though. Trying to push my focus back into my art today - as I tend to pour all of myself into it and I need a break from my thoughts. :) 

  • IceDragonArtIceDragonArt Posts: 12,408

    Ugh it sucks when we can't just FIX it for them.  Don't forget to just stop and take a deep breath and a couple of moments to just breath.  And of course, as you said, art is great therapy!

  • deathbycanondeathbycanon Posts: 1,139
    edited April 2017

    I finally managed to get some work done..... 

    TheSeeking.jpg
    750 x 1000 - 497K
    Post edited by deathbycanon on
  • IceDragonArtIceDragonArt Posts: 12,408

    I like it!  He's very casual about the magic like its no big deal.  very cool!

  • deathbycanondeathbycanon Posts: 1,139

    I like it!  He's very casual about the magic like its no big deal.  very cool!

    Thanks, I think I could of done more with the expression...... i was going for a faraway searching look, so I just left it blank. lol 

  • deathbycanondeathbycanon Posts: 1,139
    edited April 2017

    As sugested by @algovincian I rendered to a 32bit beauty canvas and then tone mapped in photomatrix pro, then did some color correction and a few other filters in Nik.... Maybe later in the week I'll give the light renders a try... this one was just lit with a HDRI

     

    Ceridwen.jpg
    667 x 1000 - 454K
    Post edited by deathbycanon on
  • deathbycanondeathbycanon Posts: 1,139
    edited April 2017

    I really like the reflection detail in the eyes with this hdri I used.... 

     

    eyes.jpg
    1179 x 571 - 548K
    Post edited by deathbycanon on
  • KnittingmommyKnittingmommy Posts: 7,664

    Wow, that's nice.  I love her skin and eyes.  Your magic image is pretty good, too.  I love the nonchalance behind the whole attitude.

  • TabascoJackTabascoJack Posts: 856

    As sugested by @algovincian I rendered to a 32bit beauty canvas and then tone mapped in photomatrix pro, then did some color correction and a few other filters in Nik.... Maybe later in the week I'll give the light renders a try... this one was just lit with a HDRI

     

    Lovely!

     

  • deathbycanondeathbycanon Posts: 1,139

    Thanks KM 

    Thanks Jack - I'm going to use the link you gave me to your thread to do the light renders, do you know of any good lessons for combining the renders in post? 

  • KnittingmommyKnittingmommy Posts: 7,664

    If you don't mind video tutorials, here are a few of fairly good ones.  Rendering engines were different, but the basic techniques are the same once you get into Photoshop.

    This one is for those who have the older versions of PS:

    Here are some written tutorials.  Just skip to the PS part of the tutorials.  The first one uses Poser as the render engine.

    http://www.rodslair.com/tutorial/blending1.pdf

    http://www.cgchannel.com/2013/05/tutorial-post-production-in-3ds-max-and-photoshop/   This one uses Maja, but the PS part is what you want.

    I hope that all helps.  For Google searches, try Compositing 3D Render Passes as your search string.

  • deathbycanondeathbycanon Posts: 1,139

    If you don't mind video tutorials, here are a few of fairly good ones.  Rendering engines were different, but the basic techniques are the same once you get into Photoshop.

    This one is for those who have the older versions of PS:

    Here are some written tutorials.  Just skip to the PS part of the tutorials.  The first one uses Poser as the render engine.

    http://www.rodslair.com/tutorial/blending1.pdf

    http://www.cgchannel.com/2013/05/tutorial-post-production-in-3ds-max-and-photoshop/   This one uses Maja, but the PS part is what you want.

    I hope that all helps.  For Google searches, try Compositing 3D Render Passes as your search string.

    Awesome, thank you so much! 

  • deathbycanondeathbycanon Posts: 1,139
    edited April 2017

    Finished this one today, naked but all "offending" parts are covered, I tried it with clothing but I just don't have the right outfit for it, as I was going for really primitive... 

    Anyway just finished binge watching "Salem" on Netflix and they have the intro just plays "Pound me the witch drum" part of the Marilyn Manson song "Cupid Carries a Gun" and I liked the visual idea of "pounding the witch drum" 

    WitchDrum2.jpg
    750 x 1000 - 695K
    Post edited by deathbycanon on
  • deathbycanondeathbycanon Posts: 1,139
    edited April 2017

    For this weeks PC contest, and something I wanted to try. Rendering things separately then compositing them together in PS. Much faster rendering times and allows me to work with each item on it's own layer in post...

    BalloonGirl3.jpg
    1000 x 1000 - 725K
    Post edited by deathbycanon on
  • IceDragonArtIceDragonArt Posts: 12,408

    Oh this is lovely!  Has a very nostalgic, take me back to my childhood feel to it.

  • deathbycanondeathbycanon Posts: 1,139
    edited April 2017

    Oh this is lovely!  Has a very nostalgic, take me back to my childhood feel to it.

    Thanks Sonja

     

    Ok anyone have an answer for this one...  I let the render go max time and max samples, everything looks great....except the mouth/teeth - its soooo grainy! Anyone know why? 

     

    I post worked it just to see how bad it would look if the image was softened.... 

     

    vamp1.png
    1236 x 2000 - 3M
    vamp1.jpg
    618 x 1000 - 367K
    Post edited by deathbycanon on
  • KnittingmommyKnittingmommy Posts: 7,664

    I like rendering things separately and then bringing them together in post with layers.  It isn't something I've done a lot of, but it does give one more control.  As for the mouth, you might have to force DS to cook it longer.  The mouth is a tough area because of all of the shadows and the gloss on the teeth and the blood you have going on.  It is those types of areas that cause a render to take forever even when everything else looks good.  Did the image go all the way to 15,000 iterations?  If so, you might need to turn off limits in this case.  What was your max time?  I usually turn the max time to zero which effectively turns off the clock and allow the render to cook until convergence no matter how long that takes.  If you left max time to the default, then it turns the render off after 2 hours whether it is done or not.

    I love the nostalgic feel to the image with the girl in the park.  Nice!

  • deathbycanondeathbycanon Posts: 1,139

    I like rendering things separately and then bringing them together in post with layers.  It isn't something I've done a lot of, but it does give one more control.  As for the mouth, you might have to force DS to cook it longer.  The mouth is a tough area because of all of the shadows and the gloss on the teeth and the blood you have going on.  It is those types of areas that cause a render to take forever even when everything else looks good.  Did the image go all the way to 15,000 iterations?  If so, you might need to turn off limits in this case.  What was your max time?  I usually turn the max time to zero which effectively turns off the clock and allow the render to cook until convergence no matter how long that takes.  If you left max time to the default, then it turns the render off after 2 hours whether it is done or not.

    I love the nostalgic feel to the image with the girl in the park.  Nice!

    I pushed the max time and max samples all the way to the right as far as they would go. The render was done in the morning when I got up. It was longer then two hours but I don't know how to check how long these things took once the % done bar is gone. 

  • FixmypcmikeFixmypcmike Posts: 17,301

    I like rendering things separately and then bringing them together in post with layers.  It isn't something I've done a lot of, but it does give one more control.  As for the mouth, you might have to force DS to cook it longer.  The mouth is a tough area because of all of the shadows and the gloss on the teeth and the blood you have going on.  It is those types of areas that cause a render to take forever even when everything else looks good.  Did the image go all the way to 15,000 iterations?  If so, you might need to turn off limits in this case.  What was your max time?  I usually turn the max time to zero which effectively turns off the clock and allow the render to cook until convergence no matter how long that takes.  If you left max time to the default, then it turns the render off after 2 hours whether it is done or not.

    I love the nostalgic feel to the image with the girl in the park.  Nice!

    I pushed the max time and max samples all the way to the right as far as they would go. The render was done in the morning when I got up. It was longer then two hours but I don't know how to check how long these things took once the % done bar is gone. 

    Help > Troubleshooting > View Log File

  • deathbycanondeathbycanon Posts: 1,139

    I like rendering things separately and then bringing them together in post with layers.  It isn't something I've done a lot of, but it does give one more control.  As for the mouth, you might have to force DS to cook it longer.  The mouth is a tough area because of all of the shadows and the gloss on the teeth and the blood you have going on.  It is those types of areas that cause a render to take forever even when everything else looks good.  Did the image go all the way to 15,000 iterations?  If so, you might need to turn off limits in this case.  What was your max time?  I usually turn the max time to zero which effectively turns off the clock and allow the render to cook until convergence no matter how long that takes.  If you left max time to the default, then it turns the render off after 2 hours whether it is done or not.

    I love the nostalgic feel to the image with the girl in the park.  Nice!

    I pushed the max time and max samples all the way to the right as far as they would go. The render was done in the morning when I got up. It was longer then two hours but I don't know how to check how long these things took once the % done bar is gone. 

    Help > Troubleshooting > View Log File

    Awesome! Thank you!

  • algovincianalgovincian Posts: 1,898

    Ok anyone have an answer for this one...  I let the render go max time and max samples, everything looks great....except the mouth/teeth - its soooo grainy! Anyone know why? 

    I use volumetrics in most of my Iray renders and while it looks great, it is notoriously grainy. You may want to try rendering at a higher resolution and downsampling. It should be noted that this will of course inncrease render times. Personally, I typically render at 3X the width and height (so 9X the pixels) of the desired final size for web viewing. The higher resolution version is also a better resolution for printing.

    One additional thing you can try is changing the sampler to architectural (Render Settings->Optimization->Architectural Sampler). The default sampling is an "optimized" one designed to squeeze some more speed out of the Iray engine. This can be hit/miss, but at least the grain that the architectural sampler produces is more uniform across the entire image (which may make trouble spots stick out less).

    Hope this makes some sort of sense!

    - Greg

  • deathbycanondeathbycanon Posts: 1,139

    Ok anyone have an answer for this one...  I let the render go max time and max samples, everything looks great....except the mouth/teeth - its soooo grainy! Anyone know why? 

    I use volumetrics in most of my Iray renders and while it looks great, it is notoriously grainy. You may want to try rendering at a higher resolution and downsampling. It should be noted that this will of course inncrease render times. Personally, I typically render at 3X the width and height (so 9X the pixels) of the desired final size for web viewing. The higher resolution version is also a better resolution for printing.

    One additional thing you can try is changing the sampler to architectural (Render Settings->Optimization->Architectural Sampler). The default sampling is an "optimized" one designed to squeeze some more speed out of the Iray engine. This can be hit/miss, but at least the grain that the architectural sampler produces is more uniform across the entire image (which may make trouble spots stick out less).

    Hope this makes some sort of sense!

    - Greg

    Thanks Greg,

    One of the things I asked in a facebook forum when I first started was about the resolution and DPI no one really knew the answer because most of them never printed their work..  Most printers want 300dpi and Daz only goes as high as 96dpi.... So if your rendering at 3X the width and height for web viewing how big do you render for print? Then how do you properly resize the image to have it printed? 

  • algovincianalgovincian Posts: 1,898
    edited April 2017

    Ok anyone have an answer for this one...  I let the render go max time and max samples, everything looks great....except the mouth/teeth - its soooo grainy! Anyone know why? 

    I use volumetrics in most of my Iray renders and while it looks great, it is notoriously grainy. You may want to try rendering at a higher resolution and downsampling. It should be noted that this will of course inncrease render times. Personally, I typically render at 3X the width and height (so 9X the pixels) of the desired final size for web viewing. The higher resolution version is also a better resolution for printing.

    One additional thing you can try is changing the sampler to architectural (Render Settings->Optimization->Architectural Sampler). The default sampling is an "optimized" one designed to squeeze some more speed out of the Iray engine. This can be hit/miss, but at least the grain that the architectural sampler produces is more uniform across the entire image (which may make trouble spots stick out less).

    Hope this makes some sort of sense!

    - Greg

    Thanks Greg,

    One of the things I asked in a facebook forum when I first started was about the resolution and DPI no one really knew the answer because most of them never printed their work..  Most printers want 300dpi and Daz only goes as high as 96dpi.... So if your rendering at 3X the width and height for web viewing how big do you render for print? Then how do you properly resize the image to have it printed? 

    All that really matters is the number of pixels. Monitors used to typically be 72 or 96 dpi, but this is changing (has changed), and I think it's pretty hard to make generalizations any longer as it can vary so much for different devices.

    As you said, 300 dpi is what you typically want to shoot for as far as printing goes. So if you wanted to print 8" x 10", you would want to render 2400x3000. I would typically resize such an image to 800x1000 for display on the web, and this resizing would help reduce the grain.

    - Greg

    Post edited by algovincian on
  • algovincianalgovincian Posts: 1,898
    edited April 2017

    Just wanted to add that, no matter what the device is (printer, monitor, mobile device, etc.), as dpi increases grain matters less IMHO. That is to say, a grainy image at 72 or 96 dpi (typical older computer monitor resolutions), may be undesirable. A 300 dpi image with the same amount of grain is likely to look just fine since the dots are smaller.

    - Greg

    ETA: These are my own observations/opinion and I encourage you to form your own!

    Post edited by algovincian on
  • Ok anyone have an answer for this one...  I let the render go max time and max samples, everything looks great....except the mouth/teeth - its soooo grainy! Anyone know why? 

    I use volumetrics in most of my Iray renders and while it looks great, it is notoriously grainy. You may want to try rendering at a higher resolution and downsampling. It should be noted that this will of course inncrease render times. Personally, I typically render at 3X the width and height (so 9X the pixels) of the desired final size for web viewing. The higher resolution version is also a better resolution for printing.

    One additional thing you can try is changing the sampler to architectural (Render Settings->Optimization->Architectural Sampler). The default sampling is an "optimized" one designed to squeeze some more speed out of the Iray engine. This can be hit/miss, but at least the grain that the architectural sampler produces is more uniform across the entire image (which may make trouble spots stick out less).

    Hope this makes some sort of sense!

    - Greg

    Thanks Greg,

    One of the things I asked in a facebook forum when I first started was about the resolution and DPI no one really knew the answer because most of them never printed their work..  Most printers want 300dpi and Daz only goes as high as 96dpi.... So if your rendering at 3X the width and height for web viewing how big do you render for print? Then how do you properly resize the image to have it printed? 

    Remember that a pixel is a pixel is a pixel  -the PPI value (not, strictly, DPI) is a number at the front of the fiels aying how big a pixel will be when printed (or placed into an application that uses physical dimensions). DS doesn't set teh PPI value, so if you see 72 or 96 that's just the default used by the viewer/editor for untagged images. PPI is a measure of quality if and only if the image size iss et in physical units, such as inches.

  • deathbycanondeathbycanon Posts: 1,139

    Thanks guys - I didn't understand all of that but I think I have the gist of it. :) 

    I have actually been doing the exact sizes you have listed @algovincian rendering at 2400x3000 then opening in photoshop and converting it to 8x10 at 300dpi. I just wasn't sure this was the right way to go about it. My camera shoots at 300dpi so this was never something I had to deal with in photography. :) 

Sign In or Register to comment.