Show Us Your Bryce Renders! Part 4
This discussion has been closed.
Daz 3D is part of 
Connect
DAZ Productions, Inc.
224 S 200 W, Suite #250
Salt Lake City, UT 84101
Licensing Agreement | Terms of Service | Privacy Policy | EULA
© 2024 Daz Productions Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Comments
...and a new chess pic.
New page... Oh... Chess, very nice. Meanwhile, thanks to being damaged by my socks, well sock (I've managed to put myself in a lot of unnecessary pain by putting my left sock on today - decrepitude creeping up on me clearly) another quick tutorial.
Bryce 7.1 Pro Experiments - Lighting Interiors 2 - by David Brinnen
@TLBKlaus: Nice chess image, though I wonder if adjusting the light so the dark pieces are lit more wouldn't give them more definition and resolution.
@David: Real nice videos, and possible what I need for my mirrored sphere. I really like the lighting of the building interior, only I'd be asking myself, which I did, with the low intensity of the sky where is the light coming from. The shape of the light on the floor lends itself to long style fixtures, but none are in the scene. Might others find this lack of properly shaped fixtures distracting? On the other hand, I believe placing these style fixtures in the scene would be distracting. Still despite my questions, a marvelously light scene.
I take it from your questions, you've not watched the video? I'm rendering the version now with the rest of the lighting in place and will put it up a similar render from Octane for reference.
Edit: I'll put a short video together with the finished lighting setup.
@TLBKlaus - great dragon renders. Chess game looks goof. I like the whites.
@GussNemo - quite chaotic cubes, but charming.
@David - interesting test with the terrain in Octane and the interiors.
To conclude then...
Bryce 7.1 Pro Experiments - Lighting Interiors 3 - by David Brinnen
Bryce on the left, Octane on the right.
Octane is definitely better, much better.
Interesting, in this case, I rather preferred the Bryce render. Just goes to show how opinion can be split.
Bryce for me too... the greenish tinge in the Octane one is kinda odd.
Ah well, I like the glow around the bulbs in the Octane render. Yes, that greenish tint we've seen several times.
The glow is from built in light bloom - which is nice but strictly speaking post production. The greenish tinge is due to the colour temperature of the bulbs and the bit of blue from the outside light - I think it looks quite natural - but perhaps not pleasant - probably I should do something about that. The Octane render looks a little soft compared to Bryce, probably a render setting I could tweak there. I know how I could make Bryce soft like that with the pixel radius settings under the AA controls - I think that one will still function under Premium rendering - in the back of my mind that is (even though it is greyed out) ... I will have to test.
Yep, I'd go for the Octane in this instance. I find that while 'wares' like Bryce and others produce wonderful rendered works, they are just: too neat-, too clean-, too perfect-looking. I like's me dirt, me mistakes, me imperfections...me do's! Octane seems to give the 'dirty' version, in this instance.
Jay
Huh... tough crowd - OK well I suppose this gives me an opportunity to plug an upcomming product of Horo and mines - the Lenses and Filters kit will add imperfections to the render, including dirt, distortions and all manner of crappifications - which in this case, is a good thing.
Word of the week.
WARNING Silly Question time :coolcheese:
I know that transparencies slow down render times
Does this happen when you have layered terrains as well. So I have a terrain, duplicated and raised a tiny tad and the 2nd terrain has a mat with a trans on it, and then a second terrain again raised a tiny tad and a 2nd different mat with trans, in this case David's bluebells, which has given quite a cool effect when used with one I made myself for grass. I do have quite a lot of imported stuff in the scene but it does seem to me that the render is going slow over the terrains as well, is it still having to calculate for the trans on those 2 extra terrains ???????
Drat. The sock booby-trap was supposed to slow you down not increase output.
Clearly the operating system sabotage needs to increase beyond desktop repainting...
Actually, I'm thinking about completely rethinking the whole "slow Brinnen down" strategy: perhaps reinvigorating the east coast economy would be a better idea. Extra "real world" drudgery employment (especially with a sock-limp) would curtail all this advanced Brycing nicely. I'll get the boys on it.
Enjoyed the new ideas, David (I can barely keep up with watching your videos, let alone open Bryce to have a go too). Sometime ago in your experiments I formed the impression that you weren't making enough of the potential of this "Background" naming / influence lark, and your latest vid reminded me.
The purely radiative world is a strange place, where cool things warm hot things, and dark things illuminate light things. Yes, everything (that is a thing) is an illuminator. You might want to scratch your beard and think about the "Background" of that...
In between dodging the new hit-squad of Bryce-diminishing employment opportunities heading your way. ;-)
Yes it does.
Bryce has to calculate the light passing through the transparent parts of any object and that always slows the process down... More so with IBL and TA.
...and terrains are also high in poly count as well, which doesn't help.
I like both of the inside building images, each for different reasons. In the Bryce image I don't see covers on the lights, which might hinder/filter the light. Take the cover off a bulb and it's brighter, more intense. The lights in the Octane image seem to have covers, dirty ones, scratched, or broken ones. Look at a light with one of those and it really filters the light. And the light in both images reflects all of this.
Which bring me to a reflection question. Is there a limit of how many reflections Bryce will calculate before only black is seen? I ask because I watched David's video on lighting the inside of something, and tried placing mirrors at opposite ends of a cube after getting the lighting correct. I saw about 4-6 reflections of the object I used then a black barrier/wall(?) and nothing more. If Bryce does have a limit, I think this is what's soaking in the light when I try to reflect an object completely around the inside of my mirrored sphere. Even using David's inside lighting.
Bryce crashed at me when I set max ray depth to 5000. But the image shows two opposing reflecting 2D-Faces at 0.2 BU distance with the camera in between. Max ray depth was set at 4000, render time 2 minutes. If the 2D faces are farther apart, the black dot will disappear much earlier.
Bryce crashed at me when I set max ray depth to 5000. But the image shows two opposing reflecting 2D-Faces at 0.2 BU distance with the camera in between. Max ray depth was set at 4000, render time 2 minutes. If the 2D faces are farther apart, the black dot will disappear much earlier.
Horo beat me to it. OK, Horo's given you the short answer, here's the slightly longer winded version.
Bryce "Nuts and Bolts" - Maximum Ray Depth - a tutorial by David Brinnen
Drat. The sock booby-trap was supposed to slow you down not increase output.
Clearly the operating system sabotage needs to increase beyond desktop repainting...
Actually, I'm thinking about completely rethinking the whole "slow Brinnen down" strategy: perhaps reinvigorating the east coast economy would be a better idea. Extra "real world" drudgery employment (especially with a sock-limp) would curtail all this advanced Brycing nicely. I'll get the boys on it.
Enjoyed the new ideas, David (I can barely keep up with watching your videos, let alone open Bryce to have a go too). Sometime ago in your experiments I formed the impression that you weren't making enough of the potential of this "Background" naming / influence lark, and your latest vid reminded me.
The purely radiative world is a strange place, where cool things warm hot things, and dark things illuminate light things. Yes, everything (that is a thing) is an illuminator. You might want to scratch your beard and think about the "Background" of that...
In between dodging the new hit-squad of Bryce-diminishing employment opportunities heading your way. ;-)
Being able to control the TA response level to the material surface independent of the diffuse value... that's what I'd like to try out. So you could have white things that absorb TA rays and dark things that give them an invisible boost. It would be unrealistic and weird possibly, but it could create some good effects. So anything could be an invisible (or visible) TA light source. Not just lights.
Yeah, real world drudgery would slow me down but at the same time, the income would let me buy exotic things like clothes and shoes and fuel. And I could have a proper mudguard on my bike and not something cut out of a screen wash bottle.
I have seen those big plastic soft drink bottles used for mudguards, cut in half with the nut through the lid, oh and a plastic milk container used in the same way, there must be a market for mugged mudguards in South London :)
To be honest I find adaptive design fascinating and ingenious those milk cartons also make great paint kettles and the drinks bottles act as mini green houses when put over seedlings etc.
Don't start me off with blue tack :lol:
@David - that bike picture could have been rendered with a bit of soft shadows ... :)
David & Horo, thanks for the information.
I watched your video, David, and decided to apply it to one of the mirrored box trials I made. The first image shows the setup, camera is behind the sphere to the left, the second image is without a high MRD, the third is with MRD set to 25, fourth with MRD to 50, and five with MRD to 100. What I thought interesting is the effects obtained by the MRD setting. To me, with MRD set to 25 in the third image, there appear to be mountains in the distance. Of course, the order of the images is dependent upon this site displaying them in the order uploaded.
I also tried adjusting the MRD in my mirrored sphere, thinking that would fix the total darkness except where viewed from the camera, but it didn't. The results are still the same, reflections seen only in line with the camera. No surface reflection outside of camera view.
BTW, David, proper fenders do wonders to block mud, water, and the occasional rock. ;-)
Well while we're talking reflections, here are some angular ones... max depth 12-24.
@TLBKlaus: Smashing images.
I did this one while looking for information on the Mentoring DVD.
@GussNemo - nicely done, I like the one with the soft edged pyramids.
@TLBKlaus - very nice, the last one is really great.
Playing around with the volumetric side-of-things, initially wanted to centre in on dust (there are about 25 groups of groups of particles here) and light striking them...etc. However, throwing in the model, adding in fuzzy mats over it at certain parts, the work took on a whole other direction.
Title: Ghost
Jay
be liking this