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.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
Luxrender has changed a lot for me since I discovered it and I can't go without it anymore.
I also find it a challenge to make my renders as real as posiible.
It is because I love to see what's in my head come to life and get a rush from it.
Sometimes I am rendering for days, just to get what I am looking for the sake of experiment.
Lots of the time I don't even end up with a useful render for "art"-sake.
I just get a rush from tweaking and fiddeling with the renderer software and surfaces.
And as I remember Bobvan, you were a very hard sell on using the Reality/Lux workflow until you finally figured out how to get good results from it. As I recall, you wanted to dump Lux many times at first, but you kept at it, and look how far you've come!
I can't wait for R3 either, and have actually been doing a lot of hybrid-composite renders lately that take advantage of Lux where it shines, and advantage of 3Delight where it shines. Several things that Lux accels at and 3Delight fails at are realistic water, and props that are lit internally such as control panels with lights, or lamps / light panels, or backlit items like monitor / tv screens or lit up signs. 3Delight currently really shines with a lot of the newer SSS shaders that are available like the gummy ones and the car paint ones.
Time investment simply means that you have to get off your @ss and spend time learning instead of plugging and playing and then sit around admiring one's own work. I love the fact that once I master the principles of LuxRender, I'll also have knowledge that I could directly transfer to photography if I wish, because I also believe that true photography involves more than pointing a cellphone at an object or person and clicking a button.
And I'd like to know where the hell you are seeing LuxRender images that "lack depth, color and personality in Lux. The colors are hard to manage and in most cases dull which can be remedied by changing materials and outfits until you have a combination that works right for you"? Because the only way you get images like that is if you don't know what you're doing, and one who doesn't know what they are doing can just as easily create the same low quality of images in whatever program they use.
I'm also sorry to say that I'm a bit confused by you. You're extolling the virtues of learning and growing in our art, but you seem to have little regard for the actual work involved to achieve such greatness. I agree with many, if not most, of your points, but then you seem to contradict both yourself and the very points I thought you were trying to make. I'm not saying one needs to use LuxRender, but neither DS nor Poser are just plug and play programs, and you'll never come anywhere close to "fooling" anybody if you treat either program as such. Operating a program and mastering are two entirely different things.
Time investment simply means that you have to get off your @ss and spend time learning instead of plugging and playing and then sit around admiring one's own work. I love the fact that once I master the principles of LuxRender, I'll also have knowledge that I could directly transfer to photography if I wish, because I also believe that true photography involves more than pointing a cellphone at an object or person and clicking a button.
And I'd like to know where the hell you are seeing LuxRender images that "lack depth, color and personality in Lux. The colors are hard to manage and in most cases dull which can be remedied by changing materials and outfits until you have a combination that works right for you"? Because the only way you get images like that is if you don't know what you're doing, and one who doesn't know what they are doing can just as easily create the same low quality of images in whatever program they use.
I'm also sorry to say that I'm a bit confused by you. You're extolling the virtues of learning and growing in our art, but you seem to have little regard for the actual work involved to achieve such greatness. I agree with many, if not most, of your points, but then you seem to contradict both yourself and the very points I thought you were trying to make. I'm not saying one needs to use LuxRender, but neither DS nor Poser are just plug and play programs, and you'll never come anywhere close to "fooling" anybody if you treat either program as such. Operating a program and mastering are two entirely different things.
LOL, I like you WheelMan but theres no need to beat the horse to death when getting off my @$$ is exactly what I'd rather do.
I get that you guys really like LuxRender and it can make some really great looking pictures, there is no denying it but do they look more realistic or just different? In my opinion, just different. The truth be known, I can make things look a heck of lot more real in 3delight using trickery and background that that would have to be the result of photoshopping post work using Lux.
I don't think you can have depth perception, large expansive backgrounds or atmospheres outside of choosing what color the light is for the entire picture.
I can see where bridge scenes and shots with walled background work great in Lux but interesting enough but I can still make things more realistic because the colors are more vibrant in 3delight.
Here is another export to Vue thats an old favorite of mine.. I'm still working on a HD character scene.
In any case.. Enjoy using your LuxRender... it's brilliant but not for me.
All of these programs (DS, Poser, Vue, LuxRender), have strengths and weaknesses. That doesn't make one better than the other. As for realism, I don't see more realistic pictures made in either DS or Poser, even though both are capable of producing pretty realistic stuff. Lux certainly can and does produce just as many, if not more, realistic renders than other programs. The fact that it may not do expansive environments is irrelevant only because the presupmtion is that making such renders is important to everyone, when in fact it's not. As far as I know, of the aforementioned programs, only Vue is really suited to do realistic, expansive landscapes anyway.
The below is an old Poser Firefly render. It, like DS and LuxRender, is very capable of high quality stuff.
And as I remember Bobvan, you were a very hard sell on using the Reality/Lux workflow until you finally figured out how to get good results from it. As I recall, you wanted to dump Lux many times at first, but you kept at it, and look how far you've come!
I can't wait for R3 either, and have actually been doing a lot of hybrid-composite renders lately that take advantage of Lux where it shines, and advantage of 3Delight where it shines. Several things that Lux accels at and 3Delight fails at are realistic water, and props that are lit internally such as control panels with lights, or lamps / light panels, or backlit items like monitor / tv screens or lit up signs. 3Delight currently really shines with a lot of the newer SSS shaders that are available like the gummy ones and the car paint ones.
Funny I was just thinking about you the other day how you had mentioned that with R2 we would be able to GPU render we are not quite there yet but suppose to be for R3 in the meantime this is working yeah it was a b#icth at 1st but 2 years later and thousands of renders later some from my latest batch... How you doing GPU renders you using luxus or blender? I also do alot of PNG rendering blending them with real pic backdrops. I also do ok selling side custom projects that paid to build me monster machine & buy content..
I agree that all the render engines have their strengths and weaknesses. 3Delight is a very good render engine, but I've found it to be quite slow (though it has gotten much faster recently), especially when rendering transparencies like hair and lace. I'm always amazed when people post render times that are less than 10 min. I just don't seem to be able to get the quality I want in under 1-2 hours, and usually it takes a lot longer (of course a small render for me is in the 1200x1800 range). Sooo much to learn, and so little time to learn it!
Anyway, while the discussion is on renderers and realism, I was just wondering what sort of time we would be looking at for a render similar to the attached image in 3Delight. My shader-fu in 3Delight isn't good enough to get similar results (at least not in a few hours - or maybe days). I used the Stanford Dragon for the image (can be downloaded for free - just google "stanford dragon download"), that weighs in at a little over 800,000 polys. This image was rendered in Octane and took about 90 min. using only and HDR image for lighting, and the original render was done at 1200x1100.
I'm really curious to see the speed of a biased render in 3Delight with very similar results. With some of the render times I've seen here, I'm guessing the similar results could be achieved at the same or less time.
Edit: I forgot to mention that you should click on the image to see the full sized version where the subtle effects of SSS and caustics of the light interaction on/in the dragon can be seen.
Actually that is exactly what I was getting at is that one is better than the other according to what you are looking to make. I think it should be a part of our planning phase that we consider why type of environment we are looking to create and while the closed in environments of a bridge or an office without windows might be better suited to LuxRender, there are lots of options to consider for other projects.
Some projects simply can't be done in LuxRender due to its many limitations.
The only limitation, if you can call it that, is that Luxrender does things realistically. Because of that you need to take more care to add in certain features rather than using cheats and shortcuts as you might do in 3DL. However, when you consider that most of those shortcuts are done that way because of 3DL's own limitations you begin to realise that they are two sides of the same coin. While you can't really cheat much in Lux, it adds more realism as a result of that.
I've even done a render in Lux, mixing both toon style and realistic art in the same render. It's a powerful tool capable of a lot more than people give it credit for. It's not perfect for every scene, of course, and learning how to get the most out of it is probably one of the harder things to do with it. But to say it can't do a particular project because of its 'limitations' is uninformed.
Neither 3Delight nor LuxRender have limitations, they are merely tools used by artists with various degrees of abilities, the limitations lie with the experience of the artist, not the tools.
Both tools have their uses, and both render engines can deliver absolutely crappy renders in the hands of amateurs and brilliant works of art in the hands of artistic masters.
The trapped Sadie fairy image above is too cute. Nicely done!
But a great tool makes the amateurs look like a master. Of course all tools have limitations, you shouldn't try to fly your car off a cliff, it wasn't designed to handle it.
Do you think people design cars so only 'masters' can drive them? Of course not, we design things so everybody can drive like a master by keeping it simple in design, and remember this... form follows function.
Everybody that is a tried and true professional in his unique area was once a total amateur with no clue. Everybody has different strengths and weaknesses that and any real 'artistic master' is still a person that is always learning something new. There are no masters in a free thinking collective, only the realization that we all have something we can learn.
All tools have limitations. Don't be a tool. :) LOL I wonder if you could make this picture in LuxRender as easily as I did in 3delight where it took only a few minutes to set up and 15 minutes to render.
Well..for me, it will be postwork. Here are some 2 min renders (DS 3Delight, just preview light) and some 10 min Gimp tinkering.
Or some retro-ish style.
You know what my favorite product from DAZ3d is? I highly recommend Age of Armors advanced spotlight with
"Real light"
http://www.daz3d.com/real-light-hdr-gels-bulbs
You'll find them really helpful and easy to use. Should help you get those renders with the lighting that you want... I wish these lights were actually integrated into the next version of DAZ they are that good. Shout out to Dimension Theory and Age of Armor for your great work.
Yeah, practically every 3Delight render I do gets a couple simple layer overlays in GIMP to bring up details in the shadows and give the colors some extra pop (details here) -- takes me a couple minutes a piece. I've been told that I could get similar improvements in-render by fiddling with the advanced settings, but it's so easy in GIMP I haven't worked on that yet . . . maybe if I get into animation. :red:
But a great tool makes the amateurs look like a master. Of course all tools have limitations, you shouldn't try to fly your car off a cliff, it wasn't designed to handle it.
Do you think people design cars so only 'masters' can drive them? Of course not, we design things so everybody can drive like a master by keeping it simple in design, and remember this... form follows function.
Everybody that is a tried and true professional in his unique area was once a total amateur with no clue. Everybody has different strengths and weaknesses that and any real 'artistic master' is still a person that is always learning something new. There are no masters in a free thinking collective, only the realization that we all have something we can learn.
All tools have limitations. Don't be a tool. :) LOL I wonder if you could make this picture in LuxRender as easily as I did in 3delight where it took only a few minutes to set up and 15 minutes to render.
It's a decent render, but it's mostly dark and your lion's fur looks like it's a stuffed animal. the photo background you use does not match the lighting in your scene. If it's a question of how easy it should be your results will undoubtedly show how much work went into it.
And your comment about LuxRender's many limitations, lack of color vibrance, etc is simply; untrue as any user of Lux has already pointed out. If you want to conform to 3Delight that's fine, but your assessment of Lux so far has been misinforming.
Yeah, practically every 3Delight render I do gets a couple simple layer overlays in GIMP to bring up details in the shadows and give the colors some extra pop (details here) -- takes me a couple minutes a piece. I've been told that I could get similar improvements in-render by fiddling with the advanced settings, but it's so easy in GIMP I haven't worked on that yet . . . maybe if I get into animation. :red:
How long have you been collecting all of the 'simple layer overlays' that you have and where can we buy them? Wouldn't it be more productive to have the texture itself with the different overlays already in place so you could just load material presets?
I mean, if Johny is going to have a tattoo in one picture then it makes sense that I follow a movie flow chart style and actually prefabricate all the effects scars, blood and tattoos directly onto the character so I take advantage of the condition in the 3d render. If it becomes more or less, I simple save more presets. I guess its just a difference of style but I do see a toll thats made for it:
http://www.daz3d.com/texturepainthelper
What do you think?
It can't be 'misinforming' if I'm speaking of my own experience. I am informing people of my opinion which we all have a good one of and are entitled to in a free country. You don't have to like or agree with my opinion but what you can't do is demonstrate LuxRender doing an expansive outdoor atmosphere with clouds unless as another brilliant artist did in this thread is.. "Cheat".
Why is it when some people want to insist that there way is the only way, there opinion the only valid one that they start to attack other peoples work? This isn't a competition and I'm not saying anybody is wrong. There no one way to do anything. This isn't a competition and just because I don't care to use LuxRender in its current very limited uses with no previs, doesn't mean I would waste my time discouraging you to enjoy away.. Have fun and do your thing you do so well. Your brilliant StratDragon at what you do.. Get it?
How long have you been collecting all of the 'simple layer overlays' that you have and where can we buy them? Wouldn't it be more productive to have the texture itself with the different overlays already in place so you could just load material presets?
I mean, if Johny is going to have a tattoo in one picture then it makes sense that I follow a movie flow chart style and actually prefabricate all the effects scars, blood and tattoos directly onto the character so I take advantage of the condition in the 3d render. If it becomes more or less, I simple save more presets. I guess its just a difference of style but I do see a toll thats made for it:
http://www.daz3d.com/texturepainthelper
What do you think?
I have a feeling that KickAir is referring to using copies of the render itself, to enhance the image via layering techniques and filters, as in this one I wanted a more pastel, painterly effect.
How long have you been collecting all of the 'simple layer overlays' that you have and where can we buy them? . . .
Simpler than that -- the layer overlays are made from the render they're intended to enhance, and GIMP is free, nothing to buy.
Edited to add: crosspost -- hi chohole, pretty pic!
No, the auto makers don't make cars that are sold to the general public for "masters" but you do have to master the art of driving to obtain a license to drive them.
It is no different with DS, Poser, Vue or any of the other apps. They can be used by everyone from beginners to advanced. However, if you want to get the most out of the app, you do need to master the art of using it.
You can have the greatest and most expensive tools in the world but if you don't have a clue how to use them properly they are just things. You can own the a Stradivarius violin but if you don't know how to play, it's just so much noise. This is not meant as an insult just an example and is not directed at anyone person or their work.
How long have you been collecting all of the 'simple layer overlays' that you have and where can we buy them? . . .
Simpler than that -- the layer overlays are made from the render they're intended to enhance, and GIMP is free, nothing to buy.
Thanks for the heads up.. I've never used GIMP. I tend to alter lighting and do minor overlays using PNG's and PhotoImpact. I'm guessing we do the same things in different ways. :)
I completely agree with you. Here is the thing.. I'd like to see people show me how to do all these wonderful things they keep talking about by this 'unlimited tool' that is the be all end all of 3d rendering. I think its wrong to insult the intelligence or experience of the end user as somehow being less than. Maybe the rendering engine in "LuxRender" is unlimited but by working through the environment of DAZ3d, it is extremely limited and I've been told we need entire new tools and skills to 'master' this ... I'm not buying it. It's probably much better if I purchase one of those 15,000 dollar programs.. (what a rip off) LOL
The great thing is that one day.. somebody is going to step up and prove me wrong and demonstrate how they did it.. till then, its all just a lot of hot air.
So far what I've seen from LuxRender are very nice pictures that I'm happy to compliment but nothing I'd care to imitate.
I think everybody should do what they enjoy and be happy.. I enjoyed making this picture composed of V4 characters.
I don;t recall you using the word "I can't" meaning you personally, but rather "you can't" meaning everyone, If you stated otherwise my sincere apologies. In the mean time your arts pretty good, but there are hundreds of artists here who are far better than you and I both who have not touted how photo-real their work is, just shown it for what it is; good art that they probably spent a considerable amount of time on to make it look as good as it does.
Don't apologize or waste your time telling me what you think of my art... Tell me what you think will make it better and how to do it. Focus on the solution. If your not helping somebody Mr. StratDragon, your wasting your time and let me tell you something friend.. Your time is valuable and I'm extremely grateful that you and people like and all the really damn talented people in this community enjoy sharing and making great art yourself.
What you think of my art is none of my business but if you think you have an idea to help me improve then by all means, walk me through it friend.
I want to help everybody around here be the best that they can be and if people like my ideas, cool, I love sharing. I'm not in this for the profit.. We should be here to be useful to each other.
Have a great day and be blessed.
actually you can use an HDRI Image, volumetric clouds, or a transparent prop and all of them can be accomplished either with or without a sky dome, question is can you do an expansive outdoor atmosphere with clouds as rendered elements and not a dropped in image in 3Delight. Yes, I can do fog in 3Delight but I can in LuxRender just as easily and for sky lighting LuxRender could not be more simple and straight forward with the concept of outdoor lighting and exposure because it's a rule established by photography and physics. You create a light, name it "Sun" and point it in direction of your rays. One light does it all. Can you do that in 3Delight?
Again.. not a competition.
How do you do all these things that you are talking about?
Where are these assets for sale?
Whose making new stuff if its not available?
According to a dreamlight video on 3delight that I recently watched on lighting the answer to your final question is Yes. In the example that I saw it used the "The Warehouse"
http://www.daz3d.com/light-n-go-the-warehouse
Love the look. Brilliant work :)
Thanks Its funny I used a simple lighting called alluring garden a few years back. Lighting similar to lights and go (made renders like the one attached) they no longer work in 4.6
Edit one pain in the @ss with using Reality is Reality data it is it's kryptonite and can be painful to work with. One of the issues if you load 2 of the same figures (v4 genesis ect) it loses all the settings one pre saved for the second figure. Best way around it is save your settings and re apply them to the figure or object....
Maybe you could benefit from using that Advance spotlight too.
http://www.daz3d.com/real-light-hdr-gels-bulbs
I love it and it couldn't hurt.. Does the girl jump on that spider and beat the tar out of it for invader her space? I'm sure the other hotties are going to pull that thing apart.. LOL
You know what would make Lux usable to me? A previs window so you could see what the render is going to look like before you wait the 5 minutes or whatever time it take to load your picture from DAZ...
This is a render of set up I like... not a very impressive picture of course because I'm just a terribly untalented artist.. LOL
I completely agree with you. Here is the thing.. I'd like to see people show me how to do all these wonderful things they keep talking about by this 'unlimited tool' that is the be all end all of 3d rendering. I think its wrong to insult the intelligence or experience of the end user as somehow being less than. Maybe the rendering engine in "LuxRender" is unlimited but by working through the environment of DAZ3d, it is extremely limited and I've been told we need entire new tools and skills to 'master' this ... I'm not buying it. It's probably much better if I purchase one of those 15,000 dollar programs.. (what a rip off) LOL
The great thing is that one day.. somebody is going to step up and prove me wrong and demonstrate how they did it.. till then, its all just a lot of hot air.
So far what I've seen from LuxRender are very nice pictures that I'm happy to compliment but nothing I'd care to imitate.
I think everybody should do what they enjoy and be happy.. I enjoyed making this picture composed of V4 characters.
What is it exactly you want to learn how to do? That's probably the first thing you need to decide. There are plenty of tutorials out there both free and for purchase. Just look under Dreamlight. He sells a wide variety of tutorial modules both for specific apps as well as for more generalized knowledge. DAZ also has a wealth of video tutorials on You Tube covering many aspects of DS.
I don't know about unlimited tools. I've used Lux Render both with Luxus for DS and Reality 3 for Poser. I've also used Vray, Mental Ray and Maxwell Renderer with some of the higher end apps that my employers provide. Unbieased render engines are not unlimited. The truth is, everytime there is a major upgrade to any application, there are new tools and you have to add to your skills. Anyone who used DS prior to DS4 will know what I'm talking about.
Reality is a bridge app and Luxus is a plugin for DS. Luxus is both reasonably priced, has a better ease of use than Reality and there is a good set of tutorials that you can purchase.
You keep wanting someone to show you. I take it what you mean is that you want someone to walk you through step by step the same as DAZ Fiery Genesis tutorial. Yes? No?