Post Your Renders - Happy New Year yall

19495969798100»

Comments

  • TangoAlphaTangoAlpha Posts: 4,579

    Still tweaking the lighting, this is from my WIP. I'm using glow in the overhead strip lights. Even at 10000x they don't produce enough illumination to light the scene (unlike Iray, which can illuminate from emissives in spades), and produce so much 'soot' that the render is unusable. This one dials the glow back down to 100, and has tube lights just below the light prop, set at 60% (which is probably a little high). Realistic sky outside and a sun light at 400% (again it can probably be turned down, but I like the interaction with the obscured windows (obscuring is done with a cellular pattern in the bump channel). The square artefacts are courtesy of network rendering.

    For comparison I've included a couple of Iray renders of the same scene. The first is lit by a combination of Sun-Sky outdoor preset and emissive  on the overhead lights (what I was trying for in Carrara), the second is just the sun-sky light from outside.

    County Crime Lab3.jpg
    1600 x 1000 - 154K
    ca_Icon2a.jpg
    688 x 512 - 224K
    ca_Icon2.jpg
    688 x 512 - 237K
  • mindsongmindsong Posts: 1,658

    TangoAlpha, as usual, your renders are great. If it matters, to my eye, the first looks like a 'good render', but *something* about it looks rendered to me - uncanny valley, etc. might be the metal in the bannister, or the AO isn't quite right - can't place it.

    The second is dead-on right with the mix of exterior and flourescent light. most folks wouldn't be able to tell it was a render, even if looking for it.

    The third looks like it was taken with an iphone. completely believable lighting, color, shadows, etc. That's so cool!

    2c, cheers!

    --ms

  • PhilWPhilW Posts: 5,123

    It pains me to say it but the iRay renders are looking better than the Carrara ones at the moment!

  • HeadwaxHeadwax Posts: 9,634

    Interesting discussion, upto 100 pages bigh. 

  • ChoholeChohole Posts: 33,604

    yes    26 more posts and it's time for turn around.  Which is easy with this software.  We can just split off at first post on page 101 and change the author to give it to whoever wants the next one.  So don't need to start a new one.

     

  • PhilW said:

    It pains me to say it but the iRay renders are looking better than the Carrara ones at the moment!

    even the Octane ones??? yours look pretty damned good

    D|S just got a new render engine thats all

    they could add iray to Carrara and even Bryce if they wanted to. cheeky

  • ChoholeChohole Posts: 33,604

    Don't need no steenkin' Iray.   Bryce already has a choice of 3 render engines.. 

  • PhilWPhilW Posts: 5,123
    PhilW said:

    It pains me to say it but the iRay renders are looking better than the Carrara ones at the moment!

    even the Octane ones??? yours look pretty damned good

    D|S just got a new render engine thats all

    they could add iray to Carrara and even Bryce if they wanted to. cheeky

    I meant TangoAlpha's renders above of the reception area, which did not include an Octane version. I am pretty sure that Octane would render very close to the iRay results. As they are both physically based, the results should be pretty close - there may be subtle variations in shader tones, but the lighting calculations should basically be the same.

  • TangoAlphaTangoAlpha Posts: 4,579

    I think that's why Iray in DS is taking off so much -- getting a decent looking lighting setup is such a doddle. I really struggle to match it in Carrara, especially when I have both sets of renders side by side (and consequently why most of my promos are Iray). I've made some tweaks and I'll have another render in about half an hour, but I can already see there are still some sooty smudges and shadow banding (maybe that's why iray renders always come out looking a little blurry?).

    Also maybe why Octane and luxus plugins maintain their popularity?

  • DartanbeckDartanbeck Posts: 18,335

    I think that's why Iray in DS is taking off so much -- getting a decent looking lighting setup is such a doddle. I really struggle to match it in Carrara, especially when I have both sets of renders side by side (and consequently why most of my promos are Iray). I've made some tweaks and I'll have another render in about half an hour, but I can already see there are still some sooty smudges and shadow banding (maybe that's why iray renders always come out looking a little blurry?).

    Also maybe why Octane and luxus plugins maintain their popularity?

    Try this:

    Use a degamma'd spherical image in the Background panel and turn on Sky Light with Full Indirect Lighting, Transparency checked on.

    One might think we need an HDRI for such things. But Carrara does a fine job (so does Iray, though) with a straight-up image, then just add a directional Distant light, or whatever, to provide the main highlight. 

    I tried this when I was experimenting with Iray a little. I just can't help but to like Carara so much better! 

    Oh... and to be fair, since Iray defaults to Gamma Correction = 2.2, do that in Carrara as well - hence the need for a degamma'd imade in the background.

  • DartanbeckDartanbeck Posts: 18,335

    Still tweaking the lighting, this is from my WIP. I'm using glow in the overhead strip lights. Even at 10000x they don't produce enough illumination to light the scene (unlike Iray, which can illuminate from emissives in spades), and produce so much 'soot' that the render is unusable. This one dials the glow back down to 100, and has tube lights just below the light prop, set at 60% (which is probably a little high). Realistic sky outside and a sun light at 400% (again it can probably be turned down, but I like the interaction with the obscured windows (obscuring is done with a cellular pattern in the bump channel). The square artefacts are courtesy of network rendering.

    For comparison I've included a couple of Iray renders of the same scene. The first is lit by a combination of Sun-Sky outdoor preset and emissive  on the overhead lights (what I was trying for in Carrara), the second is just the sun-sky light from outside.

    Very nice!

    I've said it before... TA, you do some Fine Work!!!

  • PhilWPhilW Posts: 5,123

    Dart's advice is fine for an "open" scene, but doesn't really help for an interior, and that is where Carrara's renderer struggles most (IMO).  While it CAN produce really good interior images, comparable to a physically based renderer such as iRay, Luxrender or Octane, it is much more difficult to set up and get clean, good looking results, and some interiors just seem to resist everything you throw at it.  These things tend to be easier and better in a physically based renderer (and as you may have noticed, I do the majority of my rendering in Octane for Carrara these days).

  • TangoAlphaTangoAlpha Posts: 4,579

    I think that's why Iray in DS is taking off so much -- getting a decent looking lighting setup is such a doddle. I really struggle to match it in Carrara, especially when I have both sets of renders side by side (and consequently why most of my promos are Iray). I've made some tweaks and I'll have another render in about half an hour, but I can already see there are still some sooty smudges and shadow banding (maybe that's why iray renders always come out looking a little blurry?).

    Also maybe why Octane and luxus plugins maintain their popularity?

    Try this:

    Use a degamma'd spherical image in the Background panel and turn on Sky Light with Full Indirect Lighting, Transparency checked on.

    One might think we need an HDRI for such things. But Carrara does a fine job (so does Iray, though) with a straight-up image, then just add a directional Distant light, or whatever, to provide the main highlight. 

    I tried this when I was experimenting with Iray a little. I just can't help but to like Carara so much better! 

    Oh... and to be fair, since Iray defaults to Gamma Correction = 2.2, do that in Carrara as well - hence the need for a degamma'd imade in the background.

     

    Dart, fancy a challenge?

  • DartanbeckDartanbeck Posts: 18,335
    PhilW said:

    Dart's advice is fine for an "open" scene, but doesn't really help for an interior, and that is where Carrara's renderer struggles most (IMO).  While it CAN produce really good interior images, comparable to a physically based renderer such as iRay, Luxrender or Octane, it is much more difficult to set up and get clean, good looking results, and some interiors just seem to resist everything you throw at it.  These things tend to be easier and better in a physically based renderer (and as you may have noticed, I do the majority of my rendering in Octane for Carrara these days).

    Have you ever tried mapping a spherical image to a giant sphere and then turning that into an IBL setup?

    It takes a while to render, but might work great for interiors.

    I use entirely different approach on interiors that you folks - I almost never have sunlight coming through a window, nor am I using the scenery as the focal point.

  • DartanbeckDartanbeck Posts: 18,335

    I think that's why Iray in DS is taking off so much -- getting a decent looking lighting setup is such a doddle. I really struggle to match it in Carrara, especially when I have both sets of renders side by side (and consequently why most of my promos are Iray). I've made some tweaks and I'll have another render in about half an hour, but I can already see there are still some sooty smudges and shadow banding (maybe that's why iray renders always come out looking a little blurry?).

    Also maybe why Octane and luxus plugins maintain their popularity?

    Try this:

    Use a degamma'd spherical image in the Background panel and turn on Sky Light with Full Indirect Lighting, Transparency checked on.

    One might think we need an HDRI for such things. But Carrara does a fine job (so does Iray, though) with a straight-up image, then just add a directional Distant light, or whatever, to provide the main highlight. 

    I tried this when I was experimenting with Iray a little. I just can't help but to like Carara so much better! 

    Oh... and to be fair, since Iray defaults to Gamma Correction = 2.2, do that in Carrara as well - hence the need for a degamma'd imade in the background.

     

    Dart, fancy a challenge?

    Oh... you would SO kick my tush!!! But have you tried that?

    ..and yes... as Phil said, when I was testing, I was doing outdoor scenes.

    After the Holidays I might be interested in a speed challenge ;)

  • Chohole said:

    Don't need no steenkin' Iray.   Bryce already has a choice of 3 render engines.. 

    you would not know how to cope with the huge influx of noobs if DAZ did it!

  • PhilWPhilW Posts: 5,123

    What 3 does Bryce have? 

  • TangoAlphaTangoAlpha Posts: 4,579

    I've got the sky render I use for 3DL skydomes, will probably work. When the current render is done I'll try it. I always render at 2.2 anyhow, so that isn't an issue.

     

    When I look at your spaceship interior renders . . . you are SO the master - I'd run a mile (or at least run to Iray!)

    Okay it's done. Still some banding and smudges. I think the tube lights need to move a little further away from the light fittings (I can't exclude the light fittings without excluding the ceiling too, because of the way the mesh is organised - d'oh! I tweaked the brushed metal shader on the wall, now it's just differently wrong. And that water bottle . . . just - no. Oh, I enabled caustics too, which is responsible for some of the highlights on the blue wall, mostly coming from the glass shelf. We keep going. Next one will be with Dart's background idea.

    Reception3.jpg
    1600 x 1000 - 773K
  • TangoAlphaTangoAlpha Posts: 4,579

    Okay, this one is using Dart's background image idea. I also swung the "sun" around a bit to closer match the angle from the Iray images. I think I still need to crank up the glow...

    Anyhow, that's it for tonight - bed time!

     

    BTW, there are some nice images in the gallery from a couple of days ago made using Tangy Apple Orchard, and there's another render of mine from a different part of this set...

    Reception4.jpg
    1600 x 1000 - 791K
  • bighbigh Posts: 8,147

    so whos going to run the next thread ?

  • FifthElementFifthElement Posts: 569
    edited December 2016
    PhilW said:

    ... and some interiors just seem to resist everything you throw at it. 

    Yep, I been saying that for years ...

    It is, i believe, due to the limitations in Carrara's indirect bounce depth (how many times light ray bounces in the scene before it stops it's contribution to a irradiance map) and amount of samples per bouce.

    How limited this is, we do not really know, because there is no manual setting, everything is pretty much set on auto, lol smiley

    Post edited by FifthElement on
  • bigh said:

    so whos going to run the next thread ?

    You, silly, who else ? smiley

  • who ever wins the last post

  • MistaraMistara Posts: 38,675
    edited December 2016

     

    Chohole said:

    Don't need no steenkin' Iray.   Bryce already has a choice of 3 render engines.. 

    you would not know how to cope with the huge influx of noobs if DAZ did it!

     

    iray if you like salt sprinkles noize  lol
    convergence

    Post edited by Mistara on
  • StezzaStezza Posts: 7,057
    edited December 2016

    I wanna do a render of a road work crew but till then.....

    Worker.jpg
    800 x 471 - 532K
    Post edited by Stezza on
  • DartanbeckDartanbeck Posts: 18,335

    We keep going. Next one will be with Dart's background idea.

    Not for an interior scene. If you want a background for an interior scene that doesn't have windows to see through, either use a solid color or a bi-gradient.

    It's CG. Cheat! You would likely freak out if you saw my setupd for my interior scenes - so frakking simple! :)

    As I was reading Jeremy Birn's Digital Lighting and Rendering, I was thrilled at how similar his methods are to mine - but then when there were differences, it really helped to turn that light bulb on in my head!

    He's where I picked up the idea that automated lighting like GI/IL is simple to set up at the cost of render time (which I've already believed) but is also less customizeable for clients needs.

    One rule of thumb that I always heed is this: Taboo Schmaboo! In other words, if somebody says: Never do this! I do it to see if I like it. Screw "Never Do". It's great to try every darned little technique available. It pops extra idea into the head when difficulties occur.

     

  • DartanbeckDartanbeck Posts: 18,335
    edited December 2016
    Stezza said:

    I wanna do a render of a road work crew but till then.....

    Damn. This is awesome!

    Oh... right. It's Stezza. All Stezza renders kick Ankle!!!

    Post edited by Dartanbeck on
  • DartanbeckDartanbeck Posts: 18,335
    PhilW said:

    ... and some interiors just seem to resist everything you throw at it. 

    Yep, I been saying that for years ...

    It is, i believe, due to the limitations in Carrara's indirect bounce depth (how many times light ray bounces in the scene before it stops it's cotribution to a irradiance map) and amount of samples per bouce.

    How limited this is, we do not really know, because there is no manual setting, everything is pretty much set on auto, lol smiley

    There are some setting that can really make a difference down below where we turn on Sky Light. But when I have to mess with those, I'm starting to get waaay too long of render times for my liking.

    When I have difficulties with interior lighting for contemporary home walls, etc., I almost always go for our lovely Ambient Occlusion Only, and mess around with the Ambient setting in the Scene Effects panel (Assemble Room) to taste.

    From Jeremy Birn: the Occlusion radius should be the height of the interior in most cases. Just keep mind that Carrara automatically performs the Occlusion Sandwich - so doing it again can multiply the effect, which can often work nicely, but can also blotch things up. Just be aware that the finished render is already sandwiched.

  • cool stuff Stezza indeed

    and Dart you so need to win this thread continuation yes

  • DartanbeckDartanbeck Posts: 18,335
    edited December 2016

    Okay, this one is using Dart's background image idea. I also swung the "sun" around a bit to closer match the angle from the Iray images. I think I still need to crank up the glow...

    Anyhow, that's it for tonight - bed time!

     

    BTW, there are some nice images in the gallery from a couple of days ago made using Tangy Apple Orchard, and there's another render of mine from a different part of this set...

    See how the tube lights add those extensions of light extruding out the end of the tube? Tube lights are awesom sometimes, but for this I'd start with a rectangle shape light slightly larger that the light fixture and try the difference between placing the light directly onto the fixture and pulling it down below it. Below we risk the possibility of getting shadows from an item that should be emitting light - which we dont want.

    Sometimes it can be really nice to use a single shape light, but I think in this situation I'd start with two - one for each fixture. If they work too much, I'd turn them way down, lower their range, and then add a larger, single rectangular shape light and bring that one slightly lower and optimize it to work with the other two shape lights, which are mainly only there for their effect between the fixtures and the ceiling.

     

    Thread continues here   

    Post edited by Chohole on
This discussion has been closed.