The Realism Challenge - Biased VS Unbiased Showdown

2456710

Comments

  • JaderailJaderail Posts: 0
    edited December 1969

    Jaderail said:
    Gee really this again? I've always been of the impression that it's not the tools that create but the person using the tools. I'll link to two of my old ones and you figure out what they were done wih.
    http://jaderail.deviantart.com/gallery/?offset=24#/art/Bruuna-by-JJW-296745874?_sid=2bc68410
    http://jaderail.deviantart.com/gallery/?offset=24#/art/A-moment-in-time-316364781?_sid=4bf3f581

    Not cool. If you don't like the topic then don't spoil it for the rest. And if you actually read the intro you'd have realised the point is exactly to prove that it's the artist that makes the tool.Opps, sorry bout that. It was just a spur of the moment thing. Carry on, I'll hush now.

  • evilproducerevilproducer Posts: 9,021
    edited December 1969

    Rareth said:

    I meant my challenge to carfor but agreed. Lol. We'll go with the fruit if everyone is happy with that. Downloading as we speak.


    Go ahead with the fruit if you wish. I'm not using a still life to show off what Carrara's renderer can do versus another. I think if you want to show off your render engine of choice, you should find some gee-whiz feature that the other renderer either can't do, or can do, but with more difficulty. Otherwise this challenge is akin to seeing which car handles better in a school zone: The Prius or the Volt.

    oh, well I thought the object was to show off the rendering aspecting of things, my bad.


    It is to show off the rendering abilities of your renderer of choice. If you think you can show that off to the best effect using the fruit bowl scene, then that's great.


    My two main points are that your renderer should be flexible, and the only way to get the most out of it, is to have some grasp on what you're doing. Personally, I think the fruit bowl scene is good example of one way to light and texture a scene. It's a fine foundation, but does it show off everything the renderer can do?

  • RarethRareth Posts: 1,458
    edited December 1969

    Rareth said:

    I meant my challenge to carfor but agreed. Lol. We'll go with the fruit if everyone is happy with that. Downloading as we speak.


    Go ahead with the fruit if you wish. I'm not using a still life to show off what Carrara's renderer can do versus another. I think if you want to show off your render engine of choice, you should find some gee-whiz feature that the other renderer either can't do, or can do, but with more difficulty. Otherwise this challenge is akin to seeing which car handles better in a school zone: The Prius or the Volt.

    oh, well I thought the object was to show off the rendering aspecting of things, my bad.


    It is to show off the rendering abilities of your renderer of choice. If you think you can show that off to the best effect using the fruit bowl scene, then that's great.


    My two main points are that your renderer should be flexible, and the only way to get the most out of it, is to have some grasp on what you're doing. Personally, I think the fruit bowl scene is good example of one way to light and texture a scene. It's a fine foundation, but does it show off everything the renderer can do?

    well depends on what you put into it I guess, I've done the fruitbowl scene in Carrara and Bryce, (both awhile ago) and while I think I did a fairly decent job in both, I think I got more out of the Bryce render than I did from the Carrara render (as in I learned more).

  • magaremotomagaremoto Posts: 1,133
    edited December 1969

    Did this one awhile ago. Pretty simple scene. I wanted to test how minimal I could go.


    Carrara 7.2 Pro render.


    One light and a white background color. Partial GI- Meaning I only had the Skylight option enabled and not full Indirect lighting. Skylight allows for the white Background color (or anything in the scenes's Background actually) to act like an IBL. I simulated SSS by using the skin's color image map in the glow channel.


    unbeatable hair EP, well done, I'd like to see some other shots that makes hair so real
    this is my SSS test made in Carrara 8

    pp.jpg
    1544 x 2000 - 191K
  • wetcircuitwetcircuit Posts: 0
    edited December 1969

    After using Carrara for 15 years I don't think it's possible for ME to be un-biased. LOL. My eye has been trained to like Carrara. I'm interested when people say they like the look of one renderer over another, but it's still subjective. Photoreal is in the eye of the beholder, there is no neutral test to say which is "better".

  • evilproducerevilproducer Posts: 9,021
    edited February 2013

    Did this one awhile ago. Pretty simple scene. I wanted to test how minimal I could go.


    Carrara 7.2 Pro render.


    One light and a white background color. Partial GI- Meaning I only had the Skylight option enabled and not full Indirect lighting. Skylight allows for the white Background color (or anything in the scenes's Background actually) to act like an IBL. I simulated SSS by using the skin's color image map in the glow channel.


    unbeatable hair EP, well done, I'd like to see some other shots that makes hair so real
    this is my SSS test made in Carrara 8


    The hair is Kozoboro's (sp?) short bob!


    Nice SSS by the way! Looks good!

    Post edited by evilproducer on
  • evilproducerevilproducer Posts: 9,021
    edited December 1969

    Rareth said:
    Rareth said:

    I meant my challenge to carfor but agreed. Lol. We'll go with the fruit if everyone is happy with that. Downloading as we speak.


    Go ahead with the fruit if you wish. I'm not using a still life to show off what Carrara's renderer can do versus another. I think if you want to show off your render engine of choice, you should find some gee-whiz feature that the other renderer either can't do, or can do, but with more difficulty. Otherwise this challenge is akin to seeing which car handles better in a school zone: The Prius or the Volt.

    oh, well I thought the object was to show off the rendering aspecting of things, my bad.


    It is to show off the rendering abilities of your renderer of choice. If you think you can show that off to the best effect using the fruit bowl scene, then that's great.


    My two main points are that your renderer should be flexible, and the only way to get the most out of it, is to have some grasp on what you're doing. Personally, I think the fruit bowl scene is good example of one way to light and texture a scene. It's a fine foundation, but does it show off everything the renderer can do?

    well depends on what you put into it I guess, I've done the fruitbowl scene in Carrara and Bryce, (both awhile ago) and while I think I did a fairly decent job in both, I think I got more out of the Bryce render than I did from the Carrara render (as in I learned more).


    I guess I should have added a third point as well, or maybe emphasized the second point better: If you don't have a good grasp of shading and lighting, no renderer is going to be shown to it's best advantage. That's why I personally think that flexilbility is important. Lighting, shading and optimizing a scene is great, but you also need to be able to do that for a whole range of scenes. I've done some nice portraits, but they're not all I want to do.

  • evilproducerevilproducer Posts: 9,021
    edited December 1969

    Here's a couple more non-postworked images:


    The Bikini Car Wash picture uses the Skylight in Carrara. No Indirect light. I simulated that by adding a couple spot lights where the shadows were too deep.


    The second uses no GI whatsoever and is an interior scene, which required a different take on lighting and texturing. I used volumetric clouds.

    The-Orc-Pit-copy.jpg
    2000 x 1500 - 1M
    Bikini-Car-wash-GI.jpg
    2000 x 1500 - 1M
  • Harry DresdenHarry Dresden Posts: 376
    edited December 1969

    Great skin there magaremoto! Love your second pic evil.

    We need some Reality fans in here to set some benchmarks. :lol:

  • wetcircuitwetcircuit Posts: 0
    edited December 1969

    We need some Reality fans in here to set some benchmarks. :lol:

    They are still rendering... :lol:

    Here is another Carrara render from one of the scenes that triggered this thread... I was told this is not realistic at all... I humbly beg to disagree but whatever. It's not like I win a cookie or someone is buying me a beer. Photorealism is boring (to me) because it's like that game in the children's magazine Highlights - spot the inconsistency.

    I'd rather keep going in the direction I'm going in, not that re-re-re-render for an entire weekend the same scene.... I'm not trying to impress anyone. If the figure is more "character" than "mannequin" then you are doing what you need to do.

    Doc3.png
    450 x 600 - 162K
  • FSMCDesignsFSMCDesigns Posts: 10,369
    edited December 1969

    Great skin there magaremoto! Love your second pic evil.

    We need some Reality fans in here to set some benchmarks. :lol:

    As one I thought about posting here, but with comments like Hollys below taking a jab at rendering times and this one
    The original challenge over at Carrara was on the subject of humans and skin but we can change that. Lol. :lol:

    But seeing as I waited 1.5 hours for this render to finish I'm posting it! Grrr... :lol:

    DAZ Studio 4.5 - Eat your hearty out Reality. :cheese:


    this thread seems to be biased already, no pun intended.

    I do agree the realism is subjective. I happen to love carrara but just knowing that the lighting is biased keeps be away from it now. I want to know that what i am seeing is actual light and how actual light reacts on a surface and not my interpretation of what it might look like.

  • wetcircuitwetcircuit Posts: 0
    edited December 1969

    As one I thought about posting here, but with comments like Hollys below taking a jab at rendering times and this one
    ...
    this thread seems to be biased already, no pun intended.

    Aww. Yes of course we are all biased. That is no reason not to post... Did you see the glowing bananas? :-P

    I do agree the realism is subjective. I happen to love carrara but just knowing that the lighting is biased keeps be away from it now. I want to know that what i am seeing is actual light and how actual light reacts on a surface and not my interpretation of what it might look like.


    Hmmm. I don't understand your bias against biased.... It really isn't "actual" light, it's still someone else's settings on your scenes.... But then again, "photorealism" is completely derivative, LOL.

    I use my "eye", but I also did a lot of reading, like the Jeremy Birn lighting books.

    Here's another pic with a fishyer-eyed camera... I just can't go in and add a bunch of tiny wrinkle maps. For me it is "real enough" and still renders fast enough to be used in animations (Although I would probably tone down the details for animation anyway to get better encoding results)...

    Doc4.png
    450 x 600 - 174K
  • Harry DresdenHarry Dresden Posts: 376
    edited December 1969

    Great skin there magaremoto! Love your second pic evil.

    We need some Reality fans in here to set some benchmarks. :lol:

    As one I thought about posting here, but with comments like Hollys below taking a jab at rendering times and this one
    The original challenge over at Carrara was on the subject of humans and skin but we can change that. Lol. :lol:

    But seeing as I waited 1.5 hours for this render to finish I'm posting it! Grrr... :lol:

    DAZ Studio 4.5 - Eat your hearty out Reality. :cheese:


    this thread seems to be biased already, no pun intended.

    I do agree the realism is subjective. I happen to love carrara but just knowing that the lighting is biased keeps be away from it now. I want to know that what i am seeing is actual light and how actual light reacts on a surface and not my interpretation of what it might look like.

    Noooo. It's really not biased (there's just no escaping that pun is there?). The problem is that so far the entries are a bit one sided. And yes, people are poking fun but its all in good spirit (I hope).

    Here's the thing - I truly believe that Poser, Carrara, Bryce and Studio are all capable of rendering stunningly realistic images. The problem is nobody believes it (notibly Reality users, lol). So I'm trying to appeal to the experts in both camps to have some fun and show off. Reality is great at what it does and so is Octane. I know coz I have both. But how close can we get to those renderers if we don't have them? That is the question.

  • Harry DresdenHarry Dresden Posts: 376
    edited December 1969

    One of the things I like about biased renderers is volumetric lighting. I'm not sure if and how volumetrics works in unbiased renderers so if you guys know something I don't please share the know-how. Here's a simple scene I just rendered. I cheated a little and used UberSurface 2 to add some cuts to the body and blood spatter to the table. Not perfect but with no postwork it will do.

    morgue.jpg
    1411 x 945 - 730K
  • magaremotomagaremoto Posts: 1,133
    edited December 1969

    As one I thought about posting here, but with comments like Hollys below taking a jab at rendering times and this one
    ...
    this thread seems to be biased already, no pun intended.

    Aww. Yes of course we are all biased. That is no reason not to post... Did you see the glowing bananas? :-P

    I do agree the realism is subjective. I happen to love carrara but just knowing that the lighting is biased keeps be away from it now. I want to know that what i am seeing is actual light and how actual light reacts on a surface and not my interpretation of what it might look like.


    Hmmm. I don't understand your bias against biased.... It really isn't "actual" light, it's still someone else's settings on your scenes.... But then again, "photorealism" is completely derivative, LOL.

    I use my "eye", but I also did a lot of reading, like the Jeremy Birn lighting books.

    Here's another pic with a fishyer-eyed camera... I just can't go in and add a bunch of tiny wrinkle maps. For me it is "real enough" and still renders fast enough to be used in animations (Although I would probably tone down the details for animation anyway to get better encoding results)...

    Wendy you open your challenge with one of the most difficult topics - make a realistic brown skin - however you are very close to the target, some improvements on nose and ears, the rest is very convincing imo. maybe if the model were not so fat he could be much more realistic

  • Dim ReaperDim Reaper Posts: 649
    edited December 1969

    Interesting thread.

    Although it wasn't mentioned in the original post, I've used Vue for the fruit bowl, as an example of an unbiased render engine. Still can't get the grapes right, but I can't spend any more time on them.

    fruit_vue_3.jpg
    800 x 600 - 101K
  • Harry DresdenHarry Dresden Posts: 376
    edited December 1969

    Interesting thread.

    Although it wasn't mentioned in the original post, I've used Vue for the fruit bowl, as an example of an unbiased render engine. Still can't get the grapes right, but I can't spend any more time on them.


    Nice. I like the color bleed under the bowl. Sadly I gave up on the fruit bowl simply because the model imports as a single mesh in Studio with no material zones. Yes, I could open it in a modeler and set up material zones but I really don't like fruit all that much. Lol.

  • mjc1016mjc1016 Posts: 15,001
    edited December 1969

    Scene composed in DS3 and rendered in the standalone 3Delight...

    lightrerender.png
    901 x 850 - 899K
  • Harry DresdenHarry Dresden Posts: 376
    edited February 2013

    mjc1016 said:
    Scene composed in DS3 and rendered in the standalone 3Delight...

    Great job mjc. Is there a specific reason you rendered via 3Delight externally? Or just preference?

    Post edited by Harry Dresden on
  • Dim ReaperDim Reaper Posts: 649
    edited December 1969

    Interesting thread.

    Although it wasn't mentioned in the original post, I've used Vue for the fruit bowl, as an example of an unbiased render engine. Still can't get the grapes right, but I can't spend any more time on them.


    Nice. I like the color bleed under the bowl. Sadly I gave up on the fruit bowl simply because the model imports as a single mesh in Studio with no material zones. Yes, I could open it in a modeler and set up material zones but I really don't like fruit all that much. Lol.

    Thanks. :-)

    That's about the same reason I gave up on the fruit bowl in Poser.

  • mjc1016mjc1016 Posts: 15,001
    edited December 1969

    mjc1016 said:
    Scene composed in DS3 and rendered in the standalone 3Delight...

    Great job mjc. Is there a specific reason you rendered via 3Delight externally? Or just preference?

    It's something I dumped to RIB a long time ago and have been running as a test scene in the various 3Delight standalone versions...this is done in the current free version.

    Here's a Lux with volumetric effects...

    drow1.jpg
    600 x 800 - 70K
  • Harry DresdenHarry Dresden Posts: 376
    edited December 1969

    Wait. Lux has volumetrics? Bah, screw these wannabe renderers, Imah gonna go check that stuff out.

    Lol, just kidding. So how did you do it?

  • FSMCDesignsFSMCDesigns Posts: 10,369
    edited December 1969

    Noooo. It's really not biased (there's just no escaping that pun is there?). The problem is that so far the entries are a bit one sided. And yes, people are poking fun but its all in good spirit (I hope).

    Here's the thing - I truly believe that Poser, Carrara, Bryce and Studio are all capable of rendering stunningly realistic images. The problem is nobody believes it (notibly Reality users, lol). So I'm trying to appeal to the experts in both camps to have some fun and show off. Reality is great at what it does and so is Octane. I know coz I have both. But how close can we get to those renderers if we don't have them? That is the question.

    Valid point and I agree, it has the most to do with the artist and their knowledge/skill than it does with the renderer. I have seen some amazingly realistic looking renders done in DS with 3Delight, but they are few and far between, whereas using unbiased renderers like Lux and Octane, you can get closer to realism with just a few clicks and less knowledge IMO.

  • wetcircuitwetcircuit Posts: 0
    edited December 1969


    Here's another pic with a fishyer-eyed camera... I just can't go in and add a bunch of tiny wrinkle maps. For me it is "real enough" and still renders fast enough to be used in animations (Although I would probably tone down the details for animation anyway to get better encoding results)...

    Wendy you open your challenge with one of the most difficult topics - make a realistic brown skin - however you are very close to the target, some improvements on nose and ears, the rest is very convincing imo. maybe if the model were not so fat he could be much more realistic
    Thank you, but I am not Wendy, I am Holly. LOL ;-)

    I don't know how being heavier is UN-realistic... Maybe you are not American...

    But I could always stand some improvement... Cranked up the bump on this one. I will be looking at Black men's noses and ears to see what I can do differently. I think it's all about procedural shaders being controlled with maps, rather than just hi-res maps... Still lots of work to do...

    Great thread! looking forward to seeing more pics! Especially some unbiased ones....

    Doc6.png
    450 x 600 - 213K
  • GarstorGarstor Posts: 1,411
    edited December 1969

    They are still rendering... :lol:

    BOOM!

    Damn Holly, you're on a roll this weekend. :coolgrin:

  • Hiro ProtagonistHiro Protagonist Posts: 699
    edited December 1969

    This isn't going to be much fun without some unbiased renders, so here is one. Done in Luxrender.

    Mini.jpg
    1228 x 1200 - 299K
  • GarstorGarstor Posts: 1,411
    edited December 1969

    This isn't going to be much fun without some unbiased renders, so here is one. Done in Luxrender.

    Glad to see someone stepping up on the unbiased side. Can you please add some stats about the render settings and time?

  • wetcircuitwetcircuit Posts: 0
    edited December 1969

    Chrome and pavement look nice in that Mini Cooper render! :-)

  • Harry DresdenHarry Dresden Posts: 376
    edited December 1969

    This isn't going to be much fun without some unbiased renders, so here is one. Done in Luxrender.

    Very nice render. The standard is set for car renders. ;)

  • Hiro ProtagonistHiro Protagonist Posts: 699
    edited December 1969

    Garstor said:
    This isn't going to be much fun without some unbiased renders, so here is one. Done in Luxrender.

    Glad to see someone stepping up on the unbiased side. Can you please add some stats about the render settings and time?
    Lots of settings! Anything in particular? It uses a sky IBL and a single meshlight for some fill. As to the time, I didn't record it and it was done in 2 or 3 sessions. I would have thought in excess of 10 hours, but could be more—tempus fugit, you know. The reflections are the killer, particularly in the windows, which are still a bit noisy.

Sign In or Register to comment.