Post Your Renders like it's the year 2020!!!

14243454748100

Comments

  • magaremotomagaremoto Posts: 1,226
    edited November 2017

    after few adjustments, and less bumps, this w.i.p. shot took "only" 7 mins - no postwork (but huge pre-work)

    7.jpg
    4800 x 1940 - 2M
    Post edited by magaremoto on
  • evilproducerevilproducer Posts: 9,040
    edited November 2017

    It's been awhile, so I figured I post something I just did. I needed a stress break from life and popped open Carrara to work on an idea I've had since last year. I used many render passes and composited in Affinity Photo. Seems just as powerful as Photoshop, but for about $60.00.

    I call it The Fire Spirit.

    I used a V4 with a shaowcatcher applied to her, then surface replicated a small vertex ember model on her body. I also did the same with the hair model. I then set up two particle emitters for the hair and body model and used duplicates of the ember model for the sparks. I set up the scene to get the lighting, then hid the V4, hair, and surface replicators, but not the particle emitters, and rendered the scene with the many render passes.

    I saved a duplicate copy of the scene, deleted all of the other objects with the exception of the V4, hair. both surface replicators, fire ring stones and logs, and then I applied a shadow catcher to those models that didn't have on already, except the ember models. I then enabled the Render Alpha Channel option in the renderer, plus added a glow render pass, post effect pass, etc. and rendered.

    In Affinity Photo, I combined the V4 and hair render with the main scene render, used the render passes to enhance some of the effects like transluncy in the plants, and help the glow effect.

    So why the shadow catchers and not alpha in the shader, or toggled off visibility for the figure? Well, I tried that, and then you can see ALL of the embers in the replicator all around the body. It makes it look like a visual mess. Since a shadowcatcher also acts as a mask for anything that passes behind it, only those replicated embers in view of the camera are rendered. It lookd much cleaner.
     

    Fire Spirit-raw.jpg
    2276 x 1280 - 3M
    Fire spirit- with buffers.jpg
    2276 x 1280 - 3M
    Post edited by evilproducer on
  • DartanbeckDartanbeck Posts: 21,224

    So why the shadow catchers and not alpha in the shader, or toggled off visibility for the figure? Well, I tried that, and then you can see ALL of the embers in the replicator all around the body. It makes it look like a visual mess. Since a shadowcatcher also acts as a mask for anything that passes behind it, only those replicated embers in view of the camera are rendered. It lookd much cleaner.

    Very cool technique. Both versions look great (allow me to blow them up a bit)

     

    It's been awhile

    Yes! Glad to see you pop in with your skills, my friend!

    Welcome Home! 

  • DiomedeDiomede Posts: 15,079

    Beautiful render, EP.  Glad to see you posting.  Hope the render eased your stress level.

  • evilproducerevilproducer Posts: 9,040
    edited November 2017

    So why the shadow catchers and not alpha in the shader, or toggled off visibility for the figure? Well, I tried that, and then you can see ALL of the embers in the replicator all around the body. It makes it look like a visual mess. Since a shadowcatcher also acts as a mask for anything that passes behind it, only those replicated embers in view of the camera are rendered. It lookd much cleaner.

    Very cool technique. Both versions look great 

     

     

     

    It's been awhile

    Yes! Glad to see you pop in with your skills, my friend!

    Welcome Home! 

    I forgot to mention that I used Dart's Starry Skies product as well. Oh, the sparks are the same emitters and forces I used to make the dissolving text in my last video I showed you. Same replicator too.

    Post edited by evilproducer on
  • Diomede said:

    Beautiful render, EP.  Glad to see you posting.  Hope the render eased your stress level.

    Thanks! It did ease it bit.

  • StezzaStezza Posts: 7,801

    cool use of replicators EP

    looks real good yes

  • HeadwaxHeadwax Posts: 9,924

    welcome back Evil - you havent lost your touch for brilliance

  • Very cool render EP.  Wish it was in the last Challenge.  A fiery pinup!

    And thanks for the directions, although they were mostly over my head (not your fault).

  • DiomedeDiomede Posts: 15,079
    edited November 2017

    Here is a render with some of the stuff I picked up in the Black Friday sale.  Ambie for G2F, Ringo's shaders for Ambie, Ivy Dress, and Butterfly Wings.  Pixie dust seemed like a natural.

    ambie as tinkerbell.jpg
    1600 x 1321 - 560K
    Post edited by Diomede on
  • DartanbeckDartanbeck Posts: 21,224
    edited November 2017

    Low-Quality render settings of my initial scene start of Petipet's SciFi Hangar - just starting the shaders and lights - consolidating and such. For the PBR style maps, I use "S" in Highlight, Normal as Normal in Bump, then I take note of the level given in the Shininess channel, load the "M" map into Shininess and set the brightness of the image to whatever that nuber was, which basically crushes the whites to that value - make that value the max Shininess. In other words, if I set my shiniest materials at a shininess value of 50, for example, I'd set the brightness of the map to 50.

    No time, so I have to quickly grab a test render and save the scene, which is a bummer because higher quality Object, shadow and AA settings would certainly make it look a lot nicer. I likely overused some simple filters in post, but oh well for this quick thing.

    I just wanted to show the wonders of this set. It looks really expansive because I used a very wide lens. 35mm I believe. 

    SciFi Hanger 1a.jpg
    1280 x 720 - 282K
    Post edited by Dartanbeck on
  • UnifiedBrainUnifiedBrain Posts: 3,588
    edited November 2017

    Wow!  That's quite a set.  Excellent realism there, Dart.  Don't understand all the various maps yet.  Maybe down the road.

    Post edited by UnifiedBrain on
  • TangoAlphaTangoAlpha Posts: 4,584

    That's impressive. I'm sure I've got that set - it's one of many that I've bought over the years but never opened!

    BTW, shininess is also the inverse of roughness. So if you have a pbr roughness map (common in Iray sets), you can use that in the shininess channel, with the invert box checked.

    Similarly, if you have a specular map (sometimes "_S"), that'll work in the highlight channel. In Substance Painter, you can add Specular as an extra channel that gets exported.

    Becuse Carrara isn't a PBR renderer, you'll probably still have to tweak the levels to get it looking how you want. But that's all part of the fun! wink

  • PhilWPhilW Posts: 5,139

    EP - wonderful work, very original and the final effect is spectacular!

    Dart - awesome looking set and wonderful work in rendering it!

  • DartanbeckDartanbeck Posts: 21,224

    That's impressive. I'm sure I've got that set - it's one of many that I've bought over the years but never opened!

    BTW, shininess is also the inverse of roughness. So if you have a pbr roughness map (common in Iray sets), you can use that in the shininess channel, with the invert box checked.

    Similarly, if you have a specular map (sometimes "_S"), that'll work in the highlight channel. In Substance Painter, you can add Specular as an extra channel that gets exported.

    Becuse Carrara isn't a PBR renderer, you'll probably still have to tweak the levels to get it looking how you want. But that's all part of the fun! wink

    It really is!

    ...and just to add, the "_m" maps are for what PBR renders call "Metalness", or how metalic the material is. So when used with an "_s" map in the Highlight channel and "_m" in Shininess, we get a more accurate representation of what the artist intended for how shiny a material is. Again, with some tweaking as mentioned earlier.

    Being that "_m" is for metalness, we could also use that (I would lower the brightness in this case as well) in the reflection channel. For my speed-renders, I try to avoid reflection in my meterials unless I either want to see a reflection in it, or it is really essential to the look.

  • TangoAlphaTangoAlpha Posts: 4,584

    Metals mixed in with other materials on a texture sheet are a real pig! (unless they've been separated out into their own shading domains, but often that isn't the case). The metallic map works kind of like a mask (white=metal, black=not), and with that in mind you can use it to drive mixers and multipliers with the other maps and channels. 

  • DartanbeckDartanbeck Posts: 21,224

    Metals mixed in with other materials on a texture sheet are a real pig! (unless they've been separated out into their own shading domains, but often that isn't the case). The metallic map works kind of like a mask (white=metal, black=not), and with that in mind you can use it to drive mixers and multipliers with the other maps and channels. 

    Exactly. In my own work, I like to keep the materials separate. But in the case as above, Petipet (Stonemason is also a genius at this) is able to very efficiently manage several types of surfaces in a single full map size - even if it crosses many domains. So we end up using less shaders for all of the various domains - if that makes any sense. It does to me.

    Anyway, I love how he makes his kits work in this way. Reminds me of a lot of the Stonemason stuff I've examined - in complete awe. 

  • TangoAlphaTangoAlpha Posts: 4,584

    You could always use the metallic map as a background in the UV room, and use that as a guide for selecting the metallic polys an create extra domains . . .

  • DartanbeckDartanbeck Posts: 21,224

    You could always use the metallic map as a background in the UV room, and use that as a guide for selecting the metallic polys an create extra domains . . .

    But why, if we have a map? ;)

    Thing is, I'm often seeing that the individual domains are there. But instead of having to either use a separate map or a separate shader which uses the same map, with the Metalness map we can have a single shader for everything that uses that color map, which I love!

    But if we need separation, the ability to do so is always there.

    In fact, I find myself adding new domains to things once in a while. I actually didn't know if that would have a negative affect on certain content. But it doesn't. UV mapping remains the same, we just get a nice new material zone to play with! Sometimes that's the best way to tweak things to one's liking!

  • TangoAlphaTangoAlpha Posts: 4,584

    Creating the domain lets you do stuff that's off map (procedural shaders for example, or adding effects etc, or to use a common shader). It's an option. wink

  • DartanbeckDartanbeck Posts: 21,224

    Creating the domain lets you do stuff that's off map (procedural shaders for example, or adding effects etc, or to use a common shader). It's an optionwink

    ...and a Wonderful option at that! yes

  • VyusurVyusur Posts: 2,235
    edited December 2017

    I was so much impressed by Dart's render of hangar that couldn't resist to try to render it myself.

    hangar-001.jpg
    1000 x 667 - 1M
    Hangar-04.jpg
    1000 x 667 - 1M
    Post edited by Vyusur on
  • DartanbeckDartanbeck Posts: 21,224

    I like yours a LOT better!!! :)

  • Some wonderful work being created here.

  • VyusurVyusur Posts: 2,235
    edited December 2017

    I like yours a LOT better!!! :)

    Anyway I am mesmerized by yours. Your render was made by native engine but mine was rendered by Octane.

     

    Post edited by Vyusur on
  • PhilWPhilW Posts: 5,139
    Vyusur said:

    I like yours a LOT better!!! :)

    Anyway I am mesmerized by yours. Your render was made by native engine but mine was rendered by Octane.

     

    They BOTH look superb!

  • PhilW said:
    Vyusur said:

    I like yours a LOT better!!! :)

    Anyway I am mesmerized by yours. Your render was made by native engine but mine was rendered by Octane.

     

    They BOTH look superb!

    +1, as the kids say. laugh

    I've often thought that a fun challenge (not for prizes or anything) would be to pick or create some scene that everyone has (or can get for free) and see how different people light (and possibly rexture) it.

  • MDO2010 said:
    PhilW said:
    Vyusur said:

     

    Anyway I am mesmerized by yours. Your render was made by native engine but mine was rendered by Octane.

     

    They BOTH look superb!

    +1, as the kids say. laugh

    I've often thought that a fun challenge (not for prizes or anything) would be to pick or create some scene that everyone has (or can get for free) and see how different people light (and possibly rexture) it.

    It used to be done at 3DRender see http://www.3drender.com/challenges/. I enjoyed it a lot at the time,  tried it on my own, but never dared to post anything. Anyhow, models are still available for another challenge devil

  • VyusurVyusur Posts: 2,235

    Maybe it's better to take something from everyone's DS content, Level 19 for example, and render it?

  • Philemo said:
    MDO2010 said:
    PhilW said:
    Vyusur said:

     

    Anyway I am mesmerized by yours. Your render was made by native engine but mine was rendered by Octane.

     

    They BOTH look superb!

    +1, as the kids say. laugh

    I've often thought that a fun challenge (not for prizes or anything) would be to pick or create some scene that everyone has (or can get for free) and see how different people light (and possibly rexture) it.

    It used to be done at 3DRender see http://www.3drender.com/challenges/. I enjoyed it a lot at the time,  tried it on my own, but never dared to post anything. Anyhow, models are still available for another challenge devil

    Philemo, that is an awesome link!  Thank you very much for posting.

This discussion has been closed.