Re: RS is way too much flexible and powerful for it's users.
You guys really make 3D sound so difficult I'm wondering why you don't paint everything by hand? I was visiting an architect university in St. Petersburg last year, and the students there drew everything by hand and it was amazing! Haven't seen a rendered picture that compares to what they did. Or, why don't you just make the models in 3D and finish the GI by hand? The render time should be very low for the models only and if you really know the GI like you say you do, painting it with Gimp/Photoshop shouldn't take long. And you get exactly what you want In my opinion template scenes is a poor solution. It gives the picture made from a template stamp. Good for lazy people who really don't care about the final result. -Jouni 2010/7/25 Jean-Sebastien Perron j...@neuroworld.ws: The maxwell renderer demo reel says it all : beautiful images, no animation. And the few animations have noises moving around. RS must offer a way to use stand alone renderers (that is really important). For now there is not one efficient standard way of communicating with a renderer. All of them use all sorts of undocumented SDL (scene description language) or worst : binary or .dll But I don't agree that the RS renderer is not good enough. It is perfect, just not what some need right now. What is needed is a perfect GI button or template scene (Seriously) like Strata3D. Strata3D do all the setup for you with predefined scenes. Procedural materials will always have AA problems, textures never will. The problems found in RS are the same encounter in Renderman. Pixar renderman generate a lot of lighting glitches that need to be corrected by hand for example. Contrary to Renderman, all these small (look at me) stand alone renderers are not production ready. To create beautiful images with renderman you need a lot of work. In renderman there is no GI, only the mathematical function to code it yourself inside your shaders. By reading and experimenting a lot with Renderman, I found that it has a lot of similarities with RS. RS can make images as beautiful as any other renderer on the market. For that you need to understand rendering, lighting, shading and RS a little deeper. And that is what most RS users are not ready to invest time in. Don't blame the car, blame the driver. It's not fair to compare RS to other renderers. RS is a pure Raytracer. Like any methods there are pros and cons. Contrary to many other 3d app, RS does not offer decent scene setup and materials right from the start : you have to do it all from scratch. Prepare for the flames and the usual offended : ) Jean-Sebastien Perron www.NeuroWorld.ws
Re: RS is way too much flexible and powerful for it's users.
Sorry Jouni but I agree with you. I find the continuing discovery in RS an invigorating part of the day to day drawing. I dont wont short-cuts.. I hold GI and AO poor excuses for actually seeing what has to happen with actual lighting objects. The old lighting guys in studios had far more limitations and yet they understood their trade, their craft. An app that does it all without me needing to turn the computer on is only going to do what everyone else is doing. The open access to almost everything is the way it should be. Etc. Lol, rant over (for now) Neil Cooke From: Jouni Hätinen jouni.hati...@iki.fi To: user-list@light.realsoft3d.com Sent: Sun, 25 July, 2010 7:19:04 PM Subject: Re: RS is way too much flexible and powerful for it's users. You guys really make 3D sound so difficult I'm wondering why you don't paint everything by hand? I was visiting an architect university in St. Petersburg last year, and the students there drew everything by hand and it was amazing! Haven't seen a rendered picture that compares to what they did. Or, why don't you just make the models in 3D and finish the GI by hand? The render time should be very low for the models only and if you really know the GI like you say you do, painting it with Gimp/Photoshop shouldn't take long. And you get exactly what you want In my opinion template scenes is a poor solution. It gives the picture made from a template stamp. Good for lazy people who really don't care about the final result. -Jouni 2010/7/25 Jean-Sebastien Perron j...@neuroworld.ws: The maxwell renderer demo reel says it all : beautiful images, no animation. And the few animations have noises moving around. RS must offer a way to use stand alone renderers (that is really important). For now there is not one efficient standard way of communicating with a renderer. All of them use all sorts of undocumented SDL (scene description language) or worst : binary or .dll But I don't agree that the RS renderer is not good enough. It is perfect, just not what some need right now. What is needed is a perfect GI button or template scene (Seriously) like Strata3D. Strata3D do all the setup for you with predefined scenes. Procedural materials will always have AA problems, textures never will. The problems found in RS are the same encounter in Renderman. Pixar renderman generate a lot of lighting glitches that need to be corrected by hand for example. Contrary to Renderman, all these small (look at me) stand alone renderers are not production ready. To create beautiful images with renderman you need a lot of work. In renderman there is no GI, only the mathematical function to code it yourself inside your shaders. By reading and experimenting a lot with Renderman, I found that it has a lot of similarities with RS. RS can make images as beautiful as any other renderer on the market. For that you need to understand rendering, lighting, shading and RS a little deeper. And that is what most RS users are not ready to invest time in. Don't blame the car, blame the driver. It's not fair to compare RS to other renderers. RS is a pure Raytracer. Like any methods there are pros and cons. Contrary to many other 3d app, RS does not offer decent scene setup and materials right from the start : you have to do it all from scratch. Prepare for the flames and the usual offended : ) Jean-Sebastien Perron www.NeuroWorld.ws
RE: RS is way too much flexible and powerful for its users.
Ok I think the topic is shifting here and becoming blurred with opinions of what art and talent are. Jean thanks for your feedback, god I miss Gary sometimes J The only point made was the rendering quality is low standard by comparison to many renderers out there. Pure and simple after whatever talent is applied, the quality output is better elsewhere. Granted there may be more proficient and talented artists elsewhere, but fundamentally it is not possible to get similar results now in Realsoft. Vray for example, is a good all rounder and offers a better and quicker animation solution too. We are getting left behind, simple as that. How you use the tool is up to you and your ability, but for most the render output quality is essential, especially when using a 3D app for work, as client are educated now and see the difference. Jouni and Neil, As for the suggestion to hand paint a blank 3d model to look more real in a production environment is impractical. From a hobbyist point of view, this may be interesting for some to explore, but this was not the discussion and I would disagree that your eye can make every calculation of light ray bounce and ambiance more realistically by hand. Best regards, Jason From: owner-l...@light.realsoft3d.com [mailto:owner-l...@light.realsoft3d.com] On Behalf Of Neil Cooke Sent: Sunday, July 25, 2010 8:36 AM To: user-list@light.realsoft3d.com Subject: Re: RS is way too much flexible and powerful for it's users. Sorry Jouni but I agree with you. I find the continuing discovery in RS an invigorating part of the day to day drawing. I dont wont short-cuts. I hold GI and AO poor excuses for actually seeing what has to happen with actual lighting objects. The old lighting guys in studios had far more limitations and yet they understood their trade, their craft. An app that does it all without me needing to turn the computer on is only going to do what everyone else is doing. The open access to almost everything is the way it should be. Etc. Lol, rant over (for now) Neil Cooke _ From: Jouni Hätinen jouni.hati...@iki.fi To: user-list@light.realsoft3d.com Sent: Sun, 25 July, 2010 7:19:04 PM Subject: Re: RS is way too much flexible and powerful for it's users. You guys really make 3D sound so difficult I'm wondering why you don't paint everything by hand? I was visiting an architect university in St. Petersburg last year, and the students there drew everything by hand and it was amazing! Haven't seen a rendered picture that compares to what they did. Or, why don't you just make the models in 3D and finish the GI by hand? The render time should be very low for the models only and if you really know the GI like you say you do, painting it with Gimp/Photoshop shouldn't take long. And you get exactly what you want In my opinion template scenes is a poor solution. It gives the picture made from a template stamp. Good for lazy people who really don't care about the final result. -Jouni 2010/7/25 Jean-Sebastien Perron j...@neuroworld.ws: The maxwell renderer demo reel says it all : beautiful images, no animation. And the few animations have noises moving around. RS must offer a way to use stand alone renderers (that is really important).. For now there is not one efficient standard way of communicating with a renderer. All of them use all sorts of undocumented SDL (scene description language) or worst : binary or .dll But I don't agree that the RS renderer is not good enough. It is perfect, just not what some need right now. What is needed is a perfect GI button or template scene (Seriously) like Strata3D. Strata3D do all the setup for you with predefined scenes. Procedural materials will always have AA problems, textures never will. The problems found in RS are the same encounter in Renderman. Pixar renderman generate a lot of lighting glitches that need to be corrected by hand for example. Contrary to Renderman, all these small (look at me) stand alone renderers are not production ready. To create beautiful images with renderman you need a lot of work. In renderman there is no GI, only the mathematical function to code it yourself inside your shaders. By reading and experimenting a lot with Renderman, I found that it has a lot of similarities with RS. RS can make images as beautiful as any other renderer on the market. For that you need to understand rendering, lighting, shading and RS a little deeper. And that is what most RS users are not ready to invest time in. Don't blame the car, blame the driver. It's not fair to compare RS to other renderers. RS is a pure Raytracer. Like any methods there are pros and cons. Contrary to many other 3d app, RS does not offer decent scene setup and materials right from the start : you have to do it all from scratch. Prepare for the flames and the usual offended : ) Jean-Sebastien Perron www.NeuroWorld.ws
RE: RS is way too much flexible and powerful for its users.
Thanks Neil, As long as we all have lead in our pencils we will always use em :) All the best Jason -Original Message- From: owner-l...@light.realsoft3d.com [mailto:owner-l...@light.realsoft3d.com] On Behalf Of n...@neilcookegraphics.co.nz Sent: Sunday, July 25, 2010 3:34 PM To: user-list@light.realsoft3d.com Subject: RE: RS is way too much flexible and powerful for its users. You're not wrong Jason IMO, I couldnt know what I'm missing but I still like to rave about the pencil I have ... it's the best I've ever had. Lol. Neil Cooke On Sun, 25 Jul 2010 11:27:51 +0100, Jason Saunders j...@pixelperfect.co.uk wrote: Ok I think the topic is shifting here and becoming blurred with opinions of what art and talent are. Jean thanks for your feedback, god I miss Gary sometimes J The only point made was the rendering quality is low standard by comparison to many renderers out there. Pure and simple after whatever talent is applied, the quality output is better elsewhere. Granted there may be more proficient and talented artists elsewhere, but fundamentally it is not possible to get similar results now in Realsoft. Vray for example, is a good all rounder and offers a better and quicker animation solution too. We are getting left behind, simple as that. How you use the tool is up to you and your ability, but for most the render output quality is essential, especially when using a 3D app for work, as client are educated now and see the difference. Jouni and Neil, As for the suggestion to hand paint a blank 3d model to look more real in a production environment is impractical. From a hobbyist point of view, this may be interesting for some to explore, but this was not the discussion and I would disagree that your eye can make every calculation of light ray bounce and ambiance more realistically by hand. Best regards, Jason From: owner-l...@light.realsoft3d.com [mailto:owner-l...@light.realsoft3d.com] On Behalf Of Neil Cooke Sent: Sunday, July 25, 2010 8:36 AM To: user-list@light.realsoft3d.com Subject: Re: RS is way too much flexible and powerful for it's users. Sorry Jouni but I agree with you. I find the continuing discovery in RS an invigorating part of the day to day drawing. I dont wont short-cuts. I hold GI and AO poor excuses for actually seeing what has to happen with actual lighting objects. The old lighting guys in studios had far more limitations and yet they understood their trade, their craft. An app that does it all without me needing to turn the computer on is only going to do what everyone else is doing. The open access to almost everything is the way it should be. Etc. Lol, rant over (for now) Neil Cooke _ From: Jouni H�tinen jouni.hati...@iki.fi To: user-list@light.realsoft3d.com Sent: Sun, 25 July, 2010 7:19:04 PM Subject: Re: RS is way too much flexible and powerful for it's users. You guys really make 3D sound so difficult I'm wondering why you don't paint everything by hand? I was visiting an architect university in St. Petersburg last year, and the students there drew everything by hand and it was amazing! Haven't seen a rendered picture that compares to what they did. Or, why don't you just make the models in 3D and finish the GI by hand? The render time should be very low for the models only and if you really know the GI like you say you do, painting it with Gimp/Photoshop shouldn't take long. And you get exactly what you want In my opinion template scenes is a poor solution. It gives the picture made from a template stamp. Good for lazy people who really don't care about the final result. -Jouni 2010/7/25 Jean-Sebastien Perron j...@neuroworld.ws: The maxwell renderer demo reel says it all : beautiful images, no animation. And the few animations have noises moving around. RS must offer a way to use stand alone renderers (that is really important).. For now there is not one efficient standard way of communicating with a renderer. All of them use all sorts of undocumented SDL (scene description language) or worst : binary or .dll But I don't agree that the RS renderer is not good enough. It is perfect, just not what some need right now. What is needed is a perfect GI button or template scene (Seriously) like Strata3D. Strata3D do all the setup for you with predefined scenes. Procedural materials will always have AA problems, textures never will. The problems found in RS are the same encounter in Renderman. Pixar renderman generate a lot of lighting glitches that need to be corrected by hand for example. Contrary to Renderman, all these small (look at me) stand alone renderers are not production ready. To create beautiful images with renderman you need a lot of work. In renderman there is no GI, only the mathematical function to code it
