has anyone upgraded from reality 2.5 to 4?

You found a 3d sexy girl on the net… Maybe you created one yourself … Or then you have an idea for a new pictures series… Be nice, make take advantage off it everybody…

Re: has anyone upgraded from reality 2.5 to 4?

Postby JIMMYJOHN » Wed, 15May06 06:48

lamont Sanford wrote:Forgot to post the reality 4 render, here: Image


I let this render overnight as I slept.


Hey Lamont, not trying to undermine your work, but 8 or 10 hours to end up with such a render is a joke (and a complete waste of time).
I repeat, better renders can be more easily achieved with DAZ or POSER that seem to be much more user friendly programs.
I much prefer this render:
Image
which I guess, has been made with REALITY 2.5.

I fully understand your interest in REALITY: I myself jumped on REALITY 3 as soon as I discovered its promotional renders - they do look out of this world, as you can check here: http://preta3d.com/reality-gallery/
Still, lets compare:
this car has been rendered with POSER:
Image
that one with REALITY:
Image
Not much difference in quality, eh?

So, after having spent a few hours working with REALITY 3, I've come to the conclusion that those promo renders are a "con":
It looks like they have been made by experts who fully master the program(the lights are particularly hard to understand and set up) with VERY powerful machines.
So unless you are ready to buy a very expensive pc and invest countless hours trying to get to grips with the complexities of REALITY, this program is a waste of time.
Just my 2 cents.
User avatar
JIMMYJOHN
lagoon predator
 
Posts: 173
Joined: Thu, 10Jan07 00:00

Re: has anyone upgraded from reality 2.5 to 4?

Postby Ehlanna » Thu, 15May07 00:12

LuxRender (the 'underlying' render engine that Reality is the bridge to) can be just as sensitive to light and material setups as any render engine, Firefly included. Just like with Firefly (with my VERY limited knowledge of it) and 3Delight (within Daz Studio) there are various things you can do to make render times less.
As for the promotional renders being 'cons', that is an unfair comment as any professional product will be show-cased with the best image that can be produced. The results from any un-biased render engine (LuxRender, Octane, etc.,) can look better than anything produced with Firefly, 3Delight, etc. Of course, 3Delight and Firefly can do things that LuxRender cannot as LuxRender is 'limited' to accurate representation of light.
In the end things like LuxRender (and Reality, Luxus, etc.) are just another tool in your armoury (to mix metaphors!) and you'd use the one best suited to the need. I don't use Reality/LuxRender a lot, but I do from time to time, when it is 'needed'.
Just for information, there is an upcoming release of LuxRender that makes use of 'advanced' features of Intel processors that will massively decrease render times (by a factor of up to 10, I believe) and an update to Reality that will make use of that is in the pipeline.
Ehlanna
star of the reef
 
Posts: 371
Joined: Thu, 10Apr22 23:00
Location: Looking out the screen at you ... ;)

Re: has anyone upgraded from reality 2.5 to 4?

Postby JIMMYJOHN » Thu, 15May07 20:00

Hi Ehlanna,

You're right, I was just giving my opinion (therefore subjective), based on my limited experience of LuxRender/Reality 3.
So I may be unfair but I found the whole thing very UNuser friendly and the results rather poor and inconsistent compared to the efforts you have to put in.
It may be a wonderful tool for people wiling to engage in the rather steep learning curve needed to get the best out of Reality.
That's not the case for me, I'm very happy using POSER, 3DSMax, VRAY.
And just like Lamont, as a game producer, my aim is not to make the best possible renders but to make many images - probably not of the best quality, just average ones but with consistency).
And so, I am reluctant to wait hours to make a render, not being sure of what the end result will be.
As we say, to each his own, the aim is to use the tools best suited to one's needs.

Cheers,
JJ
User avatar
JIMMYJOHN
lagoon predator
 
Posts: 173
Joined: Thu, 10Jan07 00:00

Re: has anyone upgraded from reality 2.5 to 4?

Postby paquito » Fri, 15May08 07:56

I have absolutly any knowledge about render engines, but the Mustang looks like a cheap toy....
Maybe it is only because the color, but the Aston Martin looks way better.

Maybe it's just my imagination, I don't know...
paquito
legend of the South Seas
 
Posts: 634
Joined: Tue, 14Jul01 19:56
Location: France
sex: Masculine

Re: has anyone upgraded from reality 2.5 to 4?

Postby JIMMYJOHN » Fri, 15May08 11:17

Ehlanna wrote:LuxRender (the 'underlying' render engine that Reality is the bridge to) can be just as sensitive to light and material setups as any render engine, Firefly included. Just like with Firefly (with my VERY limited knowledge of it) and 3Delight (within Daz Studio) there are various things you can do to make render times less.
As for the promotional renders being 'cons', that is an unfair comment as any professional product will be show-cased with the best image that can be produced. The results from any un-biased render engine (LuxRender, Octane, etc.,) can look better than anything produced with Firefly, 3Delight, etc. Of course, 3Delight and Firefly can do things that LuxRender cannot as LuxRender is 'limited' to accurate representation of light.
In the end things like LuxRender (and Reality, Luxus, etc.) are just another tool in your armoury (to mix metaphors!) and you'd use the one best suited to the need. I don't use Reality/LuxRender a lot, but I do from time to time, when it is 'needed'.
Just for information, there is an upcoming release of LuxRender that makes use of 'advanced' features of Intel processors that will massively decrease render times (by a factor of up to 10, I believe) and an update to Reality that will make use of that is in the pipeline.


Hey Ehlana,
Would you mind PMing me a few examples of renders you made with REALITY, if possible with the light settings you used (including the "screens" or "deflectors" - whatever they call it), and the render time they took.
Thanks.
User avatar
JIMMYJOHN
lagoon predator
 
Posts: 173
Joined: Thu, 10Jan07 00:00

Re: has anyone upgraded from reality 2.5 to 4?

Postby Ehlanna » Fri, 15May08 15:18

JIMMYJOHN wrote:Hey Ehlana,
Would you mind PMing me a few examples of renders you made with REALITY, if possible with the light settings you used (including the "screens" or "deflectors" - whatever they call it), and the render time they took.
Thanks.

I don't tend to keep track of how long the renders take, as I often twiddle with the number of cores being used as I do other stuff. But as examples:
Image
Image
I really need to do some more!
Those used a simple HDRI and one meshlight as a rim light if memory serves.
Ehlanna
star of the reef
 
Posts: 371
Joined: Thu, 10Apr22 23:00
Location: Looking out the screen at you ... ;)

Re: has anyone upgraded from reality 2.5 to 4?

Postby Ehlanna » Fri, 15May08 18:54

Ok,just did a quick and nasty one, took a little over 2 hours (running on half my cores), lighting was via IBL (one one the ones supplied with Reality)
Image
Ehlanna
star of the reef
 
Posts: 371
Joined: Thu, 10Apr22 23:00
Location: Looking out the screen at you ... ;)

Re: has anyone upgraded from reality 2.5 to 4?

Postby JIMMYJOHN » Fri, 15May08 20:49

Image

Rendered with POSER PRO on my Laptop, CPU Intel i7 quad core, RAM 8Go.
Not comparing quality here, but render time: 12 (TWELVE) MINUTES!
Thus my reluctance to learn and use REALITY.

Your Black and White renders do look great!
Do you allow me to try to photoshop them?
If I find the results OK, then I PM them to you.
User avatar
JIMMYJOHN
lagoon predator
 
Posts: 173
Joined: Thu, 10Jan07 00:00

Re: has anyone upgraded from reality 2.5 to 4?

Postby Ehlanna » Sat, 15May09 00:08

If you're willing to put in the time and effort (as with most things) then that will pay dividends on the end result and, to a degree, how fast you get there with Reality/LuxRender. I have not yet really done much in the way of boning up on the best way to do things so there's plenty of room for improvement.
By all means play around with the B&W images, post what you end up with back here?
Ehlanna
star of the reef
 
Posts: 371
Joined: Thu, 10Apr22 23:00
Location: Looking out the screen at you ... ;)

Re: has anyone upgraded from reality 2.5 to 4?

Postby JIMMYJOHN » Sat, 15May09 00:57

Image
Image

Just a quick modif on your B&W images.
But maye it's completely wrong, a treason to what your intentions were: keeping them soft and mellow.

I'd love to learn LUX:REALITY, but for that I'd need much more time than I have.
After a few years of practice, I only start to know how to use POSER - more or less.
Still, it takes me around a year to illustrate a game 'that comprises several hundred images - lets say between 4 and 5 hundred).
At one point or another, despite our wishes, we end up being caught by the principle of reality...(no pun intended ;-).
User avatar
JIMMYJOHN
lagoon predator
 
Posts: 173
Joined: Thu, 10Jan07 00:00

Re: has anyone upgraded from reality 2.5 to 4?

Postby Ehlanna » Sat, 15May09 02:12

The intent was a dark-ish effect. What your postwork has done has highlighted a seam issue at the foot/leg boundary on the man ;)
Use whatever you are happy with is my rule of thumb. Personally I cannot get along with Poser, but that's me. I'm also not wholly happy with Daz Studio and what it can and cannot do. Such is life ;)
Ehlanna
star of the reef
 
Posts: 371
Joined: Thu, 10Apr22 23:00
Location: Looking out the screen at you ... ;)

Re: has anyone upgraded from reality 2.5 to 4?

Postby JIMMYJOHN » Sat, 15May09 04:15

That's basically it: a few filters for brightness, contrast and sharpness.

The very moment I was making the modifs, I knew I was doing something wrong (as if I was reading your artistic mind).
But I had to make them anyway... ;)
User avatar
JIMMYJOHN
lagoon predator
 
Posts: 173
Joined: Thu, 10Jan07 00:00

Re: has anyone upgraded from reality 2.5 to 4?

Postby Ehlanna » Sat, 15May09 12:01

JIMMYJOHN wrote:That's basically it: a few filters for brightness, contrast and sharpness.

The very moment I was making the modifs, I knew I was doing something wrong (as if I was reading your artistic mind).
But I had to make them anyway... ;)

The changes look good, they alter and lighten the mood of the images. And postwork is another thing I do not really get on with! ;)
Ehlanna
star of the reef
 
Posts: 371
Joined: Thu, 10Apr22 23:00
Location: Looking out the screen at you ... ;)

Re: has anyone upgraded from reality 2.5 to 4?

Postby JIMMYJOHN » Sat, 15May09 23:35

I don't know what you do exactly (RAGS games, innit?), but believe me, when you makes loads of images, postwork can be crucial: to save an image that has a bad poke though or a wrong back facing polygon. It can even greatly improve a whole scene of badly lit images.

Anyway, CGI is fascinating: we more or less use the same tools.
When we start using them we just try to get on with the basics and produce something.
Then, the more we learn to use the tools, the more we become able to represent what we have in mind.
This, until the final objective which is to create our own STYLE.
The ultimate CGI artist are the persons who have developed a unique style, recognizable at first sight.
I won't cite names but I know a few of those artists, they are the ones I admire most and wish to emulate.

Take care,
JJ
User avatar
JIMMYJOHN
lagoon predator
 
Posts: 173
Joined: Thu, 10Jan07 00:00

Re: has anyone upgraded from reality 2.5 to 4?

Postby Ehlanna » Sun, 15May10 03:34

JIMMYJOHN wrote:I don't know what you do exactly (RAGS games, innit?), but believe me, when you makes loads of images, postwork can be crucial: to save an image that has a bad poke though or a wrong back facing polygon. It can even greatly improve a whole scene of badly lit images.

Anyway, CGI is fascinating: we more or less use the same tools.
When we start using them we just try to get on with the basics and produce something.
Then, the more we learn to use the tools, the more we become able to represent what we have in mind.
This, until the final objective which is to create our own STYLE.
The ultimate CGI artist are the persons who have developed a unique style, recognizable at first sight.
I won't cite names but I know a few of those artists, they are the ones I admire most and wish to emulate.

Take care,
JJ

I have done a couple of RAGS games, but that was before I got back into messing about with Daz Studio so they use photos *ahem cough* borrowed from the web ;)
I know what you mean, there are a few CG artists out there who produce stunning work!
Ehlanna
star of the reef
 
Posts: 371
Joined: Thu, 10Apr22 23:00
Location: Looking out the screen at you ... ;)

PreviousNext

Return to Sexy girls

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests

eXTReMe Tracker