Get feedback from others on your works in progress
-
johanjohan
- Posts: 43
- Joined: Wed Sep 13, 2006 3:33 pm
- Location: New Caledonia
Post
by johanjohan » Tue Oct 10, 2006 11:59 pm
Hi!
I post my picture
with Blender 2.42a and Indigo 0.62
linux Ubuntu flubox
(with mix of 3 renders)
original with soft shadow (40hours and 32000.00000 mutations /sec) :
and with hard shadow (10hours and 23000.00000 mutations /sec) :
thanks for regards
Johan
-
Kosmokrator
- Posts: 1141
- Joined: Sat Jul 29, 2006 11:52 am
- Location: Greece-Athens
Post
by Kosmokrator » Wed Oct 11, 2006 12:03 am
i prefer the hard shadow version...with some litle adjustments u have perfect photorealism!indigo rocks once more time!
1)Core i7 965XE stock CLOCK ,PSU:CHIEFTEC 850W
M/B ASUS P6T DELUXE,WATERCOOLING ZALMAN RESERATOR 2
MEMORY:6GB CORRSAIR @1600,Ati HD 4870x2,
MONITOR:LG 1950SQ,CASE:THERMALTAKE SOPRANO
-
manitwo
- Posts: 1029
- Joined: Wed Jul 05, 2006 4:50 am
- Location: Tirol - Austria
Post
by manitwo » Wed Oct 11, 2006 12:10 am
again exellent work johanjohan
i prefer the first pic, but i would make the part in the sunlight much brighter.
... and think about the floor. (tiling)
i'm looking forward - keep it up

-
eman7613
- Posts: 597
- Joined: Sat Sep 16, 2006 2:52 pm
Post
by eman7613 » Wed Oct 11, 2006 1:53 am
nice room, how much the rent? good job!
Yes i know, my spelling sucks
-
johanjohan
- Posts: 43
- Joined: Wed Sep 13, 2006 3:33 pm
- Location: New Caledonia
Post
by johanjohan » Thu Nov 09, 2006 5:24 pm
Hi!
I update my picture
17h30 with Indigo 0.6t6
network render > Dualcore T7200 XP Home + DualXeon 2*2,4Ghz Linux Ubuntu
81000.00000 mut/sec
the first (original no postprod) :
and the second (with postprod):
thanks for your regards
Johan
-
skypa
- Posts: 103
- Joined: Tue Oct 24, 2006 11:38 pm
- Location: Germany / Berlin
Post
by skypa » Thu Nov 09, 2006 5:47 pm
The floor texture looks really stretched.
-
OnoSendai

- Posts: 6244
- Joined: Sat May 20, 2006 6:16 pm
- Location: Wellington, NZ
-
Contact:
Post
by OnoSendai » Fri Nov 10, 2006 8:36 pm
Some crits:
* needs some DOF

, the doorframe in the foreground should be blurred, especially in these relatively low light dusk conditions.
* you need to use more polys to achieve true photorealism - the sofa and cushions need some creases for example.
* consider using a very subtle bump map on the floor
-
johanjohan
- Posts: 43
- Joined: Wed Sep 13, 2006 3:33 pm
- Location: New Caledonia
Post
by johanjohan » Fri Nov 10, 2006 10:51 pm
Yes, very cool comments OnoSendai San

because I can to learn the new tips
* for the DOF, it will not easy to find the good DOF, because its just the doorframe in the background but the tableglass should be not blurred
* its more easy to me to have more polygons with sofa and cushions
* and I learn how to do bump map on the forum
thanks
Johan
-
zsouthboy
- Posts: 1395
- Joined: Fri Oct 13, 2006 5:12 am
Post
by zsouthboy » Sat Nov 11, 2006 8:04 am
johanjohan:
To get the DOF you need, and keep the doorframe blurry, you'll need to change the focus.
There IS an aperture and focus setting that will do what you want.
Were I using a camera to photograph this, I'd stop down to probably f/11, and focus BEYOND that table, probably on the back wall or further, so that the doorframe is far enough from the focal plane to be blurred. Set your Indigo settings similarly - focus beyond, and change the aperture (the exact amount will depend on the camera lens length setting) to a higher number.
Off-topic slightly, but - does it bother anyone else when someone says "you need more DOF", in this situation?
It's not that they need more DOF (which at this point is ∞), they need less!
Not singling you out Ono, because I know you know the correct terminology.
-
OnoSendai

- Posts: 6244
- Joined: Sat May 20, 2006 6:16 pm
- Location: Wellington, NZ
-
Contact:
Post
by OnoSendai » Sat Nov 11, 2006 5:04 pm
zsouthboy wrote:
It's not that they need more DOF (which at this point is ∞), they need less!
Not singling you out Ono, because I know you know the correct terminology.
Hehe.. good point. I guess I should have said, 'needs more off-focal plane blur' or something like that

But i think everyone knows what I meant

Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 25 guests