forgotten in a box

[m.f.t.]

hi all,

here's a simple scene i made in 3ds max
expecting something marvelous! to happen, i modeled the emitter as a helix.

i think the image should be 'clearer' esp. the bulb and the mirror

what do you think the problem is?

a) inappropriate materials
b) i am not patient enough (4-5 hours on an e6300) (SPP 1571)
c) a higher super sampling size should be selected (4 was used)
d) any other?

thx. in advance

[pixie]

Some thin fog perhaps...

[m.f.t.]

no, there's no fog... :/

[Borgleader]

no, there's no fog... :/

And that is why he suggested to add some?

[BbB]

Main emitter behind glass = looooooong render time. Let the rays roam freely.

[zsouthboy]

Sampling through a bunch of media is a nightmare, it's going to be slow no matter what.

Simplify the emitter as much as possible (1 triangle) is pretty much all you can do to help.

EDIT: BbB beat me to it.

[m.f.t.]

ok, you're right, a very simple emiter would do too, and glass being unnecessary, but it's a little bit experimental...

(please don't let me be misunderstood)
and i'm not making a comparison
but here's another render from another unbiased renderer.

it's not a test between two, since the scenes and materials are not identical, nor the render time but results are very different.
(though both uses glass and comlicated emitter geometry.)

[suvakas]

Super sample factor 4 ? Why? It only controls the AA. Setting it to 4 renders your image 4x the size it actually is. Leave it to 2 as it is by default. Also for scene like this use MLT not Pathtrace.

[pixie]

no, there's no fog... :/

And that is why he suggested to add some?

That's what I meant. You could use nk materials for the metal and see if it improves...

[Kram1032]

"non-Indigo" isn't quite informative. If you do a render in an other engine, you should post, which engine

SSF 4 is quite unnecessary. go for 3 or even 2.
Also try to activate (will actually slow down the render but will make it look more realistic and maybe in this case better, earlier) aperture refraction... (bloom)

[m.f.t.]

since i am quite new to indigo world, i hesiteted about mentioning the renderers name.

here, the non-indigo renderer is fryrender,
i think in this case, indigo is more realistic, but fry is somehow sharper.


when i got spare time, i continue to take renders, and try to improve the image (and learn more about indigo) =)


...and, about the fog, aperture diffraction, when i manage to get a good image i can go with them, but not now...

[Kram1032]

Well, The sharpness of your render heavily depends on your AA settings.

Which filters do you use for splat and for downsize and what are the values for them?