Re: [nbos] 3D medieval cityDennisdutton Fri Oct 5th, 2012
I'm afraid I agree while disagreeing. First, what is photorealism? It is making a piece of art look as if was a real photograph, which consists much more in the art then in the technique, how can you tell what looks real when you never look around yourself?
Number of polygons, however, is much more technique than art, IMHO.
For example, many say the more pixels per inch makes it more real. I have experimented with various values and found 200 DPI to be sufficient to my needs (and I've had people ask me if some of my pictures are real.)
Also, those who are always chasing the latest and greatest software and models, never learn to use any of them to any effect, which is why I stick with Poser 6, Bryce 6 and Photoshop CS4 software and Poser 4 models, they are what work for me.
Bill Fleming, the best author on the subject, says photorealism consists of ten parts:
1, clutter and chaos
2. Personality and expectations
4. Surface texture
6. Dirt, dust and rust
7. Flaws, scratches and dings
8. Beveled edges
9. Object material depth
I'm still learning most of this but what I'm trying the discuss on these lists is mostly #2. For example, I've heard people relate to you in medieval society according to your class status and that is determined by your appearance, so what are the specifics? In Harn materials, that appears to be the fabric and textures of the clothes you wear (supposidely that includes style as well but since I'm not a modeler and must deal with what I can find I'm still working on that) so undyed serge wool is peasantry, faded solid colored russet wool is freeborn and bright colors and patterns, expensive materials are for gentry. What about body language and postures? How does the different qualities of wool look different?
#3 believability consists of including some complicated object that everyone is familiar with and can relate to other objects, again I'm still working on this and the best I can suggest off the cuff is an animal such as cat, dog, pig or horse. For this I need more research on symbolism that has developed such as animal reactions and flower symbolism.
Anyways you can see the directions of my studies.
Khaire, Theoros Dennis
Iereus ekathbolou Dionysus
Demarkhos, Demos Hellenotamiai
On Oct 5, 2012, at 1:12 AM, Andrew Staples <andy.staples-at-gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Dennis, good to see you on this list as well.
> Number of people (and livestock) is likely to be imited by the number
> of polygons rather than 'realism'. The reality would depend on time of
> day and time of year (I'd expect more people when the caravans are in
> As to photorealism, well, I'm not intimate with the software you're
> using - I think you said DAZ Studio, Bryce and Sketchup; I use Poser
> Pro, Vue Infinite and Zbrush. But, in general, how photoreal you get
> will depend on the lighting models available to you, and the shaders
> you use.
> As a minimum, you'll need some kind of indirect lighting, such as
> global illumination or, better, radiosity. I don't know if any of the
> software you use has that as an option, but Studio does have the
> Reality plug-in to push scenes through the Lux render engine. That's
> an unbiased renderer (ie, it uses real-world physics, rather than
> simplified models of physics and shortcuts like most render engines
> today), so it'll take time to render.
> As to shaders, it's unlikely that anytthing will work straight out of
> the box. You'll ned to do some research on the optical properties of
> the materials you want (how much diffuse light, how much translucence,
> how much specular and the like), then get down and dirty in the
> material rooms of your scene-builders. In most cases, you'll have to
> make compromises.
> Oh. and while I mention dirty, you'll want to make sure your
> materials have some dirt on them, and use bump or displacement maps to
> remove most of the hard, straight lines and edges.
> Once you've done all that, you'll want to play with your render
> settings to make sure you've set your engine to include any advanced
> shader techniques you're using but not ones you aren't (don't waste
> valuable CPU resources). A touch of depth of field and a bit of film
> grain will help as well. Use gamma correctioin if it's available to
> you, postwork it if not.
> Sit back, render away for anything betwwen 2-3 hours and 2-3 days, and
> then see how well you did your shaders.
> Those are the general tips for photorealism; not knowing your
> software, I can't give you anything more specific. What I can tell you
> is that setting all that up takes knowledge and time. Deciding where
> to compromise takes skill. Most home users don't have enough
> knowledge, time or skill to do it properly, which is why many people
> dismiss home 3D as push-button art. An awful lot of it is. The more
> you move towards photoreal or illustrative styles, the more of
> yourself you put into it, the better the results.
Nbossoftware mailing list