Re: [nbos] 3D medieval cityChip Dunning Fri Oct 5th, 2012
Please check your fonting. Your email contains a ton of junk HTML with
webkit markings that is causing the email to display in huge fonts. It
makes it very difficult to read
"The reason the mainstream is considered a stream is because it's so
shallow" --George Carlin
On Fri, Oct 5, 2012 at 5:21 AM, Dennisdutton <dennisdutton-at-yahoo.com> wrote:
> 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
> 3. Believability
> 4. Surface texture
> 5. Secularity
> 6. Dirt, dust and rust
> 7. Flaws, scratches and dings
> 8. Beveled edges
> 9. Object material depth
> 10" radiosity
> 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
Nbossoftware mailing list