Quote from MunnA :

First try with modo's urban kit.
The car material still a piece of sh..., working on it.

Not bad - 2 things I'd like to mention:

1. You have a sharp shadow. Get rid of it - overcast sky does not produce shrp shadows.

2. Render out an alpha channel fot the car only, if you don't have t already, and then adjust the contrast in Photoshop or whatever using the alpha as mask. The dark areas on the car needs to be a bit darker, and then you'll have a better match.

Edit - and you should consider having more transparent windows.

What you need to do, is to add way more light coming from the opposite direction. The sun is behind the buildings, yet you can see them clearly.

The reflection on the side windows is strong too, and should also indicate you need a lot more light.

I'd also agree that the red looks strange. Perhaps too strong reflection? The car seems to be "lit up" because of the reflections, not actual light (not as much as there should be).

Quote from iFastLT :

Second try. This time I've changed tarmac material, so it looks way more realistic

Looks much better than the first one, but not just because of the new tarmac - The change of angle shows a much more interesting play of lighting and composition.

I'd suggest few and very dim bounce lights to add some life to the very dark areas such as buttom and rear of the car and the big building entrance. Should be just enough to give some shading/edge detail - either that, or - preferably - add something that will add reflection detail on those areas.

I love the DOF.

Quote from pacesetter :

render it please?

http://www.lfsforum.net/attach ... d=103301&d=1270159784

Nice skin

Quote from leonardo555 :

It's caused by the Enviroment image he has. 1-It's so bad the image. 2-It's not one HDRI, it's one JPG.

The image can't be that bad without Bose noticing it - how it is being used can be bad - for instance by mapping a regular image as spherical - which could be the case here - and very easy to fix btw.

HDRI vs Jpeg: HDRI doesn't have anything to do with better resolution.

Quote from leonardo555 :

As you may have noticed, I helped him, and it was his Vray settings, the rest was ok.

Have you gone blind or what? First you can't see the DOF focal point on my render, and now telling me you helped him.. uhm, ok. Good for you. His reflection on the side windows is none the less still pixelated, and Bose even commented on it saying he doesnt know what it is - which you also missed.

Jeeeesh, Leo

Quote from Bose321 :

Newest render, black interior problem I had before fixed

Is the reflection on the sidewindow pixelated, or are you using some weird map? It was like that before too.

Quote from AndRand :

First, I just wonder how come you compare and almost make equal feeding a pet that has to eat flesh (ppl do not - if you think it is wrong, you dont have to do it... but nevertheless everybody needs some nutrition) with pushing someone in front of the car... quite creepy. And sometmies it is hard to tell if it is because both things are so worthless or the opposite

I didn't write about the car thing. Bawbag did

But I think I know where he is getting at: In nature, the "strongest" will survive, but in the case of that vid, the chick is doomed no matter what. In nature, the chick would likely be doomed as well, but it would also have chances of survival. In the case of the vid, it is simply supposed to be eaten, because the owner fancies snakes. You could argue that feeding the snake with a live animal is closer to nature, and i'd agree - but is it also closer to nature for the chick? It's a compromise that doesn't upset me (can depend on what and how though), but showing and exploiting it like that is IMO amoral.

SidiousX: rofl, thats just... horrid!

Quote from BlueFlame :

How can you dislike nature?

I bet the owner (and owners of many other pets) lets the snake move freely at all times, because it's so natural? That's not the point though, and I dont get upset by pets or them being fed by live animals, but you don't have to show it like that. Ppl die all the time, but that doesn't mean it's ok to show that as well in a western country.

Quote from BlueFlame :

Also, we don't have the liberty to say what we want

We don't constantly get reminded about what we can and can't say because it's pretty much common knowledge what this right means. But I'll keep in mind to reference to wiki next time the two of us have a convo.

Quote from Bose321 :

I removed the windows, and everything looks normal again...

Ok, thats some good progress. See if there is anything with the window material or the mesh settings, that could cause the light not to enter. It could be anything really and since I don't use 3DS, I can only guess - could be stuff like GI light depth being set to 0, or windows not visible to GI or anything like that.

A simple way to test the material - simply apply a default material and make it transparent.

Quote from logitekg25 :

you are just taking the work out of the lions eating

U'd end up taking much more than that. It was exciting to go to the zoo when I was a kid, but now it's kinda sad. How much "lion" is there in lions there etc?

Regarding dislikes @ BlueFlame: If there's something a person doesn't like, he should try to change it - that's why having a vote, liberty to speak up without penalty etc. is so important - ppl who remain passive are the problem.

Quote from Bose321 :

Already tried that, in a normal scene, with normal vray light planes, it all looks normal. When I add lights inside, the rest of the car lights up, not the inside. and the materials aren't black.

Can you add a non-VRay light and see if that does anything?

If the mats aren't black, and u can see the interior in a different scene then you might have enabled or disabled something you shouldn't have - double check your light settings incl. any setting related to the windows and interiors, or re-create the scene. I can't be more specific about 3DS stuff

Edit: hide/delete the windows temporarily and do a render. Does that change anything? If not then u defo have messed something up.

Last edited by r4ptor, Tue 30 Mar 2010, 22:02. Reason : typo

Quote from r4ptor :

Why not add a light or two within the car?

(thats of cause while assuming that u don't have pitch black materials in there)

Quote from Timo1992 :

r4ptor this is a nice render, good work

fbm<3

thank you, sir

Quote from Bose321 :

Could anyone help me with this one? My interior is really dark...

Why not add a light or two within the car?

Yah, I'm not too happy with the tire material myself, however I need to do more test renders from multiple angles and lighting conditions, to get a better idea.

There is DOF focus - look closer

Edit: maybe I should have explained the render more because the rubber is better than it appears to be (IMO). I know whats going on behind it, but you guys don't. The environment and sunlight are about 10 times brighter than they normally should be in daylight conditions. I added a tonemapper to bring it all back to something that looks closer to natural.

Attached is a render without DOF but otherwise same (top) and one with 10 times lower (default) environment and light intensity.

Why render with that much light? Stress testing again It's very much like testing cars. You won't get a proper feel for the car unless you push it - that's just one of the things I do when I create my materials. If I don't do it, the risk of a material looking good with one lighting condition, but bad in another will increase - like a car that may feel like it's a good ride at low speeds, but suck at higher ones.

The rubber does look better with normal light, but the method of testing shows it's not fully there yet.

Ps. Each render took 3 min 30 sec in 1280 res, which should mean about 15 mins (or slightly more) @ 2560 res. As said before regarding DOF... jiiiiiikes.

Last edited by r4ptor, Tue 30 Mar 2010, 06:36. Reason : Previous attachment was wrong. I fail

Thanks - it's actually a 2-in-1 test render. 1 to get the overall feeling for the materials, and the other for DOF. I can't even remember when I last time used 3D DOF for renders beside lowres testrenders, because it's so time consuming, and I have therefore been doing it in post where I can add and tweak DOF almost interactively. There are limits in a post DOF though, and that's what keeps bringing me back to see if 3D DOF has improved (render speed). I did a ~2300 res viewport render with a low DOF effect - about 1 pixel wide at the rear wing. That would have been realistic as a 1:1 scale render. The rendertime was quick enough that I then wanted to do a "stress test", so I exaggerated the effect and set the computer to do a full blown 2560 res render - which completed after some 6 or so hours.. jikes :S

No 3D DOF for me, thank you very much - I'll keep doing it in post

Oh, I'll be looking into 3Delight after all the materials have been done. 3Delight is a Reyes renderer, not a proper raytracer, and stuff like motionblur and DOF is amaaazingly fast to do in it - but if you need reflections etc (which it CAN handle), then ur screwed - I did a quick test with it. A displaced plane mesh and ended up with 8 or so million polys. No fancy material, but it still rendered über fast with heavy DOF enabled. Something that would kill mental ray

I've lately been changing all materials to use mental ray Architectural shader. Attached render is how it looks when rendered. No photoshopping or anything like it - except for the obvious scale and cropping.

Still few parts to go and then all cars will be done - I also need to tweak the ARB geometry, so they don't look nearly as crap as they do in this render.

C&C are welcome.

I like vids. they can have different purposes, but I especially like onboard vids - more info to gain from them and thats just <3

Quote from Boris Lozac :

loool "do you have any idea how fast you were scrolling?"

totally. Roflmofl

Cool. Good luck and have fun with it

Quote from Töki (HUN) :

I've left Brazil and now using Vray. Here's what I've done. Just a test render...

Looks good

Quote from samyip :

The background's white point still not matching the car's. I think the cars are ok, only need to adjust the background.

Or the other way around, sure.

Quote from leonardo555 :

I tweak just a little with photoshop and for me it seems better
(it is just a little modify, but open one in one window and another in another window and compare.)

You color corrected the entire image - that's not going to blend the two elements (cars and bg) and the changes u made are a taste thing. The cars should be isolated and color corrected separately - especially have the white point lowered, since they are too much brighter than scenery.