PDA

View Full Version : Is it real or is it Lightwave? Show us the most realistic LW renders!


RobertoOrtiz
12-01-2003, 03:29 PM
As the subject says, show us the most realistic LW renders!

They can be yours, or work that someone else did but you think it is photorealistic!

Looking forward to the responses.

-R

roguenroll
12-01-2003, 03:46 PM
this was a pretty simple one, but ended up in the LW gallery.

http://www.fmotion.net/gallery/nut_boltcol.jpg


this one came not too bad either:
http://www.fmotion.net/gallery/enkei.jpg

evenflcw
12-01-2003, 03:57 PM
Just about anything by the ArtQuantic guys! :bowdown:

rougenroll, I think those renders look too clean. Nice though.

leigh
12-01-2003, 04:00 PM
In all honesty, I've yet to see anything made in LW that I've thought looks totally photorealistic. Actually, I've seen hardly anything that is CG (made in ANY program) that I have thought looked 100% real for that matter.

wgreenlee1
12-01-2003, 04:15 PM
Originally posted by Leigh
In all honesty, I've yet to see anything made in LW that I've thought looks totally photorealistic. Actually, I've seen hardly anything that is CG (made in ANY program) that I have thought looked 100% real for that matter.


i agree

it can get close but ta......no cookie for cg looking real or photoreal...thats just a sales pitch that give artists direction or their own class of art like 'expressionism' or 'abstract'

roguenroll
12-01-2003, 04:17 PM
Originally posted by evenflcw
Just about anything by the ArtQuantic guys! :bowdown:

rougenroll, I think those renders look too clean. Nice though.

thx, that was about a year and a half ago, just getting into hdri, so I was just trying to get a nice final.

I've gotten that comment before, and since then I've really dug into the post process quite a bit, usually to the detrement of my piccy.

R

ironbooker
12-01-2003, 04:19 PM
Well The only thing iīve seen pretty much real or close is a page in alias site, it is like a little mini game where you have to choose from a lot a picīs , wich one is real and wich one is CG

http://www.alias.com/eng/etc/fakeorfoto/

daviddrbal
12-01-2003, 04:32 PM
In the present I'm not doing photo real stills, but I have found a few. Done year ago or so.

01 (http://www.dreamtalks.org/cgi-bin/i/portfolio/12.jpg)
02 (http://www.dreamtalks.org/cgi-bin/i/portfolio/05.jpg)


this one is more like painting I know
03 (http://www.dreamtalks.org/cgi-bin/i/portfolio/09.jpg)

jeremyhardin
12-01-2003, 04:49 PM
my closest attempt:
http://www.newtek.com/products/lightwave/lw-gallery/albums/Architecture/345.jpg

in color:
http://vbulletin.newtek.com/attachment.php?s=&postid=104088

roguenroll
12-01-2003, 05:02 PM
Originally posted by jeremyhardin
my closest attempt:

in color:
http://vbulletin.newtek.com/attachment.php?s=&postid=104088

very nice

roguenroll
12-01-2003, 05:05 PM
[QUOTE]Originally posted by dreamtalks
[B]In the present I'm not doing photo real stills, but I have found a few. Done year ago or so.

01 (http://www.dreamtalks.org/cgi-bin/i/portfolio/12.jpg)
02 (http://www.dreamtalks.org/cgi-bin/i/portfolio/05.jpg) [
QUOTE]

yeah i like the first two, real atmosphery, dreamy.

BAROBA
12-01-2003, 05:17 PM
Do compositions counts?
I made this a few years ago
The grey plane is lw, the bg and white plane are part of a picture. ( I edited another plane out of the pic)

http://users.pandora.be/crimecity/images/A12.jpg

The artquantic guys rock :) They have some stunning photoreal stuff :)

RobertoOrtiz
12-01-2003, 05:21 PM
BAROBA I am going to act like a fanboy with THAT image!
:bowdown:

Nice!
-R

MorBioS
12-01-2003, 05:28 PM
I did this image for a contest.

is not so great like some images posted here, but...

SCREWS (http://pessoais.digi.com.br/~spinfx/imagens/parafuso-2.jpg)

anieves
12-01-2003, 06:11 PM
Originally posted by ironbooker
Well The only thing iīve seen pretty much real or close is a page in alias site, it is like a little mini game where you have to choose from a lot a picīs , wich one is real and wich one is CG

http://www.alias.com/eng/etc/fakeorfoto/

I had 9 out of 10 correct :)

Kvaalen
12-01-2003, 07:00 PM
Originally posted by ironbooker
Well The only thing iīve seen pretty much real or close is a page in alias site, it is like a little mini game where you have to choose from a lot a picīs , wich one is real and wich one is CG

http://www.alias.com/eng/etc/fakeorfoto/

I know this is slightly off topic, but I don't find the CG ones real looking.

With some of them if you look at a bigger picture you can clearly see the textures (like the nails and grass and face [you don't need to look at a bigger picture to tell the face is fake]). Then there is one image that has reflections that aren't regular (like the fork and spoon). And one has too much of a CG lighting and it is way too clean (the cups).

Just my opinnion.
:shrug:

LittleFenris
12-01-2003, 07:10 PM
Originally posted by jeremyhardin
my closest attempt:
in color:
http://vbulletin.newtek.com/attachment.php?s=&postid=104088

wow. :applause:

takkun
12-01-2003, 09:49 PM
Originally posted by Leigh
In all honesty, I've yet to see anything made in LW that I've thought looks totally photorealistic. Actually, I've seen hardly anything that is CG (made in ANY program) that I have thought looked 100% real for that matter. I think that the reason most CG things don't look photorealistic is because CG is mostly used for creating things that would be impossible in reality, like a sci-fi spacecraft or a 100ft monster, and our minds immediately reject it as fantasy. But, CG is also used for very subtle effects and I feel that when done well, no one will notice that it's CG, a good example is the final scene in Panic Room. When I saw the movie I had no idea that everything in the scene was CG (and made in Lightwave ), Another great subtle CG movie is "What Lies Beneath", there is one part where the camera is outside and Michelle Pfiffer (sp?) closes the door and the camera goes through the door, into the house. Most people I talked to didn't even notice the transition or realize that it was CG. And don't forget the digital matte paintings that are in sooo many movies (even in a lot of non-effects driven movies) that no one ever realizes is CG. I read an article recently about that but I don't remember what site it was on...

LittleFenris
12-01-2003, 09:55 PM
Originally posted by takkun
...a good example is the final scene in Panic Room. When I saw the movie I had no idea that everything in the scene was CG (and made in Lightwave )...

Can you explain exactly which scene it was, I'd like to check that out and see! :bounce:

policarpo
12-01-2003, 10:23 PM
my meager and humble attempt earlier this year with that cool Proton model. :)

http://www.policarpo.us/cgi-bin/images/graphics/blog/021167-big.jpg

PresidentEvil
12-01-2003, 10:50 PM
Originally posted by Leigh
In all honesty, I've yet to see anything made in LW that I've thought looks totally photorealistic. Actually, I've seen hardly anything that is CG (made in ANY program) that I have thought looked 100% real for that matter.

There was this certain movie with a big boat done by d2 a few years back that looked kinda real to me :)
Evil

Remi
12-01-2003, 10:50 PM
Originally posted by VWTornado
Can you explain exactly which scene it was, I'd like to check that out and see! :bounce:

I believe he's talking about the part where the camera travels thru the floor/ceiling to the room where foster and co are hiding....I remember seeing the behind the scenes stuff online somewhere...perhaps try a search and you might find it. But yea...everything was cg and I couldn't tell....very impressive stuff...it was quite a dark shot though:)

CIM
12-01-2003, 11:03 PM
...a good example is the final scene in Panic Room. When I saw the movie I had no idea that everything in the scene was CG (and made in Lightwave )

Yeah, and it was rendered in mental ray (check the mental image's gallery). Unless you're speaking of a different scene. :shrug:

There's plenty of realistic CG in films, however, most of it isn't noticable (as CG).

kurv
12-01-2003, 11:28 PM
I have to say the blue mustang is the most realistic CG thing I have ever seen. I stared at it for about an hour...

http://www.newtek.com/products/lightwave/profiles/GeraldAbraham/

Second mustang down... The first one is amazing as well...

Here is the image

http://www.newtek.com/products/lightwave/profiles/GeraldAbraham/img/g_002.jpg

and the wireframe

http://www.newtek.com/products/lightwave/profiles/GeraldAbraham/img/g_003.jpg

LWD
12-01-2003, 11:29 PM
Originally posted by Leigh
In all honesty, I've yet to see anything made in LW that I've thought looks totally photorealistic. Actually, I've seen hardly anything that is CG (made in ANY program) that I have thought looked 100% real for that matter.

Really?

I've seen tons of things that look totally photoreal. Usually they were thing in films that I didn't even question, but was surprised to learn later were CG. We did a bunch of shots in Secondhand Lions that no one knows were CG except us...all in LW.

I have noticed however that you can take a real photo of something, tell people it's CG and they will opine ad infinitum on why it's looks "just a bit off".

Dave Adams
I,ROBOT/Digital Domain

Sil3
12-01-2003, 11:44 PM
Originally posted by Leigh
In all honesty, I've yet to see anything made in LW that I've thought looks totally photorealistic. Actually, I've seen hardly anything that is CG (made in ANY program) that I have thought looked 100% real for that matter.

So i assume that u have never seen this ones before:

http://www.menithings.com/main.php?action=movies&movie_id=11

If that doesnīt look realistic, i dont know what does :eek:

Tons of stuff also shown in movies sometimes are FULL CG, and we dont even notice them, so yes, u have already seen things that were 100% CG and your braind didnīt even pick them up, and thatīs perfect CG, and what CG should be in most of the cases :D

Keddy
12-01-2003, 11:50 PM
The Subway and Peugeot206 done by Ripper :buttrock:

And the Corridor and Elevator done by Oliver V :buttrock:

They bith are one of the best 3d photorealistic i've seen in Lightwave.

Mwai Kasamale
12-02-2003, 12:13 AM
ooohhh, Leighs asking for it.:p

Well the most photoreal I have seen thusfar, done in LW, would have to be;

Takken mini series: bomber and dogfighting shots.

Harts War: Dogfights and crash

? Not sure about this one, but THIN RED LINE (one o my favourite movies): in the opening landing scene.

Driven: Crash sequence (photoreal but in that very CG kinda way)

many more but I think its alittle long winded to make sucha statement because its important to remember that 90% of all movie releases have some digital or visual effect . 80% of which are seamless and unseen. This forum tends to focus on all the big blockbuster effects from the big studios instead of the mastery of the FX created by small houses like The Orphanage, Rainmaker, CoreDP among many other even smaller boutiques.

As this discussion relates to LW Photorealism, I'd have to say CafeFX GM commercials, Dreamworks Animations Takken opening seq. Too much to list.

But anyway I've gone on too long
my 2 cents

takkun
12-02-2003, 12:16 AM
Originally posted by VWTornado
Can you explain exactly which scene it was, I'd like to check that out and see! :bounce:

Check out this site and watch the quicktime video, it's hard to see it since the quicktime is only 180x129. Actually, my favorite thing in that movie was the opening titles, giant letters hanging in mid air above NYC. Simple yet majestic. That's all lightwave too.

http://www.cafefx.com/html/gallery/features/movie/panicroom.html

ddaniels
12-02-2003, 12:21 AM
here is an image from some test renders i did not to sure if it is photo real but hey i am open for critiques

ddaniels
12-02-2003, 12:23 AM
and onther render

Krix
12-02-2003, 12:35 AM
"In all honesty, I've yet to see anything made in LW that I've thought looks totally photorealistic. Actually, I've seen hardly anything that is CG (made in ANY program) that I have thought looked 100% real for that matter."

Mostly because you KNOW that is CG. As takkun said about the monsters etc. But I saw lots of films, saw lots of CG because it was obvious (for ex.) that Gollum does not exist. And there were tons of other CG shot what I would never recognize if I don't see the making of...
In certain films.

Actually since the Two Towers I'm not sure if Gollum doen not exist...

;)

takkun
12-02-2003, 12:43 AM
Originally posted by CIM
Yeah, and it was rendered in mental ray (check the mental image's gallery). Unless you're speaking of a different scene. :shrug:. Yeah, most of the 100 some FX shots in that movie are Softimage and Mental Ray, I think they were done by BUF, the same company that did a lot of those great sequences in Fight Club. But the scene I was talking about, the final scene, when Forest Whitaker is caught by the police in the backyard. I didn't realize that the whole scene was CG and done in Lightwave.

LWD
12-02-2003, 12:50 AM
Originally posted by takkun
Yeah, most of the 100 some FX shots in that movie are Softimage and Mental Ray, I think they were done by BUF, the same company that did a lot of those great sequences in Fight Club. But the scene I was talking about, the final scene, when Forest Whitaker is caught by the police in the backyard. I didn't realize that the whole scene was CG and done in Lightwave.

We've done a lot of work for Fincher over here using Lightwave.

Oh, and to Mwai: I did all the alien artifact shots in Taken, and even in the shots where it's just sitting there in the briefcase doing nothing, it's CG.

The UFOs were real. );-D

Dave Adams
I,ROBOT/Digital Domain

Thalaxis
12-02-2003, 01:11 AM
Originally posted by LWD
We've done a lot of work for Fincher over here using Lightwave.

Oh, and to Mwai: I did all the alien artifact shots in Taken, and even in the shots where it's just sitting there in the briefcase doing nothing, it's CG.

The UFOs were real. );-D

Dave Adams
I,ROBOT/Digital Domain

And that was a cool-looking artifact :)

I also thought it was a great mini-series... except for the fact that
it was a bit big for the "mini" part :)

takkun
12-02-2003, 01:21 AM
I never saw Taken but all I've heard is good things about it, I'll have to rent/buy that. :drool:

So LWD, I'm a huge fan of David Fincher and I love the Digital Domain/David Fincher commercials. What's it like working with him? He's seems like a very technical savvy director and his style is f**kin great. Do tell, good sir.

LWD
12-02-2003, 01:29 AM
Originally posted by takkun
I never saw Taken but all I've heard is good things about it, I'll have to rent/buy that. :drool:

So LWD, I'm a huge fan of David Fincher and I love the Digital Domain/David Fincher commercials. What's it like working with him? He's seems like a very technical savvy director.

I haven't worked shoulder to shoulder with him, I'm in the feature film division and he's been doing commercials. I can tell you that if you hear a whirrring noise coming down the hall it's probably David on his Segway.

Whirrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr Look out!

Dave Adams
I,ROBOT/Digital Domain

takkun
12-02-2003, 01:33 AM
LOL, David Fincher on a Segway?

Damn it... I still have to get around using these stupid legs. pfft!

CG.p
12-02-2003, 01:43 AM
Originally posted by jeremyhardin
my closest attempt:
http://www.newtek.com/products/lightwave/lw-gallery/albums/Architecture/345.jpg

in color:
http://vbulletin.newtek.com/attachment.php?s=&postid=104088

DOF makes it look like a minature. It IS nice though.

CG.p
12-02-2003, 01:44 AM
Originally posted by ironbooker
Well The only thing iīve seen pretty much real or close is a page in alias site, it is like a little mini game where you have to choose from a lot a picīs , wich one is real and wich one is CG

http://www.alias.com/eng/etc/fakeorfoto/

That crap was so abstract it was a joke. Using weird lighting and unnatural views of the real objects makes it wasy when the cg ones don't look everyday.

jeremyhardin
12-02-2003, 01:51 AM
there was no DOF.

CG.p
12-02-2003, 02:08 AM
I might have replied to the wrong image since it didn't show up in the opst reply page. Never mind then. :)

Miyazaki
12-02-2003, 02:10 AM
Originally posted by CG.p
That crap was so abstract it was a joke. Using weird lighting and unnatural views of the real objects makes it wasy when the cg ones don't look everyday.
I couldn`t agree more.

CG.p
12-02-2003, 03:08 AM
Originally posted by Miyazaki
I couldn`t agree more.

Makes it "easy" too

vvee
12-02-2003, 04:23 AM
Although it's pretty simple. Here is one that was done to match realistic studio lighting. It fooled the client for about 5 minutes.

iratethemad
12-02-2003, 05:52 AM
go to the lightwave gallery at www.newtek.com there are a few things there.

like this one
http://www.newtek.com/products/lightwave/lw-gallery/displayimage.php?album=15&pos=82

and this one
http://www.newtek.com/products/lightwave/lw-gallery/displayimage.php?album=15&pos=84

this is the closest to realistic that i have done so far
http://www.newtek.com/products/lightwave/lw-gallery/displayimage.php?album=8&pos=10

E_Moelzer
12-02-2003, 05:53 AM
hehe, on that MAYA- test. I had no problem finding all the renderings, but some of the photographs looked pretty unrealistic due to heavy filtering and post (which makes me wonder where CG actually starts here).
CU
Elmar

iratethemad
12-02-2003, 07:21 AM
i found this
http://www.squirreldome.com/d0007.jpg

looks pritty good to me

http://www.squirreldome.com/

here is the link it's in the lightwave gallery

Keiyentai
12-02-2003, 08:30 AM
Those are nice. The site you posted iratethemad :bowdown: THANK YOU. Dogwaffle is my new texturing toy now I think lol. Still downloading (gotta love dial up) but from what I see :drool: oh man I wish I found out about it sooner.

samartin
12-02-2003, 08:38 AM
Nice post Irate, that top link to the shark is very believable, I wouldn't have guessed that was CG if I searched for a shark picture using google...

Mwai Kasamale
12-02-2003, 09:47 AM
probably the most photoreal images I've seen spat out of LW

http://www.luxology.net/gallery/image.aspx?id=393

http://www.luxology.net/gallery/image.aspx?id=149

http://www.luxology.net/gallery/image.aspx?id=24

The Shipping News
http://www.pixelfury.btinternet.co.uk/thumb_shippingnews_over.png

And offcourse everything D2 has done

Keiyentai
12-02-2003, 10:35 AM
I have seen that Subway pic somewhere before. I think it was on Renderosity.com...not sure though. THough it is still awesome.

Ed Bittner
12-02-2003, 12:20 PM
I was going to reply to Leigh, (who's skills I believe are of the first order!), but I figured, "What's the point of debating it?"
I've been an artist for over thirty years, yeah, I'm an old fart, and have what I would describe a discriminating eye. A client once said to me, " Being an artist, do you see things differently than me?" I thought, "How the f*** do I know how YOU see things?", but I SAID, " I guess it's a matter of focus." In my humble opinion, ALL artists share this focus, which is why we do things the general public cannot. Having said that, I must also add that I still see CG that fools me. Keep 'em coming folks. Leigh is entitled to her opinion as well.
Ed

tonyg
12-02-2003, 02:17 PM
Great thread -- it is fun to root through the more realistic renders and look for the little give aways. I don't get to do much realistic stuff these days. Did this one: http://personal.nbnet.nb.ca/inno/renders/bed_bigger.jpg in Lightwave 5.6, so about 1999. It's supposed to mimic the set where similar products were photographed; thus the choice of environment.

leigh
12-02-2003, 05:21 PM
I think some people may have misunderstood what I said. I am not one of these snooty elitists that examines every pixel in an image and then nitpicks. Have a look in the gallery forum here and you'll see how enthusiastic I get about work that I think is great.

But I am being honest when I say that I haven't seen a lot of CG that looked totally and utterly 100% realistic. I do have to agree that I'm sure this is partly a mental thing, in that when we see a spaceship or a monster, our brains tell us "that isn't real", and that can tarnish ones view somewhat.

The stuff that I have seen that I thought looked totally real is the stuff that drives me to improve my own skills. And I'm sure that in the years to come, photorealism in CG will become far more abundant.

tonyg
12-02-2003, 05:46 PM
This is an interesting distinction; are we talking about realism, or photorealism? Most of the time, when I look at a render and think "Yes, that's it", what I am comparing it to is a photo-realistic image (often a photograph, in fact, is my refernce of choice). In fact, it has to be that way, I think -- it is hopeless to compare renders to realism, since a render is usually displayed on a 2D device, with a limited palette, refresh rate, and so on. What we can compare renders to successfully (and what we can match) is a photograph or film / video.

I ramble -- what I mean is, 3D images do, sometimes, aspire to being "like a photograph" in terms of their accuracy in colour representation, resolution, focus, and so on. They do *not* come close to the real, since our eyes remain a zillion times more acute, better mounted, and faster processing that any camera, virtual or otherwise...

just my 2c

Ed Bittner
12-02-2003, 09:15 PM
Leigh,
This reminds me of another thread in here a while ago, where the discussion was FX. Of course, when we see a spaceship or a monster, we know it is not real. I guess my point was that there are two kinds of CG. Visible and invisible. Just like there are two kinds of FX. Visible and invisible. The visible are the kind,(unfortunately), that some films are centered around. The invisible are the kind that advance the story and blend in so well that they often times slip right on by.
Before the advances in computer technology,( and Photoshop), when all painting was 2D, I was one of the first artists that I'm aware of that was painting my backgrounds "out of focus". This of course was a real pain in the a** when you think about it, but when sent to press the illusion was such that one didn't know if it was a piece of artwork or a photograph. Much to Tonyg's point. Anyway, it's the stuff you see, but don't know you see, that inspires me to do greater work.
Ed

ddaniels
12-03-2003, 12:38 AM
I thought the whole point of this thread was to post your own work that was as close to photo real as you could not to debate wether or not photorealism can be accomplished in cg

ages
12-03-2003, 02:19 AM
Originally posted by jeremyhardin
my closest attempt:
http://www.newtek.com/products/lightwave/lw-gallery/albums/Architecture/345.jpg

in color:
http://vbulletin.newtek.com/attachment.php?s=&postid=104088

Brilliant!

Is that just in Lightwave or with additional software?

jeremyhardin
12-03-2003, 02:23 AM
straight LW. (i might have BW'ed it in Photoshop, but i don't remember. so consider the color one the raw one if you like)

Ramon
12-03-2003, 03:00 AM
Kind of off topic but,...
Leigh wrote: I've seen hardly anything that is CG (made in ANY program) that I have thought looked 100% real for that matter.

Reign of Fire. The Secret Lab nailed it with that Dragon! The Dragon was modeled in Maya rendered in PRM. Now, yes, Dragons don't have an actual real-life reference and oldly enough, that might be what can make their Dragon so realistic. I believe however, that it's their drive and dedication for a spectacular level of detail and nunaces that were maticulously created for this project. It's the best Dragon creation I've ever seen. It looks extremely believable.
Those guys ruled - they were awesome! Sucks that the studio is no longer around.
By the way, Jeremy Hardin's image of the interior house and Gerald's Mustang convertable was very believable as well.

Take care all

ages
12-03-2003, 08:31 AM
Originally posted by jeremyhardin
straight LW. (i might have BW'ed it in Photoshop, but i don't remember. so consider the color one the raw one if you like) How many lights u use and what sort of effects?
*amazed

JVitale
12-03-2003, 09:29 AM
Hey guys!

Go and see The Last Samurai this weekend and tell me what you thought was real and what stood out as CG.... Roger Ebert called the scenery "stunning" and most of it was LightWave....

SplineGod
12-03-2003, 09:54 AM
Originally posted by Ed Bittner
I was going to reply to Leigh, (who's skills I believe are of the first order!), but I figured, "What's the point of debating it?"
I've been an artist for over fourty years, yeah, I'm an old fart, and have what I would describe a discriminating eye. A client once said to me, " Being an artist, do you see things differently than me?" I thought, "How the f*** do I know how YOU see things?", but I SAID, " I guess it's a matter of focus." In my humble opinion, ALL artists share this focus, which is why we do things the general public cannot. Having said that, I must also add that I still see CG that fools me. Keep 'em coming folks. Leigh is entitled to her opinion as well.
Ed
LOL, Ed thats hilarious! Cant tell you how many times Ive heard variations of that question. Good answer though. I think we see things more the same then not....otherwise hundreds of people in a theatre wouldnt agree that something was cool or moved them in the same way. I think for an artist its like being good at any job. You dont take things for granted that the average person does. Most people drive their cars and have no idea how it works. A good mechanic is aware of an engine, its smells and sounds far more then most people. The same for an artist. We see things and focus on them in ways others may not consciously be aware of. I think that may be the real difference is that things that many are only subconciously aware of an artist brings to concious awareness. As I said I dont think this ability is limited to artists but anyone who does something for a long time. :)

RobertoOrtiz
12-03-2003, 04:08 PM
Originally posted by JVitale
Hey guys!

Go and see The Last Samurai this weekend and tell me what you thought was real and what stood out as CG.... Roger Ebert called the scenery "stunning" and most of it was LightWave....
COOL!
Are there any LW shots online of this movie?

-R

preludian
12-03-2003, 06:21 PM
I'm with Leigh here, I have seen many pictures looking CG photo-realistic but not one being realistic, it's often small subtleties that betray them, the dof is wrong, not enough variations ( have twenty identical columns and you will still perceive ( not really see ) variations in reality, in cg you always SEE the variations, they are often much too obvious, shadows are tintend too much (as in the mustang image) and so on.

Maybe we should make a list with elements that betray the images as being cg. Like a checklist...

mastermesh
12-03-2003, 08:05 PM
especially cloud formations... I have shot a lot of clouds and posted them on turbosquid.... a lot of times, cloud formations look more like surreal paintings than anything that is "real" - lots of "real" things look fake, especially after you've been modelling the images you are looking at in the "real" world... I often find myself thinking about how much better peoples faces would look if they were subdivded just a little bit more or if this poly had one more vertex pushed out just a tad more or pulled in the z direction or whatever when I see em up close in meetings, etc. at about the same distance that you would see a face that you were working on in Lightwave or other apps... it's really strange how the more that you work with 3d or any art for that matter the more that you realize how imperfect the world really is...

roguenroll
12-03-2003, 08:24 PM
saw this at highend3d


http://www.highend3d.com/artists/si.3d?au=arvid&im=trumpet_final&iid=288

Phyrea
12-03-2003, 08:33 PM
I'm with you MasterMesh. More and more often I'll see something with my own eyes and say, "If I had a photo of that, it wouldn't look real. People would think it was fake." Here's an example of a photo I took of my cat while she was yawning. It looks entirely fake, like one of those cat food commercials where they digitally animate the cat's mouth - but it's 100% real. If someone showed me this picture I'd tell them that they've had too much fun with Kai's Power Goo. Yet, I took it with my Canon Digital EOS Rebel 300D. The only thing I've done to this image is cropped it and resized it slightly (the original 6.3 MegaPixel size includes my laptop next to her and the box she's sitting in).

I think with all the cg these days, we can become too eager to shout, "that looks fake!" At the same time, it's rare that I see cg that looks 100% photorealistic.

erikals
12-03-2003, 11:03 PM
So incredibly many settings has to be correct in order to get a photorealistic render, but some people have come very close though.

I guess these artist are the ones I have seen coming up with the best LW renders,

Defontaine Jacques
http://www.artquantic.com/

Grzegorz Jonkajtys
http://www.newtek-europe.com/uk/community/lightwave/jonkajtys/jonkajtys_1.html

Kitada Kiyonobu
http://www.worley.com/media/examples/G2/Webpics/G2_KitaCar2.jpg

G3D
12-05-2003, 01:16 AM
...at photorealism. Maybe only near the photorealism ballpark. I used the "Galileo's Tomb" HDRI to illuminate the scene.
Here is the link:


http://www.G-3D.com/Photorealism_Attempts.html

-George

tonyg
12-05-2003, 06:33 PM
Nice. Gotta love those HDR light solutions. Now if they just worked as well in an animation, and rendered in a more timely way...

G3D
12-05-2003, 07:46 PM
No, I didn't use the Galileo" HDRI. I had it disabled so it only used the 80% gray of my skydome to illuminate.

One thing I have noticed and maybe others here have seen this: LW will render GIs with 24bit probes(or panos on a sphere) but if you use a 96bit image, you have a render with all sorts of grainy white yellow dots. A mess. This is *even* with shading noise reduction turned on. I thought the whole benefit of using 96bit HDRIs was that there could be very bright spots where the local lights in the photo were bright. Maybe I'm misunderstanding this. Anyway, I'll post an example later.

evileye
12-05-2003, 08:25 PM
Cool thread. This is my closest.
http://www.eyelandarts.com/gallery/images/head.jpg
rendertimes were painfull though.
Alex

CMachuca
12-06-2003, 02:52 AM
OMFFFFFFFFGGGGGGGGG PLEASE HELP ME NOT TO DIE!!!!!!!

http://www.luxology.net/gallery/image.aspx?id=149

I'm sorry but i don't think that's real!!!!, if it is in fact real, please let the author reading this call me to be his butler for the rest of my life!

G3D
12-06-2003, 08:44 AM
Hi again,

I re-rendered my last image with a better source of illumination and reflection.
The middle image is the new one.

http://www.G-3D.com/Photorealism_Attempts.html

m0nd0
12-06-2003, 12:40 PM
Hi everyone -- been trying to summon the courage to make this post (my first here)...hope the image doesn't stretch the tables too much.

It's not going to fool anyone, but it's the most realistic image I've produced to date...

http://homepage.mac.com/mondo500/.Pictures/head_AreaDofDBLsk03.jpg

Wesball
12-06-2003, 10:52 PM
as far as the discussion of the FX from Last Samurai...

I hope this isn't considered a spoiler for people on the movie, but...

I just saw it last night in digital projection...

unfortunatley I was pretty dissapointed in the FX shots... there was some pretty terrible FX, espeically considering it was a $100 million movie, that I've seen in a long while.

wozzyke
12-07-2003, 11:25 AM
Originally posted by CMachuca
OMFFFFFFFFGGGGGGGGG PLEASE HELP ME NOT TO DIE!!!!!!!

http://www.luxology.net/gallery/image.aspx?id=149

I'm sorry but i don't think that's real!!!!, if it is in fact real, please let the author reading this call me to be his butler for the rest of my life!


Well actually that's true CG, not a photo or something, this is done with LW and I guess this person who made it is from belgium and his website has been posted here too

http://www.artquantic.com/

That's his site, but its "comming soon" for a long time now.

Halsu
12-08-2003, 01:13 AM
Here's a few of mine. The first two were done for 3dfightclub's side by side compo, where the aim is to try to reproduce a real photograph in 3D:

http://www.kolumbus.fi/erkki.halkka/plugpak/OCRGUG_Candles.jpg

http://www.kolumbus.fi/erkki.halkka/plugpak/OCRGUG_Caravan.jpg

These are a bit older tries...

http://www.kolumbus.fi/erkki.halkka/plugpak/OCRGUG_GGBG.jpg

http://www.kolumbus.fi/erkki.halkka/plugpak/F104.jpg

All the above are from my PlugPak user gallery:

PlugPak User Gallery (http://www.kolumbus.fi/erkki.halkka/plugpak/PlugPak_Gallery_index.html)

...there's many nice ones by others too there, check it out.

There's more of my stuff at the gallery of the company i work for. It hasn't been updated in a while though...

Avanti Broadcasting / AKMP Program Gallery (http://www.akmp-program.fi/www/english/index_5.html)

HowardM
12-08-2003, 01:26 AM
So is the new NIKE Gridiron done by DD Lightwave?
If so, I gotta say the first time I saw it, I was fooled until they got all 'tron' like! :)

Eki, I dont believe the candle image is rendered! Its gotta be rendered on a comped photo?! Ive always been in awe if thats 100% lightwave! Your race car has always looked real!

Halsu
12-08-2003, 01:51 AM
The candle image is 100% CGI.

I did some post in Photoshop (blur, grain, color correction). Not that much...

I attached the straight LW render, it's really compressed and smaller to meet the 20 kb limit, but should show the difference clearly enough...

HowardM
12-08-2003, 01:54 AM
nope, no difference! :) they BOTH look like photos to me!
youve got the perfect blend of flash photography (shadow behind on wall) and bevel, blur, shine, reflection, dithering, etc on everything!
I swear that could pass as an old photo!
The only thing that looks strange, but not fake, is the corner of the walls.

jeremyhardin
12-08-2003, 02:10 AM
see how much photorealism 3dfightclub has inspired?

aspiring artists should check it out.

Keddy
12-08-2003, 02:24 AM
Originally posted by Halsu
The candle image is 100% CGI.

I did some post in Photoshop (blur, grain, color correction). Not that much...

I attached the straight LW render, it's really compressed and smaller to meet the 20 kb limit, but should show the difference clearly enough...

Everything (candle, table, chair,b ackground etcs) done in cgi? I thought your background is photo and your candle is cgi. Your candle image looks very nice!

Halsu
12-08-2003, 08:45 AM
Everything is CGI. There's no BG image there.

I used the reference photo just as a reference.

And yes, 3dfightclub is a cool place! Check it out...

http://www.3dfightclubforum.com/

kurv
12-08-2003, 03:23 PM
Erkki, your work is incredible...just amazing!!!

That image of the candle is the most incredible CG image I have seen. While being simple, it is the most photo real I have seen.

Goes to show you, as Leigh said, it is difficult to look at a CG image of a space ship and think of it as photo real. Your mind says that can’t be real… But a candle on a table you see all the time…

Great work!!

adboy
12-08-2003, 03:30 PM
this inst exactly photoreal but u know what i mean

did these a few years ago
will get round to finishing them some time

http://www.btinternet.com/~realism3d/images/bugcasefinal.jpg

and this one from the same time

http://www.btinternet.com/~realism3d/images/realb.jpg

kurv
12-08-2003, 03:35 PM
aboy, those are awsome!!! Great work.

intvSlams
12-08-2003, 04:55 PM
Some of the stuff I've seen posted in this thread is incredible. My humble attempt at photoreal was for my friends portfolio site, ImustCreate (http://www.imustcreate.com)

I was never too happy with the lighting, but I had several non-artists email asking about how we filmed the chips.

adboy
12-09-2003, 01:26 AM
thanks wordwarepub :)

Chewey
12-09-2003, 01:33 AM
Not Lightwave,
rendered using Shade Pro rev 6

http://shade.e-frontier.co.jp/en/gallery/images/ykimura01.jpg

LWD
12-09-2003, 01:34 AM
Schweeeet! Chewey!

Dave Adams
I,ROBOT/Digital Domain

Chewey
12-09-2003, 01:45 AM
Originally posted by LWD
Schweeeet! Chewey!

Dave Adams
I,ROBOT/Digital Domain

Whoops! Sorry but that isn't my work, it belongs to Y.Kimura. My apologies for not attributing it to him in that post

Here's his web site,

http://www3.famille.ne.jp/%7Ephkimura/index.html

erikals
12-09-2003, 09:39 AM
Wow :) Great renders Chewey.
hard to find info on Shade... interesting program though.
http://www.kotapress.com/Art/Reviews/ShadeR4/Review_Shade4.htm#

kevman3d
12-09-2003, 10:27 AM
Hmmm, only things I have online that I can show at this stage would be probably these HDR based renders...

http://www.kevman3d.com/images.asp?section=3dimage&id=0

And this one that is somewhat oversaturated!

http://www.kevman3d.com/images.asp?section=3dimage&id=5

Kev.

Halsu
12-09-2003, 01:17 PM
Originally posted by wordwarepub
Erkki, your work is incredible...just amazing!!!

Hey, thanks i'm flattered!

Would you like me to add scene and object files for some of those scenes to the 1001 Tips & Tricks content??

The Formula was made for work so i can't give that away, but the rest can go ;-)

Halsu
12-09-2003, 01:23 PM
Originally posted by intvSlams
Some of the stuff I've seen posted in this thread is incredible. My humble attempt at photoreal was for my friends portfolio site, ImustCreate (http://www.imustcreate.com)

I was never too happy with the lighting, but I had several non-artists email asking about how we filmed the chips.

Very nice - i LIKE the lighting there!

Steve McRae
12-12-2003, 03:38 AM
hope its not to late to get involved - i just posted this (http://www.cgtalk.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=109008) in the wip section

opinions, thoughts?

adboy
12-14-2003, 05:59 PM
very very nice:)

and i'm not sure bout that dof comment i'd leave it as is

what software did u use for this
its pretty sweet

Steve McRae
12-14-2003, 06:04 PM
. . . hey thanks . . . it was LW . . .

adboy
12-14-2003, 06:16 PM
ah my favorite:)

anieves
12-14-2003, 08:06 PM
Originally posted by Atomman
hope its not to late to get involved - i just posted this (http://www.cgtalk.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=109008) in the wip section

opinions, thoughts?

That's is one amazing piece! nice.

JDaniel
12-14-2003, 10:36 PM
Very nice copter Atomman!
Here's a few kinda realistic overcaster 1 tests I made awhile back , except for the porch modeling. That was Scott K.
New Lab (http://www.jackydaniel.com/pages/Lab.htm)
Cart (http://www.jackydaniel.com/pages/Cart.htm)
Monitor (http://www.jackydaniel.com/pages/Monitor.htm)
I'm concentrating on organics now though. We need true SSS and better radiosity though, just to name 2.

kurv
12-14-2003, 11:26 PM
Originally posted by Halsu
Hey, thanks i'm flattered!

Would you like me to add scene and object files for some of those scenes to the 1001 Tips & Tricks content??

The Formula was made for work so i can't give that away, but the rest can go ;-)

ummm let me think, heck YES!!!!

Thanks Erkki!!!!

olo
12-15-2003, 12:48 AM
and mine try:
http://raph.com/3dartists/artgallery/ag-ap.php?aid=413

Halsu
12-15-2003, 02:25 AM
Here's a comparision image of the candelier:

Candelier_comparision_jpg (http://eki.3dfightclub.com/temp/Eki_Candelier_comparision.jpg)

Edit: I was asked for a wireframe, so...

Bertoluci
12-15-2003, 09:14 AM
Hello,

this is something I did 2 years ago. The client thought it was a photo. But the goal of the job was to previz his new classroom. So there was nothing to get a photo of ;)

Bertoluci

anieves
12-15-2003, 03:25 PM
my most recent try...
Jpg compression got rid of most of the post fx grain just in case whylee asks ;)

http://www.motionblurstudio.com/cgtalk/jet2.jpg

adboy
12-15-2003, 09:05 PM
olo thats really nice man

quality work

CGTalk Moderation
01-16-2006, 08:00 PM
This thread has been automatically closed as it remained inactive for 12 months. If you wish to continue the discussion, please create a new thread in the appropriate forum.