PDA

View Full Version : eva-ola perfume bottle WIP


raythex
08-19-2005, 03:27 PM
hey just finishing up a project for my port.

was hoping for some c&c from the community before i go to the printers.

everything rendered in blender (no yafray involved)

no post production work.

lol

this is a pure brotha.

cheers

ray

BgDM
08-19-2005, 04:27 PM
Very nicely done. Very clean render.

Glass shader is perfect.

No crits from me at all.

BgDM

NR43
08-19-2005, 04:43 PM
Nice and clean :thumbsup:

Spin99
08-19-2005, 07:06 PM
Slick and Pro :D

Apollux
08-19-2005, 07:11 PM
I would give a small tint (blue maybe) to the liquid, to increase color presence in the overall image.. but that is more of a marketing decision.

raythex
08-19-2005, 07:36 PM
i would, apollux, but :sad: i haven't figured how to do it realistically. becuase for there to be extra blue, i would have to turn down the fresnel... but if i did that, it wouldn't look like liquid... more like quartz.... or something... im kinda stuck on this one. i guess that i haven't done enough problem solving.

you got any suggestions though? anyone?

cuz it was my original intent to make it.... blue-er... like when you dip a blue highlighter into a glass of water... for fun lol.... that kinda clear blue. but it turned out like this.

any ideas would be greatly appreciated!

thanx!

ray

Apollux
08-20-2005, 01:47 AM
Time for some Blender Magic !!!

The liquid is an independent mesh from the container, right?

Put the liquid on a separate layer, set some blue lights around it.. put the lights on the same layer as the liquid and activate the "layer" option for the lights... you'll get something like fluorecent blue perfum :thumbsup:

raythex
08-20-2005, 04:06 AM
wow! its rendering on my othe rcomp right now. its looking really cool! thanx!

yeah, im not a big layer rendering fan... lol im too scared.

anyways

yeah, i'll post it as soon as i can

rendering times are going through the roof lol.

cheers!

raythex
08-20-2005, 08:24 PM
okay the big version didn't work. but i did two smaller ones in spare time today.

one is ray depth 7 and one is ray depth 10. and so i guess the ray depth 10 allowed the light to pass through the little tube in the center. and the reason that it was dark before was cuz that it was shadowed becuase no light could penetrate to it before.

im note sure about the extra color though. does it look better in ur opinion? for some reason i get a clouded feeling? any suggestions?

cheers

ray

Inktvlek
08-20-2005, 10:10 PM
I think it looks better with the dark tube... As for the color: maybe not this color. Apollux was right that a bit of colour would make it look a bit more sophisticated, but I think he gave the wrong hint assuming you should maybe use light blue I think. You still used a greyish pale blue...
I did a quick photoshop edit, to demonstrate what I think might be good colors to give it a more 'full' feeling (although I must admit your first image has a certain cleanliness on it I like aswell).

I hope you don't take my edit as an offence...

TroutMaskReplica
08-21-2005, 12:12 AM
wow. nice bottle/render.

one thing that would make this look more like a professional studio shot would be the 'white card' reflection that is common to almost all shots of packaging with reflective surfaces.

some simplified, controlled reflection is what this image needs. think of a physical studio setup, with softboxes, seamless backdrops, etc.

some examples:

http://www.jacobscreek.com/australian-wine-images/australian-wine.jpg
http://img.epinions.com/images/opti/4e/6f/8936910WhiteLinen_w-resized200.gif
http://www.netdropshipper.com/graphics/products/1350-Estee%20Lauder%20Beyond%20Paradise.jpg

TroutMaskReplica
08-21-2005, 12:15 AM
actually, come to think of it, it would be easier just to paint in that stuff in photoshop.

raythex
08-21-2005, 12:44 AM
hey wow guy! thanx! i thought that i was almost done! but it turns out that there are so many options!

i'll try to post more within the next couple of days.

cheers

ray

Apollux
08-21-2005, 04:09 AM
hey wow guy! thanx! i thought that i was almost done! but it turns out that there are so many options!

i'll try to post more within the next couple of days.

cheers

ray

Somebody here, I don't remember who, has a signature that says "a piece of art is never finished, it is just abandoned".

raythex
08-21-2005, 06:54 AM
Inktvlek, no i dont take any offence :) i am very happy that you took the time to help me with my project! i have decided that you are very correct! i believe that as of this point, i am using a lavender shade of blue in my bottle. to switch up the color variation a bit. thank you!

troutmaskreplica, do you think that it could be possible to do that reflection with a simple ramp shader? becuase im very keen on trying to keep this purely in blender. you know, to show off that i can create convincing "beauty shots" the first time round so that my work would require very minimal post production work. i am slightly stumped as to how i could go about doing this in blender. i ran a few tests with lamp positions, but haven't managed to get a specular spot thats running the entire vertical length of the bottle. nor could i get one that looked very close to the bottles in your examples. do you think i might have to start playing aorund with my shader options?

and apollux! i also saw that quote somewhere in the forums. i recal seeing it in the finished work section, but who knows. :D

cheers

ray

Inktvlek
08-21-2005, 08:54 AM
to get the 'whitecard' reflection TMR is talking about, you actually need one :o)
These are called arealights in Blender... But for arealights you need AO, I'm not sure if you already used that, but if you do, rendertimes will probably become unacceptable... Anyway, Maybe you don't really need a real whitecard/softbox highlight - a reflection might fine. Just put a vertical plane in front and put a spot on it that illuminates it.

I really like your light-setup the way it is now btw, would love to see how you did it - just spots? or some sunlight aswell? I never manage to get the light this even on the whole render...

raythex
08-21-2005, 05:49 PM
lol actually, inktvleck, its one lamp and AO turned up to 1.64 at 16 samples. and yeah, i think i'll do this "white card" effect with an area light. but im not sure how good the control will be. becuase i realize that if i turn down my AO, then the plane i have unernethe will show through. but if i dont, the area light will be too bright if its going to have enough energy to actually cast this specular spot on my bottle.

do you know if the casting a glow onto a white plane is just as effective?

cheers

ray

TroutMaskReplica
08-21-2005, 05:52 PM
raythex,

inktvlek is correct, you need to make a white plane and set its colour to white and its emit value very high, probably maximum.

the idea in the product shots i linked is to create a simplified reflection scheme that evokes an environment (so the product isn't just floating in a vacuum), but without the reflection chaos that actually placing the product in a room full of objects would create.

the big white card highlight is actually supposed to represent a window type of light source. but if you had the product reflecting a real window, the result would be much less idealised and would take away focus from the product.

also notice in the wine bottle image the liquid is very dark behind the highlight and very transluscent on the opposite side. this is something you might want to play with, although one makes assumptions on the viscosity of the fluid based on the exaggeration of this effect.

if i had my tablet here i'd to an overlay on your render but unfortunately i left it at work :( to paraphrase a famous quote, writing about art is like dancing about architecture ;)

cheers

edit: you will not get the white card highlight i mentioned from an area light. you need a white plane to do this.

TroutMaskReplica
08-21-2005, 05:54 PM
oh, and you really should consider rendering in passes, it makes life so much easier. it's the more professional approach in my opinion, keeping everything pure is a little too idealistic (and maybe even masochistic ;)). go for the approach that gives you the most control.

Inktvlek
08-21-2005, 06:54 PM
raythex,
edit: you will not get the white card highlight i mentioned from an area light. you need a white plane to do this.
Ok sorry this was more or less an assumption from my side. Just ignore my post :o)

raythex
08-22-2005, 12:13 AM
rendering in passes? lol i sound like im so new to this. haha. would you please enlighten me on what that is? .... i might do it already in my other work. is it rendering out seperate pictures and then compositing in photoshop?

TroutMaskReplica
08-22-2005, 03:52 AM
it's just rendering out different elements and then compositing them together in photoshop (or the gimp or whatever).

for example, some people will render specularity and reflection in separate passes. i've rendered out key and fill lights in separate passes before.

the possibilities are endless and dependent on the situation.

Inktvlek
08-22-2005, 08:31 AM
But as for now, real rendering in passes is not really possible inside Blender, is it? Don't know about CVS though, because it's on the Orange want-list.

edit: nice example & explanation: http://www.3drender.com/jbirn/ea/Ant.html

Apollux
08-22-2005, 11:05 AM
It has allways been possible, and it has allways been a lot of extra work to set up (not just in Blender, in all packages).. I guess that what the Orange Movie Team want is an automated way to set up the passes.

I mean, instead of your final shaders, you neeed:

1.- A spec-less shader for the color pass.
2.- A pure black shader with high spec for the reflexion.
3. A sub-surface scattering shader for, guess, sub-surface scattering.
4.- An Alpha mask for composing
5. A Z-deph grayscale mask for composing.

Those are the very basic pieces needed for a pass render (and all can be done with Blender).. tr can be futher broken down (some people break down each light source separetaly, some render a bump map pass).. now multiply those 5 passes by each element on your scene (Background counts as one element also).

Now add in extra work and time spent in post production to put all the pieces together.

See? more often than it should, setting up a pass render adds more work that what it is supposed to solve. Sure it is a great solution when rendering times are very high and you are not sure about the lighting or textures.

By the way, if you decide to change the animation, or relative position of an element from the camera, you have to re-render almost all the passes.. not exactly the time saver you were expecting.

TroutMaskReplica
08-22-2005, 01:44 PM
it's an ideal solution for this project, which is a still frame targetted for print, where render times are high, and a professional result is absolutely critical, and where trial and error experimentation would eat into the projects budget.

yes, it is extra work to set up but you save all of that trial and error headache.

raythex
08-22-2005, 03:12 PM
how would i go aobut making a z-depth pass?

is it just applying a gradient material to the world setting? im not sure how z-depth would work with trasparent objects either. becuase it doesn't show whats inside.

Apollux
08-22-2005, 03:25 PM
There is a sequence plug to make that... I believe that Yafray also have some option for it.

Personally, I do it with a total black material on the objects and white mist on the world settings (or was it the other way around?) ... make the camera start/end clipping to mach the mist settings.

raythex
08-22-2005, 04:36 PM
hmmm :shrug: ... so what use is the z-depth? cuz im trying to find zdepth on the internet. and all it gives me and those gradient pictures without an explination of what they do. and so im thinking to myself, okay it looks cool lol, but whats the usefulness?

Apollux
08-22-2005, 06:49 PM
http://docs.gimp.org/en/ch07s13s02.html

There is somewhere a previous version of that help page with an actual example, but I cann't find it right now.

EDIT:
http://www.ic.al.lg.ua/~ksv/gimpdoc-html/plugin_e.html

raythex
08-24-2005, 11:33 PM
okay! so... going along the same lines as product advertising... i got another nice little render. these are Epson Generic Ink Cartridges. its for a website that im working on.

some C&C would be welcome :D

render time: 1 hr
Processor: intel celeron
Ram: (i dont know, can't be bothered to check, work place computer lol)

Post production in macromedia fireworksMX 2004 lol, i know. but they dont have photoshop here.

hehe

cheers

ray

Apollux
08-25-2005, 01:31 AM
For that type of image, isn't it more cost efficient to actually photograph the real thing?

Inktvlek
08-25-2005, 09:51 AM
Lighting needs some work I think, but one thing really bothers me: Instead of a real DOF, it looks like the image is just faded away (to white). For the background that works; it looks more or less like a fog. But in the foreground it's actually a bit strange.

About the lighting, try not to back-light this much. Now you have the most important part of the picture (the front of the cardridge) that's dark. Also, I understand that you didn't use a ground plane, but I believe that if you carefully light the scene, the shadows will cast in places you can't see them, except for the most important: those tiny black lines at the bottom!

Other than that: I agree with Apollux. I have been told that real life GI & caustics are pretty convincing and fast aswell! :)

raythex
08-25-2005, 04:37 PM
yeah i thought it would be more cost effective to take an actual photo too. but the place im working for doesn't have 40 ink catridges that i can line up. like that :( lol so well, they wanted something nifty. so i came up with this. (yay)

and i guess this was one of those quick renders. becuase hte modeling took my 10 min. textures 10 min. and then i just kinda hit render. hehe

(guess i'll try to get that DoF plugin inktvlek :D)

anyways. i'll try to post my latest bottle tomorrow or the next day. that ones for a portfolio. so. it can take as long as it needs.

cheers!

ray

TroutMaskReplica
08-25-2005, 05:34 PM
it looks like the DOF is a gaussian blur filter applied over a quickmask in one go.

it would be better to make a quickmask gradient, go back into normal mode, apply a small gaussian blur, go back into quickmask mode, move the gradient a small amount toward the focal point, jump back into normal mode, hit command F etc etc. this will produce a more gradual blurring that will be more realistic.

did you bevel those edges?

modeling and texturing look ok. agree with others the Epson logo should be on a plane receiving direct illumination. i think i would be comfortable with the way you've lit this scene were it not for the epson logo being where it is.

Apollux
09-02-2005, 01:16 AM
Hey, I'm curious !!

How did the EVA-OLA thing turn out?

raythex
09-02-2005, 01:56 AM
lol hey sry guys. it'll be a while before i post in this thread again. school started up so i haven't realyl gotten a chance to do a really good render with a nice white card effect. its comming though. i kidna just edit it at night and then leave it for a couple test renders. right now, my rendering is done on my station downstairs (which doesn't have internet, too lazy to get wi-fi for it) so its a bugger to transfer test renders up to this computer (with internet) and such. ... so there might be... i dunno.... 2-3 weeks breaks before you see any progress. sry lol

cheers


ray

CGTalk Moderation
09-02-2005, 01:56 AM
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.