Does this image feel photoreal?

[mangolass]

The ground feels photoreal. The balls look CG, even in a thumbnail. On the big noisy one, the bottom part looks bright blue/green, as if the ground in front of it were brightly lit ~ but the ground in front of it isn't that color at all.

LT

[Simon]

The ground feels photoreal. The balls look CG, even in a thumbnail. On the big noisy one, the bottom part looks bright blue/green, as if the ground in front of it were brightly lit ~ but the ground in front of it isn't that color at all.

LT

Yeah thats what I noticed, but Im not sure at all why it happened. I think my best guess that the ground quickly gets a lot brighter out of the cameras vision. but that doesnt really make much sense as I was using a lightprobe image. hmm.

Simon

[Rice]

There are some really nice qualities to your shaders but if your trying to match realism I would pick a subject matter that people see often enough to have some sort of comparrison to. The subject matter you choose to me immediatly says CG. 3 shiny balls on the ground isn't something you would see readily, especially that close up and unique looking. Maybe if it was more of a product type shot of some stainless steel balls it might work better although it would probably make for a less interesting image like below.

http://www.smallparts.com/images/BALLS2-C.jpg

Also the amount of oxidation on the front ball in comparrison to it's clean surface area on the same ball to me would be unlikely, making it feel unnatural. There are some great reference sites online for how corrosion is caused and the different types of corrision you can expect.

Cheers,

[rayscluster]

It looks good to me. but the quality of image looks a bit low. Then add some more GI feel, it will looks more realistic.

[CGTalk Moderation]

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.