Started by Hannes, March 09, 2016, 04:13:01 pm
Quote from: Dune on March 13, 2016, 03:43:56 amYes, I knew about 1) (better is always more 'expensive' But 2) I have to think about. Does that also mean that it's better to increase those samples for say an 8k image?
Quote3): I guess we have a small misunderstanding; if you look at your monitor you see one (~1/4) part of the globe the equirectangular image is projected on, the rest is on the right, left and behind you (and above and below). The part in front has a certain sharpness, but so need the other parts. That differs from a straight render that fills the monitor. That's what I meant. So an equirectangular render of 8k wide would, IMO, look kind of similar as a 2k normal render, roughly said.
Quote from: Hannes on March 16, 2016, 06:20:46 pmI added a little bit more stuff (think I have to stop now...) and rendered a second view in 4K. This time it took 24 and a half hours.There's a lot of reflective shaders, but I did tests with the simple specular function of the shaders, and I didn't like it.Here's how it looks in 1280px. No postwork.