Planetside Software Forums

General => Image Sharing => Topic started by: DannyG on December 17, 2012, 07:01:59 PM

Title: Populations test
Post by: DannyG on December 17, 2012, 07:01:59 PM
NWDA Lilac, Grasses, reeds, weeds, Spruce, hero rock, Silva3D BlackberryVar3, Pines, Mandrakes Bushes.

First render was at .8 AA10
Title: Re: Populations test
Post by: DannyG on December 17, 2012, 07:04:18 PM
Some needed advise from Tangled Universe his recommend settings. Big difference I think, grass is much softer. Bit of a softening to the scene as a whole but still looks good. thanks Martin (Not a huge difference in render time compared to the straight 10)
Detail .8, AA16 (1/16) pixel noise .02 Cubic B-Spline
Title: Re: Populations test
Post by: masonspappy on December 17, 2012, 07:28:42 PM
it looks very good  Danny.
Title: Re: Populations test
Post by: Dune on December 18, 2012, 02:40:46 AM
Nice setup and I like the veggies. The stones might need some improvement, IMHO. But the main difference I see between the two renders is that the latter is a bit blurred overall. I think if you prefer that, it's quite easy to blur a little in photoshop, but render crisp, so you have the detail. Or do I miss something?
Title: Re: Populations test
Post by: DannyG on December 18, 2012, 05:55:56 AM
Hello Dune, you are correct it is a bit blurry/softened as you mentioned what I didn't like about the original render is the grass looks a bit raspy or harsh. Thats very high res grass I was a bit confused as to why it was looking like that, (maybe some intersecting going on)  Martin suggested that I use the above render settings to help this and it did indeed help the grass but it did add some blur to the scene as a whole, I think by using a xero filter or something like that in PH would work, but would seriously the impact the clarity of the atm and trees (more so than above) I appreciate the look and advise, and yes the displacements do look a bit pointy, need to sort that out as well. working on it  ^^
Title: Re: Populations test
Post by: Henry Blewer on December 18, 2012, 08:01:52 AM
The Box pixel filter works well also with Martin's settings.

I like both renders actually. Have you tried DOF for your renders? I have not been able to really get that to work...
Title: Re: Populations test
Post by: Dune on December 18, 2012, 01:10:34 PM
How about the Mitchel-Netravali filter? I use that a lot.
Title: Re: Populations test
Post by: Zairyn Arsyn on December 18, 2012, 02:38:51 PM
very nice scene.
interesting rock displacements.
Title: Re: Populations test
Post by: inkydigit on December 18, 2012, 06:09:12 PM
Great stuff Danny and some really useful info too...Dune's suggestion sounds interesting too!
J
:)
Title: Re: Populations test
Post by: DannyG on December 19, 2012, 12:23:39 PM
Mitchel Netravali Render setting Detail .8 AA16
Title: Re: Populations test
Post by: Dune on December 20, 2012, 02:11:18 AM
I like this better than the very soft one. How about a little population variation among the grass(es)? And I would change the stones/dirt. Smoother, more color variation.
Title: Re: Populations test
Post by: TheBadger on December 20, 2012, 05:14:18 AM
Good set up. Now drive your self mad tweaking it to perfection.  ;D
Title: Re: Populations test
Post by: DannyG on December 20, 2012, 07:22:12 AM
Thanks for the help gentleman, I will work on this this weekend. Sort out the issues Dune mentioned. Thanks again
Title: Re: Populations test
Post by: Aerometrex on January 02, 2013, 10:46:57 PM
Very impressive result.  How long did it take to process?
Title: Re: Populations test
Post by: choronr on January 03, 2013, 02:00:28 AM
Danny, I would suggest you give the stones/rock a more of an earth color (brown/gray). This would better blend with your grasses and plants.
Title: Re: Populations test
Post by: DannyG on January 03, 2013, 11:00:59 AM
Thanks Bob I appreciate the advise, I would have to agree, to be honest I kind of abandoned this project for know, I certainly need to work out the PF.
*Aerometrex this took about 3 hours to render at the settings above