WIP, first full render, times are ridiculous though and I'm not sure why. Granted I cranked up the quality Detail 1.1/AA10 because of the lower resolution, but 16 hours seems a lot when that's not too far over what I use in some larger renders that end up taking less time. I've got soft shadows on which I feel is necessary to the feel of the image. Even without that it still takes longer than I'd want in test renders with lower quality. Could possibly be the objects themselves I suppose. I'm sure the water doesn't help. I'd like to do multiple seasons, as well as add some fog, but I feel like it may just end up taking forever. Also in this version there's definitely post work. I'll post one later without the effects.
This looks really lovely and promising (although the glow effect may be a little much for me personally). I suspect it's the water cranking up the render time though. I'd say make it a bit less rough, to start.
- Oshyan
great forest ;)
A better image usually seems to require a longer render time. This is certainly worth a few extra render cycles.
Looks good.
Some trees-maybe all?-do look problematic. Kinda not subdivided?
I like is pretty. :)
I like the foliage on the main tree. Very pretty. Some of the tree trunks look strange to me.
Quote from: Kadri on October 03, 2015, 03:19:23 PM
Looks good.
Some trees-maybe all?-do look problematic. Kinda not subdivided?
nice start bt I agree with the squareish trunks. That's a major problem with the XFROG freebies..quite low poly for the most part.
Very nice indeed, has great potential. Maybe crank up the bump on the trees to get rid of the squareness. Did you mask out the water for faster rendering? It's small area, but if the whole lake under the ground will be rendered first....
And detail 1.1 isn't necessary, IMO. There's very little ground, and I guess 0.8 or even 0.6 would do nice enough. And AA8 also, instead of 10. You could also lower the soft shadow samples to 5, due to the rough vegetation. Check some crops for differences.
re: the trees...I would replace the dead squareish trees with a population of leaf less Chestnut as most of the ones in that collection seem fairly Hi Res. I checked the lowest file size one EU43_2.tgo and just turned the opacity to 0 (black) and it's a great dead tree.
Tree fixes (used a different model of that same chestnut, Bobby), less glow, and higher resolution. Tinkered with settings and only took 12 hours even at the higher resolution.
Dune - What do you mean by masking the water? That's the first I've heard of that?
I really do like the last one
David
Good one...that's a nice batch of trees...one of the 9 varieties batch,
If it's taking so long to render, it's also because water is rendered under the terrain, where you don't see it. So if you take that part out (by mask) it won't be rendered and speeds up the render time. A mask can be made by painting over the creek from above, or even this way, by using the render painted over (better of course), where the rest is black, water area is white; this image map can then be projected through render camera, and used as input in a default shader's opacity tab, where the default color is turned to black. Input this into a colorless surface layer where your water shader resides as a child, and your done.
For creeks and rivers I tend to use a displaceable cube sized to fit the river/stream width and flattened in the Y axis and lengthened in the long part; with a Water shader on it to replace a plane as you can easily rotate a flattened cube where as the plane is a pain to rotate. This eliminates any water outside of the narrow confines of the cube saving a fair bit of time, but masking as well works on a Lake object; this just saves making a mask and I find it faster. Make sure to turn off Cast Shadows on the cube though.
Quote from: Dune on October 06, 2015, 11:45:38 AM
If it's taking so long to render, it's also because water is rendered under the terrain, where you don't see it. So if you take that part out (by mask) it won't be rendered and speeds up the render time. A mask can be made by painting over the creek from above, or even this way, by using the render painted over (better of course), where the rest is black, water area is white; this image map can then be projected through render camera, and used as input in a default shader's opacity tab, where the default color is turned to black. Input this into a colorless surface layer where your water shader resides as a child, and your done.
Oh God, I think I never thought about that. I thought things were rendered only if seen in the image.
Thanks a lot for this information.
David