Since I'm not around much recently to contribute, I thought I'd share a single chapter of the slow in coming Public Library - vol.4.
No matter, I'm an idiot.
No matter, I'm an idiot.
No matter, I'm an idiot.
No matter, I'm an idiot.
No matter, I'm an idiot.
wow.... nice work, this looks absolutely great.
Cheers, Simon.
I'm psyched. This looks like a very powerful tool. Thanks!
This is one of the few that I am going to download. Thanks for sharing, dude!
Thanks!! For me this is a wonderful example of how nodes can be organized. It amazes me how such a simple structure can result in such beauty, control, and be so easily expandable. I've already learned a lot just from a brief review - for example, I had never seen the lambert shader in use and had no idea how effective a control it could be. Thanks again!!!
No matter, I'm an idiot.
Very clean setup ... I was tempted to ask where the nodes are ;D ;) ...
No matter, I'm an idiot.
Wow, this looks really good! It doesn't degrade as gracefully as I'd like in the distance, but that may be a function of detail settings or other adjustment. I'll tinker with it and see. Thanks for sharing! :)
- Oshyan
Thank you, dandelO. This is excellent.
This is an awesome file bud! ;D
Fast set up file for sure, looks like our OLD stuff!
Thank you! Very much. You the man!
So you are giving this to us 4 free?!!! man thanks bro im guna have a play around with this!
you should be on the NWDA team^^
This is totally cool.
It does, however, affect render speed a lot. I'm doing a scene right now that I'd estimate renders in 6 hours without grass, maybe twice that with grass populationo (I've done lots of renders of this scene, but not the identical shot). I'm now trying with your grass and it's at almost 20 hours and nowhere near finished. :-(
Settings: Detail 0.9, AA 6, 1680x1050
No matter, I'm an idiot.
Quote from: dandelO on September 09, 2009, 06:05:06 PM
The Lambert shader is better for translucency than a default shader, I find.
There are two translucency settings in it, a default shader has only one. I like to use a nice bright, vibrant colour for translucency, in a default shader you only have the option to change colour and actual translucency via one slider, lowering translucency here darkens the colour of the translucence.
A Lambert shader has an extra control: 'translucency tint' colour. This means I can keep the bright translucency colour whilst dropping the translucency value.
Really there is no difference. Translucency tint is multiplied by the the translucency value. You don't gain anything by keeping a bright colour while using a low translucency value. But if you find the GUI easier that way, that's good. It's just compressed into a single parameter in the Default Shader to save space and to be consistent with all other attributes, but it is no less powerful in its rendering effect.
Using a Lambert Shader at the end actually limits your options, because you will lose all your specular and luminosity.
Matt
Quote from: dandelO on September 11, 2009, 02:55:53 PM
Hi, Falcon. I am on my mobile here, excuse the crude, quick message. It really should be MUCH quicker than a population
I'm testing that now. It's done. Render time was a little over 28 hours.
I've now replaced the planetary grass shader with two grass populations (to get the same amount of variety) and am rendering it again, with otherwise identical settings. I have GI set to 2 (default). Atmosphere quality is at 64, with ray traced shadows enabled. The preview clearly shows that it's taking all that time on the grass, though.
Will see how long the population render takes. :-)
I can send you the .tgd if it is of any help.
No matter, I'm an idiot.
Here's the two renders in comparison.
First, with the grass shader, render time about 28 hours.
Second, with two grass populations, render time about 10 hours.
Post-processing changes: Reduced size to 50% for posting, HDR conversion. Nothing else.
Might be that it's the close-up view? It does show that it was not really intended for that.
No matter, I'm an idiot.
In my opinion a trade off is the best choise, using the grass shader for the mid to distant areas and the objects for the close-ups.
Good scene, by the way!
Quote from: Volker Harun on September 19, 2009, 08:33:01 AM
In my opinion a trade off is the best choise, using the grass shader for the mid to distant areas and the objects for the close-ups.
Good scene, by the way!
Guess I'd agree with that. I finally got a chance to play a bit. Should probably paint out the foreground, but it's fun to play with.
Gave me a chance to break out world machine too.
Thanks DandelO