NK_Sunset

aymenk2003 · December 23, 2009, 01:35:13 AM

Detail 0.25 yes too low bad desktop...
ray trace everything checked
ray trace objects checked
No postwork...
any comments...

N.KAID

Gforce · December 23, 2009, 02:32:37 AM

the sky is still very nice for being rendered at .25.

EoinArmstrong · December 23, 2009, 04:36:16 AM

Yeah - this is great for 0.25 - the sky colours are lovely

Hannes · December 23, 2009, 05:22:15 AM

One question: why did you check "raytrace everything"? I think in this case it doesn't make sense and only increases render times.

aymenk2003 · December 23, 2009, 06:50:32 AM

Quote from: Hannes on December 23, 2009, 05:22:15 AM
One question: why did you check "raytrace everything"? I think in this case it doesn't make sense and only increases render times.

that's why I got nice cloud at 0.25...ehh I think..

N.KAID

PorcupineFloyd · December 23, 2009, 06:51:11 AM

Yeah, I'd turn off ray-trace everything, increase quality to 0.5 (or 0.55 but no more than that) and leave ray-trace objects on. It should result in better water quality without breaking sky details.

Henry Blewer · December 23, 2009, 07:51:31 AM

I like it. How long was the render with everything ray-traced? I think that the ray-trace gave everything a softer fell at the detail setting you used.

aymenk2003 · December 23, 2009, 07:57:58 AM

with that res it took 2. hours 20 ~...

N.KAID

Henry Blewer · December 23, 2009, 08:01:33 AM

It would probably take much longer on my P4. It gives me a ball park of how long it may take, thanks.

Hannes · December 23, 2009, 08:06:56 AM

2 hours, 20 min. with detail 0.25???
I wonder how long the render time would be without RT everything checked and with detail 0.5!

aymenk2003 · December 23, 2009, 09:58:52 AM

Quote from: Hannes on December 23, 2009, 08:06:56 AM
2 hours, 20 min. with detail 0.25???
I wonder how long the render time would be without RT everything checked and with detail 0.5!

40 min is the render time without RT everything/objects checked and with detail 0.25!

Henry Blewer · December 23, 2009, 12:30:47 PM

I think it looks better with the full ray trace option. There could be times when everything being raytraced works well.

Hannes · December 23, 2009, 01:59:31 PM

Oh yes, now it looks like we would expect a 0.25 detail render. As long as you don't have a terrain in your scene the use of RTE seems to be OK.

dandelO · December 23, 2009, 02:03:31 PM

I'd say here, that even the water looks better with RTE, and that obviously isn't optimized for ray tracing.
It looks a lot smoother(ha, because it is less detailed) in the first image.
Lovely sky.

aymenk2003 · December 23, 2009, 02:26:02 PM

Strange way behaves this RTE...!!
Since we don't have terrain it seems Ok to render at low detail...

N.KAID

NK_Sunset

dandelO