[leoA4D]

I think this feeling comes from the overall blurriness of the renders, which seems to create an overall glow/glare in the scenes, and which seems to match more with the real photographic

u.biq

I don't fully agree about the bluriness quality. Some of the most striking professional photos pride themselves for the "clarity" of the image.

http://gallery.photo.net/photo/1743566-md.jpg
http://gallery.photo.net/photo/3840915-md.jpg
http://gallery.photo.net/photo/3929002-lg.jpg
http://gallery.photo.net/photo/3926986-lg.jpg
http://gallery.photo.net/photo/3926025-lg.jpg
http://gallery.photo.net/photo/3929904-md.jpg

The second and last images failed to open due to errors. Please check out.

BTW, very impressive. I hope we will be able to gain active status with the M~R family soon and do some work like these.

[jo]

the material settings were a real fight, but finally it looked ok to me.#good, the caotings give a better result than the beta rendering with simple plastics, but all in all, it´s not better than my beta result.

what do you think ?

this is my beta result, physical sky + sunlight:
[/url]

Everyone has some doubts about the quality of RC1/2 render core.
Looking at you wonderful beta render I think that probably physical sky, with his gradient help a lot...

Ciao, Jo

[arch4d]

thanks, Jo

yep, i know i have some doubts too, just downloading RC3, wanna compare the results between RC2 and 3.

and, yes, i know the physical sky definitely makes it easy to get cool results, and of course, textures give mood, that can´t be reached with simple materials as them that are supported for now.

and regarding the coatings, i think they look quite good, but can i make a simple polished deep red plastic material without coating ?

don´t know at all !!!

if anyone knows, please share.