Maxwell Render | Official public forum

Beta 1.2.2


1.7.1 (new addition with lower shutter and little bit post work to remove some remaining darker area in the corner)


1.7.1


Both of these images have no postwork.

and a small video base on a single image and using the Z buffer channel to apply the DOF....this is my first test so the quality is not very good.

Both images are very nice, but the orange plastic is completely different with 1.7.1.

Ok, i forgot to mention that excepted the camera positioning and some lighting , nothing else is similar in this two pictures. All the materials have been changed (i'm using the one that i have share few days ago).

Hyltom, Where can I find that shared material?

The new ones are very much improved! Would you attribute that to Maxwell's improvements or your own personal development? (A little of both, I presume.) I never used Beta, so I don't know it's limitations, but the improvement in realism with both lighting and materials is quite pronounced.

The first image is superior in my eyes.

Giacc: You can find them here. Also you should have received a Christmas letter from NL with the link to download them.

Thomas: can you elaborate a little bit more why you find the first image superior? Is it the lighting, the material or a general feeling?

Bubbaloo: as you presume, i think it's due to both... maxwell improvements 1% and mine 99% . Serioulsy, compare with the beta version, we have much more ability to create complex and realistic material now and the light distribution has also improve.

In the pure photographic sense, if they were both photos on flickr, the first one would be more compelling to look at. The lighting composition is better, the image is vivid, cleaner, and the materials are more believable. The new plastic is too reflective and the shiny groundplane doesn't add much benefit. Also, something is off with the light distribution itself (probably due to material settings), causing the dark areas to be too dark sort of like an occlusion render (muddling the image).

The original was perfect. The revision was a step back.

seems like you've let your unbiased rendering sense take over your illustrative sense.

what happens if you match the front display in 1.7 with the display in 1.2 and tone down the reflections? While the materials may be that reflective, i think the reflections are competing with the forms themselves...

Thomas An. wrote:In the pure photographic sense, if they were both photos on flickr, the first one would be more compelling to look at. The lighting composition is better, the image is vivid, cleaner, and the materials are more believable. The new plastic is too reflective and the shiny groundplane doesn't add much benefit. Also, something is off with the light distribution itself (probably due to material settings), causing the dark areas to be too dark sort of like an occlusion render (muddling the image).

The original was perfect. The revision was a step back.

Ouch!!! This is a painful but very constructive comment. Thanks Thomas!
Will be back with another revision in few days.

Here is the update (lighting adjustment done on a crap Dell display ..really miss my Apple display at work when doing such adjustment)

1.7.1


Beta 1.2.2

There are a few things that are nicer in the 1.7.1 version.
-I like the light-colored buttons on top of the orange clock. They are more distinguishable than in the old (1.2) version.
-The new lighting makes the LCD displays (especially for the dark gray clock on the right) more visible. So this too is an improvement over the old (1.2).

It is a nicer image now.
Now for that last 1% ... If only the burn-out was a little less pronounced on the front clock, the plastic slightly less reflective, and the shadows were a little lighter (they kind of don't look normal given the brightness of the scene ... it's like there are not enough bounces, if we had a bounce control, or some of the materials absorb more light more than it should acting like a sponge).