[sqwall]

i can even render "you" this way, this is a lame progress on a technical forum.
you can tell lies to yourself, not to us...
if you don't believe, check what i wrote in my first post!

So render me if you want.
But calling the way i made the image lame my friend tells that you did not know how the movies are made these days. Its all about the composite where the basis is important. Go ask Blur Studios or ILM if you want, anyone will tell you that they do it on passes. By this way they can tweak things faster without the need to render the thing over and over.

Bye

[tom]

sure you're right,
but we're not making movies here...

and if you respect the community,
you should explain in the beginning.

not just you apply post processes,
we all do that when needed!

but we ain't call it "ahaaa.. maxwell render!"

[sqwall]

sure you're right,
but we're not making movies here...

Ok then. Sorry for losing your time with my lamely made image.

[sqwall]

cool image mate and cleverly done

I really dont see why everyone is getting their knickers in a twist though

Thanks for the apreciation.

[tom]

no need to sorry, sqwall...

i easily call it "lame" because
- when you make a render,
- post it with a sign max7+maxwell (i can't see other things)
- and with no additional explanation
- and when we ask you... you say no it's maxwell

this is what i call lame for years.
sorry but your presentation style deserved it.
you may be a good artist but can be better.

[Maximus3D]

Personally i think it's great, the end result is what counts and the post tweaking he done to it is acceptable to me as it's the method of compositing stuff together. So good job on it and keep on Maxwelling!
I can't see what the fuzz is about, he provide detailed instructions on how it's done and with all the doubts he should only be proud that people suspect it not being a Maxwell rendering as it's that good. I'd say it's the best critic you can get.

The complaints i can see so far as it has "too much" tweaking and it differs too much from the original source rendering and there by making it "fake" in this technically oriented forum. But also this is the Gallery section so it should be allowed here. Others have tweaked their renderings too, often with blur and other things to improve them and reduce noise. This is a step further yes but it's still valid to me.

If i'm wrong then so be it, it's not the end of the world

/ Max

[Mihai]

sqwall, I don't want to call it a lie, but you should have stated how you did it from the beginning and we could have avoided this heated discussion

First of all, you used a diffuse mat for the entire car body? That's why I think, at least to me, it just looked wrong, like too many little details missing.

Try the plastic mat to simulate carpaint, you will see you will get slightly different results, and I think better looking then that reflection pass which looks very fake. The plastic mat will have slightly different light distribution because light is reflected both through specular and diffuse methods. With just a diffuse you get only....diffuse.

By using the plastic mat you can also play with the specular color to make it more like multi layered car paint. Although we don't yet have multilayered mats, it will look better than using a diffuse composited with that reflection.

[tom]

yeah it's a GREAT job, i tell this from the heart!
but it's a bad attitude to send a processed one saying "unprocessed".

[sqwall]

Thanks for the advice i will try it.

[rivoli]

as mihai pointed out the only thing that i don't really get is the reflection pass here. a maxwell plastic (with a map in the specular channel as mihai said) would look better and it wouldn't have taken longer than the only diffuse rendering (you could have done another pass only for the stikers if you didn't want them to reflect anything).
the glasses pass on the other hand is a very good idea.

[sqwall]

I ve modified the firt post so everyone will be alerted that the image is not pure .

Sorry again.

P.S.
I did not know that this is pure technical forum. So I will try not to post heavely modified images.

[Thomas An.]

Once the post-process is applied then the light distribution is thrown off.
This is no longer Maxwell in my eyes (it might have started as Maxwell but it is diluted to the point that its no longer recognizable...)

If you wanted this heavy occlusion look why not use MentalRay, Brazil, Vray ? It would be much faster.

The image has a very nice, but CG, look.

[sqwall]

Once the post-process is applied then the light distribution is thrown off.
This is no longer Maxwell in my eyes (it might have started as Maxwell but it is diluted to the point that its no longer recognizable...)

If you wanted this heavy occlusion look why not use MentalRay, Brazil, Vray ? It would be much faster.

The image has a very nice, but CG, look.

I like how the light is spreading on surfaces in maxwell. I majorly use MR.
And the warm feel of the light in M~R is different from the others. In other renders I have to prepare setups and yada-yada.. here I enter time and press enter. Render time does not bother me I have separete machine just for rendering

Did you tried Vray and Brazil at higer levels of GI sampling ... they take same time to render

[tom]

IMHO the post effects are more suitable for a toy poster rather than a movie look.

[sqwall]

IMHO the post effects are more suitable for a toy poster rather than a movie look.

Mine post effect maybe are worth for toy poster . But the vfx guys make them more real and deal more time making them whit lots of preparation.

Here take a look.
http://www.cgnetworks.com/story_custom. ... 538&page=2
Read from Dave Wilson – Lighting