To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.cad.rayOpen lugnet.cad.ray in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 CAD / Ray-Tracing / 2822
2821  |  2823
Subject: 
Opinions sought on rendering method
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.cad.ray
Date: 
Mon, 8 Oct 2007 07:11:42 GMT
Viewed: 
8272 times
  
I’m working on a different rendering method (for instructions) using POV-Ray, and I wanted to get some opinions about the output. On that note, I have two sample renderings in two different sizes, and I’d like to get people’s feedback. Note that I’m purposely not saying anything about how they were created (other than the fact that POV-Ray was used), because that would affect the results in a way that I’m not ready for yet. (I have at least one specific thing that I want to see if people notice, but if I say anything more, I won’t get good data.) I will follow up this post later with more details (hopefully after having gotten responses).

Version 1:

1600x1200 800x600

Version 2:

1600x1200 800x600

I’m particularly interested in problems you might see with either or both of the images. There are definitely problems; I’m curious about how obvious they are.

--Travis



Message has 6 Replies:
  Re: Opinions sought on rendering method
 
(...) For me, the keypoint here is "for instructions". Anything that remove legibility to the image should be avoided. In both versions conditional lines are not rendered. Not a huge problem here, could become one on models with many rounded (...) (17 years ago, 8-Oct-07, to lugnet.cad.ray, FTX)
  Re: Opinions sought on rendering method
 
(...) - The shadows in version 2 cause color confusion. This is the most glaring example but it is repeated thoughout the rendering: the 1x2 grille piece is white in version 1 but looks grey in version 2. - No conditional lines rendered in both. - (...) (17 years ago, 8-Oct-07, to lugnet.cad.ray)
  Re: Opinions sought on rendering method
 
(...) For instructions I'd definitely choose Version 1, for nice pictures Version 2 minus the hard, black edges and a little less shiny. As the other's have said: - too dark in the black. Actually, to me the whole picture is too dark - which monitor (...) (17 years ago, 8-Oct-07, to lugnet.cad.ray)
  Re: Opinions sought on rendering method
 
(...) On my monitor, version 1 certainly looks cleaner and sharper. I will be interested to see how you accomplished this. It might get me back into creating instructions again, which is something I have stopped doing because I was getting so (...) (17 years ago, 8-Oct-07, to lugnet.cad.ray, FTX)
  Re: Opinions sought on rendering method
 
(...) In my opinion, both images are unusable for instructions. Prefering legibility over realism (though a bit of "realism" is still needed to even recognize the shapes), I put down some universal rules for creating instructions of virtually any (...) (17 years ago, 8-Oct-07, to lugnet.cad.ray, FTX)
  Re: Opinions sought on rendering method
 
Well, as of 0135 PDT, lugnet.cad.ray is at the top of the 24-hour column of the LUGNET Traffic Report (with 18 posts, vs. 12 for the next group). That makes me feel good. :-) (This is the only thread in the group that has had any posts in the last (...) (17 years ago, 9-Oct-07, to lugnet.cad.ray, FTX)

22 Messages in This Thread:











Entire Thread on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact
    

Custom Search

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR