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 / 2828
2827  |  2829
Subject: 
Re: Opinions sought on rendering method
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.cad.ray
Date: 
Mon, 8 Oct 2007 15:38:24 GMT
Viewed: 
8192 times
  
In lugnet.cad.ray, Philippe Hurbain wrote:
   In lugnet.cad.ray, Travis Cobbs wrote:
   I’m working on a different rendering method (for instructions) using POV-Ray, and I wanted to get some opinions about the output.(snip)

Version 1:

1600x1200 800x600

Version 2:

1600x1200 800x600

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 surfaces.

  • Black is too dark/uniform. Lighter edgelines?

  • The complex transparency effect in the rounded edge of the windscreen is nice but brings nothing to legibility
Version 2
  • shadow makes the image more complex. To be avoided in instructions!

  • No details in tires (the shiny look of V1 is not realistic, but clearer)

  • reflections of studs on bricks also makes the image less understandable
The clear winner for me is version 1.

Silly question - why don’t you use LDView???

Good point. I think the official instructions are harder to follow now with the fancy rendering. Sometimes you can’t tell one color from another, especially black, white, and the various shades of gray. I can barely tell the white bricks from the gray ones in your pics. And what’s up with the light spot on the gray slopes on the back. Is it supposed to be chrome? Otherwise that just confuses me. Go with the simplest lighting possible for instructions. I think a lot of ambient light and just a hint of direct light keeps the colors distinct and gives enough 3D hints to discern shapes. Forget about spotlights unless you’re rendering metallic parts, and even then try and render them with their own lighting if possible. Clarity is more important than realism. Trust me, nothing discourages my kids (and me) more than going back 20 steps to replace a dark gray part with the correct light gray part.

Also, if you can make the translucent bricks slightly opaque like Jim’s example, I think it makes the insides less confusing. Your yellow headlights look almost inside out.

As an example the rendering here is much, much less realistic, but I think it’s easier to follow than the instructions with too much realism.

Have fun,

Don



Message has 1 Reply:
  Re: Opinions sought on rendering method
 
(...) I've found that getting rid of the transparent colors' refraction characteristics makes for a much clearer rendering, too: (URL) no refraction>> Jim (17 years ago, 8-Oct-07, to lugnet.cad.ray, FTX)

Message is in Reply To:
  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)

22 Messages in This Thread:











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

This Message and its Replies on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact
    

Custom Search

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