16
Gallery / Re: Stadium Study
« on: 2018-05-23, 09:08:10 »
Great atmosphere here, but too much difference between your low definition background and the vegetation of the model.
That's my opinion...
That's my opinion...
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Pas de devis signé ?! Roland ...Yes I have a complete Slack conversation. I hope it will help ;-)
En même temps, je crois qu'il y a jurisprudence en la matière, des emails échangés dans le cadre du projet peuvent suffire.
Ça fait vraiment chier pour toi :(
En : No quote signed ?! Roland ...
At the same time, I believe that there is case law in this area, emails exchanged within the framework of the project may suffice.
It's really pissing for you :(
yep alreday told him to take a downpayment......but anyway i also got clients who paid downpayment and never paid the rest..like AFDI.Yes I know Ricco... we could build a black list forum with all this thiefs !
Sorry for u Mr Roland, seems it's starting to be a competition in france.
Si tu as un devis signé en bonne et due forme, tu peux saisir un huissier.Non pas de devis signé hélas... donc pas beaucoup de recours. Néanmoins j'ai un avocat dans mes relations... on verra !
Il y a quelques années, un indélicat a voulu jouer avec moi. Il a payé sa facture et les frais d'huissier.
En : If you have a quote signed in due form, you can seize a bailiff.
A few years ago, an indelicate wanted to play with me. He paid his bill and the bailiff's fees.
Oh crap ... sorry to read that, Roland :(Of course... no ! (it seems I'm still a rookie in the job !!)
Did you bill at least 50 % before starting the project ?
With many lights (e.g. 10 or more)Sure I know when you can get the best result. In my scene there are approximately 20 lights with some different shapes so I think it can be tested with the LS.
Where lights have complex shapes
With complex lighting scenarios (e.g. if the lights are occluded by some objects, blocking the path from the light source to the camera)
Don't forget that sometimes "faster rendering" does NOT mean the same number of passes in less time - sometimes a single pass may take longer, but be of much greater quality (lower Noise Level, and visually much better). In those cases, comparing the same number of passes does not give the comparison, and instead rendering for a specified time or to a specified noise level will show the improvement. In both cases, this means you will need less passes to get to the same result, and so less time = faster rendering (and if you are using passes, now you set a lower number of passes, to get the same or better results in less time)Completely agree with you : what I've noticed at the end of my answer was that quality is better than the render without light solver; so you're right, in this case, with less passes, I can have the same result -and even better- in less time.