This Image!!

[@matrix]

This image is what got me interested in using the Corona render engine, I cant believe this image is CG.. This is from the gallery on the corona website its by  Eduard Caliman and I really wish he was on this forum so he could talk about it if he was willing too maybe give some insight into how he did it. I know its a combo of modeling, materials, lighting and whatnot but i just find it hard to understand how you can reach this look? I mean im a newbie and i spend hours tweaking everything and i cant even get a real looking image.
Where can i learn how to make my renders look like this and what is most important for this look materials, models, lighting, or what?

[Ludvik Koutny]

It's experience. That's it. You spent just hours tweaking everything.... If you spend about 10 000 hours tweaking everything, then you'll eventually reach the experience level needed to achieve such a look.

Experience, or lack of it, is the reason why the prediction, that lots of artists will start to lose their jobs, because these days renderers/3d softwares are so easy to use, turned out to be wrong. Corona is a good renderer, but it's still just a renderer, not a pretty image generator. A golden envelope, but an empty one, and it's up to you what you put into it. The artist, in this case Eduard, is the reason the image looks the way it does, not Corona. And even if he went here, and wrote 20 pages of everything he knows about CG, even then it will take you several thousands of hours of experience until you would be able to put it all fully into practice.

[@matrix]

It's experience. That's it. You spent just hours tweaking everything.... If you spend about 10 000 hours tweaking everything, then you'll eventually reach the experience level needed to achieve such a look.

Experience, or lack of it, is the reason why the prediction, that lots of artists will start to lose their jobs, because these days renderers/3d softwares are so easy to use, turned out to be wrong. Corona is a good renderer, but it's still just a renderer, not a pretty image generator. A golden envelope, but an empty one, and it's up to you what you put into it. The artist, in this case Eduard, is the reason the image looks the way it does, not Corona. And even if he went here, and wrote 20 pages of everything he knows about CG, even then it will take you several thousands of hours of experience until you would be able to put it all fully into practice.

Thanks for the awesome answer. Guess ive got my next 10,000 hours planned haha

[Juraj]

http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/science/2014/09/malcolm_gladwell_s_10_000_hour_rule_for_deliberate_practice_is_wrong_genes.html

10k is both misquoted and wrong anyway (it's roughly 10 years, and you can see people putting out perfect work in months in many cases), but the general theme is correct, you have to primarily work on it yourself.

Rawalanche advice is very good though in light of most popular questions in this forum or CGI at all. People ask completely wrong questions, focusing on final steps and exact choices that are unique to particular scenario only, Less abstract, it means numbers. What 'exact' HDRi did you use ? What 'exact' highlight,white balance... ABC/XYZ.
Because what are you going to do with this knowledge ? Use the same HDRi in completely different project of yours and think it will look identically great ? It's absurd, but very perpetuated.

Learning (through others but not necessary) require to ask the right questions, and that's mostly "why". But even asking others that is not crucial, because you don't have to ask anyone anything to advance or become expert if you can ask them yourself. The best or pioneers simply found it for themselves by lot of good observation, critical thinking and experimenting. People like Marek Denko didn't even had access to forums or peers.


Also, you answered your questions. It's all three together, modelling, materials, lighting. In addition, there is post-production. Each require varied ratio of technical and creative/artistic knowledge. Don't try to be perfect in all at same time. Divide them and start at some. Ask the right questions and try to find answer yourself. For photorealism, it could be for example as:
1)Modelling: What makes models look real ? Look at real-world example at your fingers. Choose one object, and study it. It's about observing and analyzing. The answer could be details, the proper form, chamfers, little imperfections..etc.
2)Materials: What makes them look real ? Again take example in real-life. Study it from angles, against light. How does it behave ? Does plastic and metal behave differently ? What is the texture detail ?
3)Lighting: What makes light look attractive ?

etc.. etc..

It's about deliberate practice. Not just tinkering randomly (but even that has the place of course) for all the time. You have to have state of mind, where you can advance yourself without the help of others, because you can't have that all-the-time, and even if you would, you would only be playing catch-up game. If you want to be best, you need to rely on yourself. Just like all the masters before did.

[maru]

Teaser: we will be posting some blog articles soon, and Eduard is on the list (in fact, his article is almost ready and waiting for approval). :)

[@matrix]

Teaser: we will be posting some blog articles soon, and Eduard is on the list (in fact, his article is almost ready and waiting for approval). :)

sweeet, ill be sure to check that out!!

[@matrix]

http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/science/2014/09/malcolm_gladwell_s_10_000_hour_rule_for_deliberate_practice_is_wrong_genes.html

10k is both misquoted and wrong anyway (it's roughly 10 years, and you can see people putting out perfect work in months in many cases), but the general theme is correct, you have to primarily work on it yourself.

Rawalanche advice is very good though in light of most popular questions in this forum or CGI at all. People ask completely wrong questions, focusing on final steps and exact choices that are unique to particular scenario only, Less abstract, it means numbers. What 'exact' HDRi did you use ? What 'exact' highlight,white balance... ABC/XYZ.
Because what are you going to do with this knowledge ? Use the same HDRi in completely different project of yours and think it will look identically great ? It's absurd, but very perpetuated.

Learning (through others but not necessary) require to ask the right questions, and that's mostly "why". But even asking others that is not crucial, because you don't have to ask anyone anything to advance or become expert if you can ask them yourself. The best or pioneers simply found it for themselves by lot of good observation, critical thinking and experimenting. People like Marek Denko didn't even had access to forums or peers.


Also, you answered your questions. It's all three together, modelling, materials, lighting. In addition, there is post-production. Each require varied ratio of technical and creative/artistic knowledge. Don't try to be perfect in all at same time. Divide them and start at some. Ask the right questions and try to find answer yourself. For photorealism, it could be for example as:
1)Modelling: What makes models look real ? Look at real-world example at your fingers. Choose one object, and study it. It's about observing and analyzing. The answer could be details, the proper form, chamfers, little imperfections..etc.
2)Materials: What makes them look real ? Again take example in real-life. Study it from angles, against light. How does it behave ? Does plastic and metal behave differently ? What is the texture detail ?
3)Lighting: What makes light look attractive ?

etc.. etc..

It's about deliberate practice. Not just tinkering randomly (but even that has the place of course) for all the time. You have to have state of mind, where you can advance yourself without the help of others, because you can't have that all-the-time, and even if you would, you would only be playing catch-up game. If you want to be best, you need to rely on yourself. Just like all the masters before did.

Yes all good points, Thanks for the inspiration!!

[mitviz]

all being said is true but also corona does make setting things up and producing scenes as this easier, you will find this so after awhile of using a few different renderers

[agentdark45]

The single biggest factor making a CG image look "real" is lighting in my opinion (and how well the render engine can mimic reality i.e no smoothing/interpolation, fake shading, artificially darkened corners e.t.c). This is a HUGE oversimplification of course, as modelling, materials, post production and the quality of the render engine are also big factors. But, accurate physically based lighting (or lack thereof) can really make or break an image despite having perfect models and materials. Pleasing and accurate lighting that mimics real life can help to cover up deficiencies in lower quality models and materials (not that you should ignore these aspects though).

[mitviz]

thats really true and i think corona does lighting really well, especially for interiors! exteriors also but i cant comment since i use it mostly for interiors