8
« on: 2022-10-10, 18:27:30 »
Just to add my two cents here:
this is the reason we are trying to set a lighting standard. There are technical standards like PBR for materials, but for lighting there is none although it is the most important thing in a 3D scene. I saw a lot of people eyeballing the lighting settings until it looked good while also tweaking materials all the time. You'll get there eventually but it takes a lot of time always. In the next scene those precious adjusted assets start to break again.
I've seen hundreds of artists doing this kind of work all the time and it is frustrating of course. And common lighting assets - HDRI's for example do not make it better. they are not as bright, contrast is off, they lack dynamic range etc. This stuff continues with 3D candles that are sa bright as little suns and way too cool in terms of color. So how on earth should people approch this issue? The average artist just wants to pick an environment and some real lights like indoor ceiling lamps and set up the camera like a photographer or like someone with a smartphone.
I will not really talk about our upcoming product here - If you are interested - just hop on stableworks.tech and find out for yourself. What I want to adress here is, that All these assets - even the ones made with the best efforts will look crap in a lot of scenes because the scenes lighting is just off. people use the same camera settings for day and night shots and play around with the lighting based on what they see in real life with there eyes - of course the assets break. If we would all follow a common realistic lighting standard - AND the assets would have been made for it also - things would look completely different.
How do I know? Because I developed this system for the last 7 years and some companies are currently adapting it and they are successful with it. It has other benefits as well but one of the good things is, that this whole asset issue is gone!