Messages

16

Off-Topic / Re: Camera Raw filter

« on: 2014-12-10, 22:42:59 »

Interesting that you ask, I was about to comment on that but then thought it was too off-topic.
I don't like it a lot actually. Algorithms are interesting, specially camera effects, but the tonemapping is very limited to the presets, and the interface is very poor and not pleasant sensitivity wise. Then it lacks zoom for example and many  other things. ACR, for exemple, compensates the lack of more advanced color grading scopes with a good histogram, but in arion I keep going back to PS interface to check what I'm doing.
As soon as corona gets bloom and glare, I'll stop using it at all.

17

Off-Topic / Re: Camera Raw filter

« on: 2014-12-10, 21:19:51 »

Thanks Juraj!
It does solve it on all the tests I've made to try your solution out.
I'd never noticed that changing the mode would also change the tools of the first tab, and agree that it's probably more logical for that primary color correction on a render. I always found the current version a bit redundant, and more so because of the tone curve on the next tab having the same terminology (although slightly different response).

Regarding half-float, I already knew what you explained, but wasn't assuming (could have, now that i think of it) that the issue was necessarily because of linear gamma.

Anyway, pretty happy with it now. Thanks again.

18

Off-Topic / Camera Raw filter

« on: 2014-12-10, 10:41:14 »

Hey Guys
Has someone found a way to avoid the almost unusable response that you get from camera raw filter in 32bit mode?
I assume it happens because the software expects a RAW file, which isn't the case with bullet looks and arionfx, or even camera raw filter in 16bit for that matter,
but I do like the control it allows for and was wondering if there was anything you could do to make it work nicely in 32 bit, with say a half float .exr from Corona.

Thanks in advance
Fabio

19

Gallery / Re: wood livingroom

« on: 2014-12-03, 20:59:53 »

I had seen this a while back, maybe on Beckerman's page... it's brilliant, and very rare that we get to see these behind the scennes.
As an architect, and don't usually follow this side of the industry so much, but I appreciate the process of studio set work. I wish I could use it to create 1:1 scale models and test ideas ;) but cg will have to do!

20

Gallery / Re: wood livingroom

« on: 2014-12-03, 20:19:04 »

You're absolutely right, thanks for the correction. I was on my phone when I answered the second time and I thought it was very good cg.
Will definitely check Cedrone's work!

21

Gallery / Re: wood livingroom

« on: 2014-12-03, 15:25:41 »

I still wouldn't advise you to replicate other cg work, or even take it as reference for that matter, as your goal is lower than it could be right from the begining - whether it is to work on post-prod skills, materials, lighting or composition...
We have one of the best architecture photographers, copy him instead ;)

Regarding post-prod, know first what the image needs, and only then find whatever tool to achieve it. Even a simple curves correction can do wonders, because it's not about technique as much as it is about sensibility.
I personaly enjoy looking for video color-grading breakdowns, helps to understand the possibilities.
Hope it helps.

22

Gallery / Re: wood livingroom

« on: 2014-12-03, 13:11:43 »

Oh, I didn't realise you had such a specific reference that you were trying to match.
It's very close then. Maybe my comment about contrast still applies... note how darker the shadows are in poliform's image.

23

Gallery / Re: wood livingroom

« on: 2014-12-02, 20:08:54 »

Hi Pedro

Technically I think your work is quite good, and this image is proof of it.
We can always improve materials here and there (wood glossiness...), but I think where you could probably work to get more from your images (at least this one) is composition wise.
In my opinion it lacks depth and sense of space, which btw seems interesting enough to be more used to your advantage.
As for post-production, think more of it as an extent of your composition idea, so that it can answer to a specific purpose, and not just a way to make it look more real or natural - In this case it could compensate more the lack of contrast from the diffuse lighting.

Keep it up fellow compatriot ;)

24

Gallery / Re: Casa Spodsbjerg

« on: 2014-11-18, 16:51:04 »

I agree with you regarding the few artists that can call their works "photorealistic" - sometimes not even Bertrand really makes it - but i got to defend Juraj on this one, as he would be the first one to say (he did in fact) that his work is not perfect or "not very high" to use his words (which by the way i disagree).
Regardless of that, he is right to say that standards in arch viz are generally low (you would agree as yours apparently isn't), and doesn't really need to present "perfect" work to be able to criticise other's, specially if it allows them to improve as was the case here. Actually your previous comment on the photorealism of this work wouldn't probably be exactly that, if it wasn't for initial critique.

As for Lucas work, I commend him on his great lighting which is definitely very good and natural.
Some of the texturing and shading work can still be improved, specially the concrete in my opinion, but no one here thinks it's "low standards". It is low standards to call it photorealistic in an absolute way, but the work is quite good.

I'm also just an interested architect and by no means a cg-artist.

25

[Max] I need help! / Re: cameramod + vraycamera

« on: 2014-11-13, 15:17:12 »

You probably need to select "use photographic exposure" on the exposure and color mapping settings.

26

Work in Progress/Tests / Re: Studio Apartment WIP

« on: 2014-11-04, 08:51:48 »

I think it changes if you use a simple diffuse color on the material settings or a map (because of different gamma correction (?), maybe someone can confirm) but I find that values aroud 190 / 210 work well for white walls.
Right now I'm doing some lighting tests for an exterior, with strong direct sunlight from a cgsource hdri, and with a white value of 200, my compression is at 2, and it starts to look quite ok. So I guess that for a diffuse lit interior like yours, compression wouldn't even be necessary, and that's probably why you get the flat look.
There's another interesting discussion regarding albedos on the forum, around the whole pbr thing, check that out as well.

27

Work in Progress/Tests / Re: Studio Apartment WIP

« on: 2014-11-03, 16:39:17 »

 It might look better, but i don't that was Juraj's point though - to go and solve the issue in post I mean. He only used photoshop to explain his point better, but you should try to get a less flat image straight out of the renderer, correcting albedo values and probably adjusting light as well.
Concrete does look good, so it might be mostly a wall material problem. Some detail wouldn't hurt either to give a touch more of realism.

28

Gallery / Re: Forest & Ocean

« on: 2014-10-28, 12:36:56 »

I think you probably made it too strong in terms of light intensity, perhaps when you were looking for that depth, and that's why it looks as if it was a giant plasm like form said.
Simply toning it down a bit would likely solve the issue (maybe not for the client :p) as, composition wise, wouldn't be competing so much with the bed itself.
Anyway, like I said somewhere else, great images Juraj!