1
Gallery / Re: House for architects and artists
« on: 2019-04-06, 19:23:34 »
To be honest I think the car and environment looks really good, but the house on the first pic is so flat it looks like one big texture.
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.
It's steep but my carpal tunnel was becoming severe which kinda surprised me as I am barely 30 years old :- ). If I want to keep using PC this is little investment to save my health.
@Benny Exactly. It offers the option of getting something good enough for presentation and marketing tbh.
@romullus The price tag is quite high though. They might reduce it if sales are good and it gets used more. UE4 lightmaps though is quite a bottle neck especially coming from offline renderers.
I personally believe there isn't such a thing as a perfect or hyper realistic renderer. There are limitations but if you understand the fundamentals of how to create a good render, the end result would always be high quality and photorealistic regardless of what renderer is used. Of course, certain features a renderer has plays a good role in making the results happen. Sometimes, you can fake certain features like reflections, ao and the results come off looking nice as well.
That is another topic. There is not a single renderer on the market that sucessfully switched from CPU to GPU rendering. There are probably some reasons behind this. One might be that you not be able to get full feature set of a CPU renderer on GPU. At this point I think it would then make more sense to remove the same features from CPU version than keep 2 renderers with 2 separate feature lists. And I think most people would still not like it...
People do seem very excited about the approach Blender is taking with Eevee though. Using a realtime GPU viewport renderer for IPR, which then often is good enough, with the option to do an offline render in their Cycles. The differences between the IPR and final render are outweighed by the relatively high quality of the viewport.
Being a non-programmer I actually can't understand why Chaos isn't taking a similar approach with Vray GPU, i.e. a viewport version. But perhaps Turing will allow that.
That is another topic. There is not a single renderer on the market that sucessfully switched from CPU to GPU rendering. There are probably some reasons behind this. One might be that you not be able to get full feature set of a CPU renderer on GPU. At this point I think it would then make more sense to remove the same features from CPU version than keep 2 renderers with 2 separate feature lists. And I think most people would still not like it...