Forest & Ocean

[raylight75]

You have some problems, floor is too uniform in the real worls planks are not perfect aligned verticaly and hor., in the second pictures bed looks bad in the closeup- is very triangulated you need retopology for clean geometry, for the last images if you have light with big power in the room that light must affect windows to outside, in my opinion violet light is too strong.
And for all images in the real world materials like wood have little anisotroping, you need some variation in the reflectivity and glossy of the wood materials in the sceneq the wood materials sre very flat and uniform.

[Juraj]

Juraj

The most effective Forest_Night_8k.jpg
And as it is pleasant Forest_Vignette1.jpg - on the right наподобии a fog, it is postprocessing or effect from DOF?
Thanx!

Not sure what exactly you mean, but it's both. DOF is rendered, and you probably mean the seeming 'haze', but that's only lifted shadows.

[Juraj]

in the second pictures bed looks bad in the closeup- is very triangulated you need retopology for clean geometry

I already answered it twice, it's just normal map error I forgot about (because it was visible only under zoom), if you look at next image, it's corrected. I don't think it matters, since you have to look for it.

wood have little anisotroping, you need some variation in the reflectivity and glossy of the wood materials in the sceneq the wood materials sre very flat and uniform.

I know, 60perc. of wood materials in my work have anisotrophy, which I even stated in tutorials. But this is simple, flat wood, with only slight specularity (more natural).

Saying I need is strong word, if these are issues for you, than wait for my next personal non-commercial project, which is more polished than 12 images in 10 days ;- ). {there is also unpublished 'City' }

[Tom Zamorin]

Juraj
You have correctly understood all (in spite of the fact that I on русски have written one word). :)
I also wanted to learn it. I thank for the answer!

[Edvinas]

Cmon people. If you want, you can always find something what is not perfect. Always. But considering time/quality result as Juraj mentioned, it looks stunning. Really, man, very good work!
And it's nice to see how you stand for your "taste" ;)

[form]

Great work, the only thing that immediately stood out for me was on the forest night image, something about the lack of depth on the backplate, just looks a little to flat (a bit like a giant plasma tv and not a window/opening) but man, you and your partners work are great and I'm excited to see more. This is the reason I joined the forum.

[Juraj]

You're right about that, and maybe if I was more talented in photoshop I could add the depth in some ways (I tried sort of, but maybe in wrong way). It was impossible find backplate to please the client, and the reason why it isn't covered more with fog/haze, which
would add depth, is that the backplate had to be very dominant, to make it stand out. It does kill the realism, but on other the point of image was the environment itself.

[form]

I know the feeling, its often comes down to sacrifice to give the client what they want and to meet deadlines, regardless if you think/want it to be different. Either way, cracking set of images.

[fabioazevedo]

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!

[abubaker]

Stunning Images. Love the compositions and the Mood. I am sure plenty of hard work went into these renders, Great Job.

[melviso]

Wow.. these images are top notch. I wonder how long they took to render. Great work, Juraj. I wish my work was this good. Will keep on practicing. Can I ask what your opinions are about Corona compared to Vray?

[Alexp]

I Juraj, first of all, congratulations for your work. Its very impresive. You got it, I dont know why, but you got it, Lol
The light balance and the atmosphere its perfect in my humble opinion.

Only one question. For the glases of the windows, you use only one plane with thin(no refraction) and portal lights or the brute force method, you know, with a box.


best regards

[Juraj]

For the glases of the windows, you use only one plane with thin(no refraction) and portal lights or the brute force method, you know, with a box.

When a slight possibility of visible refraction (like glass edges) exists, I always use box. For this project, Box glass and no portals (not needed, look at how open these spaces are).
For projects with very little windows, thin and yes, portals.

I wonder how long they took to render.

Not the type of answer people would perhaps like: A lot of hours :- ) In the end it's not much issue since I have few computers to do that job, but it's not fast.
I render quite hi-res (for big commercial project I start in December, we agreed with client on 8400px because of print, so that has some cost too) but they're not super fast even in lower res :- )

Exteriors are fast, but GI+Glossies have their cost, regardless of rendering engine ( that I use/used ).

Can I ask what your opinions are about Corona compared to Vray?

Don't like to go into this territory :- ) I have a love/hate relationship with Vray. Don't get me wrong, I am not evangelist, Vray 3 is excellent rendering engine. For all my animations jobs, it's till what I use primarily.

I could give you some tangible answer what is faster and when, but people would rip me apart because it's such a emotional topic. If I said Vray is faster here, someone would tell me I don't know how to use Corona,
if I said Corona is faster here, Vray fanboys would tell me I don't know how to use Vray correctly and so... I am tired of that and not interested in software wars. I don't even care, I am utilitarian, I am always trying something else and having fun, checking if it works for me.
I invested thousands of hours into Vray, not just using it, but getting super deep into every parameter. Yet, I use Corona for 80perc. of my commercial work, and 100perc. of my "hobby" work. That should give you quite an answer
what I think is the better engine for me and my type of work.

[demmi]

good answer Juraj =)

[melviso]

Don't like to go into this territory :- ) I have a love/hate relationship with Vray. Don't get me wrong, I am not evangelist, Vray 3 is excellent rendering engine. For all my animations jobs, it's till what I use primarily.

I could give you some tangible answer what is faster and when, but people would rip me apart because it's such a emotional topic. If I said Vray is faster here, someone would tell me I don't know how to use Corona,
if I said Corona is faster here, Vray fanboys would tell me I don't know how to use Vray correctly and so... I am tired of that and not interested in software wars. I don't even care, I am utilitarian, I am always trying something else and having fun, checking if it works for me.
I invested thousands of hours into Vray, not just using it, but getting super deep into every parameter. Yet, I use Corona for 80perc. of my commercial work, and 100perc. of my "hobby" work. That should give you quite an answer
what I think is the better engine for me and my type of work.

True words Juraj, I have also come to love Corona as well but I am not sure how it will work especially with animations. because of the noise/grain. Having said that, I did notice a lot of archviz companies here in London seem to have Vray as the primary renderer. I just graduated from uni (postgrad) and it seems a lot of the companies are reluctant to try Corona out. I may be wrong though.