Archviz with corona

[Juraj]

No, I think the best people didn't bother wasting time and just found out by doing :- ) I wish I had rather discipline than curiosity. I think I would make better wikipedia editor than renderer...

[lasse1309]

the problem about "realism" is photography is not real either. camera works a certain way and photoshopping the image afterwards - even if it just contrast, curve, slight lightroom touch-up - produces certain results. in the end it is some kind of "artistic" (hate the word though) tweaking, and yes, eyeballing :D
which is both good and bad. of course there are certain "styles" you can aim for - and also in photography these styles are produced by massive manipulation. staging, propping, lighting, gear used, photographer, post-production, print, art-direction, purpose, client (!!!)

but i understand the point too well. would be great to just prop a scene, materialize, light, hit f10 and real you are ;)

l

[Juraj]

lol, I specially swapped 'photorealism' to 'realism' to avoid that discussion, but perhaps I should have used that original term :- ) But I see both worlds have too many connotations.
But I asked exactly for that, what cameras see. Tonemapping/response curve/output that is identical to contemporary digital sensor.

[lasse1309]

i am absolutely with you ;)