Jump to content

nielskretschmann

Members
  • Posts

    7
  • Joined

Personal Information

  • Country
    Germany

nielskretschmann's Achievements

Newbie

Newbie (1/14)

10

Reputation

  1. i know that the lambert shading model is an relatively old concept. still the modern mila shader shows exactly the same result as a lambert shader if its roughness is zero. if the roughness parameter is higher it gets brighter than a lambert shader at low light angles and not darker. as the light in my example is directional (parallel) it has the same angle to any surface. the software is indeed softimage but should not matter since rendering is the job of mental ray. if its a preview or a real render should not matter either. Still i could have made some error and my findings could be wrong. It would be nice if somebody could do a simelar test to verify the result.
  2. Hi, just recently i noticed a rather odd feature of the MIA material. when hit by light at low angles it appears darker compared to a lambert shader or the new Mila shader (or a Vray shader or any other shader i tested). To see what i mean, you find a table with several images under this link: http://www.roomservice3d.com/files/Post_160721_MiaShader.jpg all materials are pure white and diffuse only, there is only one light in the scene lighting the plane (Lambert) and the two boxes (MIA + MILA) at different angles. test was done with linear color workflow. at a light angle of 20° everything looks as expected with all 3 materials showing the same color. at lower angles of 10°,5° and 1° you notice how the mia shader gets darker compared to the other two. At 10° it is 70% percent as bright as the others (in linear color space), at 5° it is 32% and at a light angle of 1° only 7%. what is up with that? is this behavior of the mia shader known by you (i found nothing with google)? is it a bug? is it a feature? if it is a feature WHY?
  3. you probably still hold all rights on the work you did. i let my customers know (if they ask) that they can use images that i did for them in any way they like, if the use is directly connected to their own business. for instance they can put it on their website, a construction sign, a newspaper article etc without asking me. i only sometimes let myself get payed extra if a 3rd party wants to use my images in publications - for instance a construction firm wants to use a vizualisation for their newsletter if my client was the architect
  4. I usually dont work on fixed rates per image but mostly for my daily rate of 600€. That keeps pricing and price-negotiations very simple and you can be spared a lot of desperation when halfway through a project the client suddenly decides that he would rather have a night view in wintertime from the backside of the building rather than the mid day springtime summer view of the front that you agreed upon initially. With my daily rate the typical image would be around 1500€ for a single view or about 900€ if there are multiple shots of one object. To show what that actually means, i give some recent examples of images and their costs. all images where done from scratch including all modelling and might have taken about 2 preview images sent to the client to get to the final result. Universität köln - 2 images for 1500,-€ total http://www.roomservice3d.com/files/roomservice_visualisierung_01.jpg http://www.roomservice3d.com/files/roomservice_visualisierung_02.jpg Pergoen - 2 images for 1500,-€ total http://www.roomservice3d.com/files/roomservice_visualisierung_03.jpg http://www.roomservice3d.com/files/roomservice_visualisierung_04.jpg tubingen - 1 image for 1200,-€ http://www.roomservice3d.com/files/roomservice_visualisierung_05.jpg luxemburg - 1 image for 1800,-€ http://www.roomservice3d.com/files/roomservice_visualisierung_06.jpg niels - roomservice3d
×
×
  • Create New...