Photo-Real Renders

[videep]

Hello Everyone,

 

Actually this is quite dumb, but may be I shall improve...

 

After working for some time on vray, reading pdf's and getting to know the basics clear,

 

I have seen that if a person renders something that is photo-real, he would tweak the same settings that even I can. . .

 

So this time rather than asking about what settings to keep to take out good renders, I would like to know

What I should keep in mind while creating Photo-Real Renders...

 

Would just like to know if the modeling needs more of attention or may be textures what is it that is so

important or may be which is so responsible that makes the render a non-photoreal or photo-real...

 

Thankyou...

[Koper]

Well, I think there is allot of factors to consider, be it modelling, texturing or lighting. What you need to develop is an eye for detail. Detail, detail detail. Be it knife sharp corners on a wall that should actually have a bit of a chamfer, tiling textures or a leather texture that looks like wool. IMO Photo-real renders focus on getting those imperfections that is natural to the eye. You can have a tiling texture but within that you still have imperfections.

 

A

[Derek Forreal]

my worthless opinion is that settings don't do anything for the realism of a render. they reduce noise and splotchiness, and of course get the image rendered faster or slower, but that's about it. the highest settings possible will not make a bad render look good.

 

as Koper said, realism comes from detail in all key areas of 3d - lighting, rendering, modelling, materials and texturing.

[braddewald]

I agree with Derek. Also, I would venture to say that, although a failure in either lighting, rendering, modelling, materials, or texturing can ruin the realism of an image by itself, lighting is probably the most important.