Re: progress check on ra2 normals and 3ds questions - XCC ForumRegister | Login | Search
History | Home | Messages

progress check on ra2 normals and 3ds questionsViPr17:06 14-02-2002
Re: progress check on ra2 normals and 3ds questionsflyby18:06 14-02-2002
Re: progress check on ra2 normals and 3ds questionsViPr17:55 15-02-2002
Re: progress check on ra2 normals and 3ds questionsflyby21:58 15-02-2002

> is 3ds max scientifically accurate or does it let you do things so ridiculous that no material in real life could behave that way? ok i know there are things like cartoon shaders that make things look like cartoons but is there at least a mode of 3dsmax that has only complete realism?

scientifically accurate in what?

You should realise that every render engine in this world uses clever shortcuts and approximations. Renderengines are not simulators, and are only so clever as their underlying mathematics and algorithms.

With the default 3dsmax, you can get pretty good approximations if you know what the real thing should look like. The refraction and reflection in 3dsmax for exemple are pretty accurate and speedy.
But you can alter the parameters to such an extend that you'd have a very hard time making the materials in real life.
On the other side, although software is getting better and better, real life materials still have a visual quality that is very, very difficult to mimic.
So the candle burns on 2 sides... :)

A render plugin like my new finalRender goes a bit further and is able to calculate caustics, sub-surface light scattering, global illumination, etc.
It all looks very good, but is still an (clever)approximation of the reality....


bump mappingViPr21:56 16-02-20024
    Re: bump mappingflyby00:16 17-02-2002
        Re: bump mappingViPr02:19 17-02-2002
            Re: bump mappinghaydn02:22 18-02-2002


Home | Post | Users | Messages