OTOY Forums

you could use a more "physical" approach to the grass, even thou there are no instances yet on octane, u can model the grass to get a more realistic result, and you can keep polycount depending on the view, or even combining it with your texture (which is quite a load on memory too) you can see 2 examples on the wip gallery:
http://www.refractivesoftware.com/forum ... f=6&t=1496
or even my approach that it's not so good, but you can see how with lower poly count you can achieve similar results
http://www.refractivesoftware.com/forum ... f=6&t=1495
And here is a great tutorial on how to model it in a few steps, once you get the feel, you can do the whole process in less than 15 minutes.
http://www.peterguthrie.net/blog/2009/0 ... al-part-1/
Just my opinion, I've done a lot of grass, and even thou displacement is great is a huge sucker to render, the instances approach beats it every time on render time and results. In very large areas, the best is always a nice tileable textures anyways.

When octane matures it would be great thing to have some sort of instanced geometry scattering. Most of todays high quality architectural exterior renderings heavily rely on scattering plugins for creating rich environments.

kubo wrote:you could use a more "physical" approach to the grass, even thou there are no instances yet on octane, u can model the grass to get a more realistic result, and you can keep polycount depending on the view, or even combining it with your texture (which is quite a load on memory too) you can see 2 examples on the wip gallery:
http://www.refractivesoftware.com/forum ... f=6&t=1496
or even my approach that it's not so good, but you can see how with lower poly count you can achieve similar results
http://www.refractivesoftware.com/forum ... f=6&t=1495
And here is a great tutorial on how to model it in a few steps, once you get the feel, you can do the whole process in less than 15 minutes.
http://www.peterguthrie.net/blog/2009/0 ... al-part-1/
Just my opinion, I've done a lot of grass, and even thou displacement is great is a huge sucker to render, the instances approach beats it every time on render time and results. In very large areas, the best is always a nice tileable textures anyways.

Thank you, good post Sure I can model a grass, but I think it would cost me way more memory now when no instaces are there yet as you said too. But I look forward to it

GeorgoSK wrote:

kubo wrote:you could use a more "physical" approach to the grass, even thou there are no instances yet on octane, u can model the grass to get a more realistic result, and you can keep polycount depending on the view, or even combining it with your texture (which is quite a load on memory too) you can see 2 examples on the wip gallery:
http://www.refractivesoftware.com/forum ... f=6&t=1496
or even my approach that it's not so good, but you can see how with lower poly count you can achieve similar results
http://www.refractivesoftware.com/forum ... f=6&t=1495
And here is a great tutorial on how to model it in a few steps, once you get the feel, you can do the whole process in less than 15 minutes.
http://www.peterguthrie.net/blog/2009/0 ... al-part-1/
Just my opinion, I've done a lot of grass, and even thou displacement is great is a huge sucker to render, the instances approach beats it every time on render time and results. In very large areas, the best is always a nice tileable textures anyways.

Thank you, good post Sure I can model a grass, but I think it would cost me way more memory now when no instaces are there yet as you said too. But I look forward to it

There's my version of the grass in there, that's I was saying your grass looks great since it's a texture, you can't really avoid creating a high poly count whatever else you do. I tried a few techniques, sub polygon displacement and all.. it still renders slowly even though it has a low poly count, hair renders in the same amount of time, but hair looks 10 times more detailed.. the optimal choice is a good texture..

of course it cannot compete with actual geometry in close-ups but I like this textured grass very much! I think it's very convincing for this kind of archiviz and stuff.

the concrete wall - grass intersection is the only (little) problem indeed: one trick I saw about it is using some alpha mapped hair texture at the base of the wall... not perfect but quite good to break up the straight line, specially for a quite distant view like this

SurfingAlien wrote:of course it cannot compete with actual geometry in close-ups but I like this textured grass very much! I think it's very convincing for this kind of archiviz and stuff.

the concrete wall - grass intersection is the only (little) problem indeed: one trick I saw about it is using some alpha mapped hair texture at the base of the wall... not perfect but quite good to break up the straight line, specially for a quite distant view like this

I thought about it ;- ) Yes this indeed cause problems...
I will try this later.

Do not forget there is photoshop for this kind of stuff, I mean get a good brush and clone the grass-wall intersection

well, this is just a texture, of course it looks good, but you would only be able to use it in a still, and probably from no other angle

you could also use geometry or maya pfx, there are lots of ways to create grass and plants, but displacement is the least useful, I think. displacement could look ok for something from very far or very subtle, like a rug maybe. but you need high quality displacement, like renderman can output, and most other renderers... not so much.
I like the vray grass tutorials linked to in this thread btw, they're excellent!

v_m wrote:well, this is just a texture, of course it looks good, but you would only be able to use it in a still, and probably from no other angle

you could also use geometry or maya pfx, there are lots of ways to create grass and plants, but displacement is the least useful, I think. displacement could look ok for something from very far or very subtle, like a rug maybe. but you need high quality displacement, like renderman can output, and most other renderers... not so much.
I like the vray grass tutorials linked to in this thread btw, they're excellent!

They all relly on instances, (Vray proxy..) so one can't use that here unless, he can stuff that into his memory, which I doubt