OTOY Forums

Reality4 wrote:I'm a bit dissapointed that the eyes are not rendered with Octane

They are, but it's nothing fancy, just a simple texture projection on a glossy material.

AVARD !!! send to Render.ru
http://www.render.ru/gallery/?gal_rub=1&gal_add=award

Wow! Awesome model and rendering, congratulations!
BTW, i've just started watching the show and it rocks!

Elvissuperstar007 wrote:AVARD !!! send to Render.ru
http://www.render.ru/gallery/?gal_rub=1&gal_add=award

Russians are the king of 3D !

Wow !


Fantastic series (season 5 should be the last one - too (breaking) bad... ) and awesome render.
Absolutely jaw-dropping.

Congratulations for this 5-star work !

Rikk The Gaijin wrote:

Reality4 wrote:I'm a bit dissapointed that the eyes are not rendered with Octane

They are, but it's nothing fancy, just a simple texture projection on a glossy material.

No, you copied the eyes from the photo into your texture, including specularity (see image). So we are looking at a photo, not an Octane material.

Personally I would like to know what is 2D and what is 3D when someone posts a render, because when you post it like this everyone thinks it's 100% 3D.

And it's not. The specular reflections in the eyes come from a photo, not from the Octane engine.

It's confusing and leads to 5-star ranking for photos, not for 3D renders, I don't think that is what we want from this forum.

That said, I like your new post much better!

used the photo as a texture imo (my definition of this). its what many of us do. geometry is what makes it 3d imo (canvas). Many films do this yet don't get questioned about alike.

very good effort i reckon, i can see allot of time has gone into this being very worthy of professional note imo.
To create say the irus, retina and pupil all in a physically correct manner using more passes to show clarity with specular would be both an impractical use of time and resource for the intended outcome (assuming a little).

Reality4 wrote:

Rikk The Gaijin wrote:

Reality4 wrote:I'm a bit dissapointed that the eyes are not rendered with Octane

They are, but it's nothing fancy, just a simple texture projection on a glossy material.

No, you copied the eyes from the photo into your texture, including specularity (see image). So we are looking at a photo, not an Octane material.

Personally I would like to know what is 2D and what is 3D when someone posts a render, because when you post it like this everyone thinks it's 100% 3D.

And it's not. The specular reflections in the eyes come from a photo, not from the Octane engine.

It's confusing and leads to 5-star ranking for photos, not for 3D renders, I don't think that is what we want from this forum.

That said, I like your new post much better!

As I said, I projected the photo on my model. Yes, it does includes the specular, I don't see the problem.
The image is, in fact, rendered with Octane, using an HDR setup. I put most of the effort in the model, I'm not a shader expert, and I'm not interested in having a "100% pure" 3D render, I'm more interested in having good final result.
In movies they use all kind of tricks and post-process to get the quality they need, no one complains that it's not pure 3D.
As you noticed, in my new image I focused a bit more on the overall feeling of the scene, and I did put a bit more efforts in the skin shader and I believe I achieved a decent result.