IMAZOMBIE_358: i understand that posing stuff in programs like this is easier, and that sexual content might be a bit more common, but god damn the shading i see when the sun is on them is just...it makes them look so plastic...
Tentacult: I think alot of this artwork is kind of old, (or they use older programs.) so there isn't super amazing lighting engines. Source film maker is amazing and super easy to use, and not to mention free... I think people should port models to that and they would be able to create some truly orgasmic images.
HeroineTrainer: @Tentacult: This is definitely older artwork from earlier versions of 3d software. Also, the render settings was very low, to render at a higher level may have required too much memory.
Spoze: Nope, this was rendered yesterday by me using DAZ. I had to make concessions on the render settings due to the sheer number of figures in the scene. Earlier versions of this looked even worse due to really unfortunate lighting. I did what I could to make it a bit better, but I guess I could also be convinced to give it another pass with a different lighting set and more intensive render settings.
HeroineTrainer: @Spoze: Its good work. I'm using Poser 11 and like the rendering but need to move to DAZ because of the content. A new computer would be nice too - I face the same problem with the number of figures and system constraints.
Spoze: I'm currently running a mediocre laptop not particularly suited for the task. I've been pushing it to its limits just rendering simple scenes. Compare this picture to the relatively photorealistic giantess picture. This image set was actually rendered AFTER the other picture was rendered, using the same engine and settings.
There's a lot of it that simply boils down to technique. I'm tempted to post a few of the fairly crappy versions of these pictures that I have saved just to illustrate a point. The giantess picture in particular flat-out refused to render in nVidia Iray (kept getting blank renders) and the earlier 3DL renders looked like something out of an old 2005 video game.
I'm also trying to get into animation as well, but that's a million hurdles and then some.
Spoze: Well, I'm assuming it didn't auto-install onto your desktop. There are a bunch of different directories it COULD be in, which is annoying. You're looking for...
C: (your disk) / Program Files (not x86) / DAZ3D (other directories might have DAZ and DAZ3D) / DazStudio4
This'll bring you to a directory with a bunch of folders and dll files, but scroll down and you'll see the application itself. Make a shortcut to save yourself a lot of future agony.
Spoze: Baww, thanks you guys. I already know that Zombie isn't exactly the most positive of fellows around here, but I still want to toy around with the lighting a bit before moving onto other works. Perhaps if I get something I'm happy with, I'll repost the first image but with better quality.
Comments
- Reply
- Reply
There's a lot of it that simply boils down to technique. I'm tempted to post a few of the fairly crappy versions of these pictures that I have saved just to illustrate a point. The giantess picture in particular flat-out refused to render in nVidia Iray (kept getting blank renders) and the earlier 3DL renders looked like something out of an old 2005 video game.
I'm also trying to get into animation as well, but that's a million hurdles and then some.
- Reply
C: (your disk) / Program Files (not x86) / DAZ3D (other directories might have DAZ and DAZ3D) / DazStudio4
This'll bring you to a directory with a bunch of folders and dll files, but scroll down and you'll see the application itself. Make a shortcut to save yourself a lot of future agony.
- Reply
- Reply