/3/ - 3DCG

>>678435
>proper physical rendering
>blender
pick one

>>678435
>1 cup of of peanuts
>1 pack of ramen
>toss in blender
>puree for 5 minutes
enjoy!

HEAVYPOLY does Blender classes that look halfway decent

>>678451
pls go vaughan

>>678435
>https://luxcorerender.org/
Cycles isn't the best option for photoreal.

>>678465
>luxcore
keeeek wtf is that even

>>678449
That sounds terrible.
Fuck you.

>>678470
A better renderer

>>678435
PBR what? texturing? Rendering?

If it's texturing(like substance painter and the like) well....

yeah... You can do it but... would you want to?

Rendering, it's pretty straight forward, just add in a principled shader, it's based on disney's pbr standards

>>678503
PBR stands for physically based rendering anon, no such thing as physically based texturing. PBR is not a specific set of instructions defined by any standard, it is a umbrella term for basing your shading model around light interactions as they occur in nature.

>>678505
youre wrong but okay

>>678506
>"Physically based rendering or PBR is a philosophy in computer graphics that seeks to render graphics in a way that more accurately models the flow of light in the real world."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physically_based_rendering

I've written PBR style shaders from scratch anon. I assert I'm not bullshitting you, this is not a standardized technology but a concept that stems from this 1997 research paper:
http://www.graphics.cornell.edu/pubs/1997/GTS+97.pdf

I was first introduced to these ideas listening to John Carmacks keynote speech at Quakecon some ~10 years ago.

>>678505
Yeah I know that's what it means technically but it's not really used that way, is it?

>>678545
Yes, it is. Cycles, and most render engines like it use linear reflective % instead of sRGB values. When you plug an image texture into a shader's color input you aren't tell the shader what color the surface is, but rather you are telling it how much red, green, and blue light it should reflect.

Most people fuck this texturing up because they don't have their lights set up correctly. So they have to compensate by making their textures non realistic. In cycles the emission node's "strength" value corrosponds to 1 watt per meter squared. In my opinion, this is a retarded default. Most light sources have a surface area that is no where near 1 meter squared. Sheet, a 100 watt light bulb's metal coils probably have a total surface area of less then a cm squared.

Most "artists" can't be arsed to read blender's manual so they just fuck around until things look close enough to being right... And do so with no regard for pbr or even consistence.

Ontop of all that... RGB renderers are inherently inferior to spectrum renderers, but spectrum renderers are incomprehensible science mumbo jumbo to the average brainlet artist.

Just go find some fully physics based forward pathracer and export your shit to it. Wa la.

>>678505
so much shit wrong with this post
the /3/ degeneracy goes on

>>678569
>spectrum renderers
what the fuck is even that
do you mean linear workflow? or unclamped? or unbiased? wtf

>>678649
Renderers which take into account the properties of materials when interacting with light in different wavelengths.

Octane, Thea, Indigo, and Luxcore, if recall correctly, are spectral renderers. There's also Ocean, although it's intended for high-level previz (pic related) and takes more of a scientific approach to light simulation.

>>678649
https://www.eclat-digital.com/2013/02/22/spectral-rendering/
>>678660
Thanks for show me ocean render.