/3/ - 3DCG

[Anonymous No.368960]

Hey could you help me out please, here[s my work in progrees and i would like to ask for your help solving 2 particular problems.

1)outside wall material: i can't seem to get the bump effect right, its disproportionately stronger on the lighter side and i cant get that nice rough wall look. (in the next post ill upload an image of the quality im trying to achieve, im also doubtful if i shouldnt also include some kind of reflection map because it seems to be shining, altough it seems kinda unatural for a rough wall to shine).
Or could it be that its only a matter of using higher resolution and antialiasing?

2)The background and reflections: ive downloaded a couple of allegedly professional hdri images but no matter how i use them they always seem to be blurry or low res, could it be im doing something wrong with the settings? What are some good collections of hdri backgrounds or bitmap backgrounds?(The image i upload in the next post is also an example of what i would like to achieve regarding the background)


Thank you very very very much in advance for any kind of help i get.

Thanks again

[Anonymous No.368961]

heres the reference i would like to mimic regarding the wall material and the sky

[Anonymous No.368970]

You forgot to mention what program you're working in, and more importantly, what renderer: Mental Ray, Vray, Cycles, others?

If Maya and Mental Ray, I'd suggest using only architectural materials, mia_material_x, they're physically accurate and have a lot of control over bump map, which could prove helpful for your predicament.

I think the bump looks differently depending on the angle of the light that hits it or its position relative to the camera.

The sky looks good enough. The only problem is the reflections, which are affected by the material properties.

[Anonymous No.368974]

>>368960
I'm glad to see some archviz here. First of all, I'd like to know what software, I hope it's Max and Vray. But if it's not, then it's gonna be this general solution:
1.- I'm pretty sure you're using different map sizes for each face. You need to use the same map and the same uvw scale for each face if you want it to look uniform. Read stuff related to uvw mapping for your software, or watch some tutorials about it. It's basic stuff. Yes, you need a reflection map.
>Or could it be that its only a matter of using higher resolution and antialiasing
No, that's not it.

2.- There are many "professional" HDRI, most of which you have to pay for, but Vizpeople give you 10 great HDRI for free by registering to their site. Peter guthrie has many beautiful HDRI's too, but you have to buy them, I'm not sure if there's any torrent for that. You can also use a directional light source or physical sun if your software has any, then you can render teh alpha channel to add any background in photoshop, but this approach won't give you those nice reflections in the glass material.

Your image lacks contrast, I'm pretty sure you're using a double gamma correction.

[Anonymous No.369027]

Hey thanks for the replies, i'm sorry i forgot to say which program im using: it's 3d max and vray.
And the walls have a uniform uvw map, i know bump maps are affected by the direction the light hits but in this case i think the difference between the planes is too much, is there any setting i can adjust for this?

[Anonymous No.369044]

bump for desperation

[Anonymous No.369047]

>>369027
It took me a lot to make this info for you, but I'm planning to use it for future threads
>Delete whatever light source that you're using right there
>Bring a vray sun into the scene, place it PERPENDICULAR to the camera, a little higher than the building, the camera should be a vray physical camera.
>Do exactly what the picture shows, we'll be trying to achieve some realistic lighting first, and then we'll work from there.

I expect your cooperation.

No me falles, carnal.

[Anonymous No.369049]

>>369047
Red leader standing by.
QUESTION: what about gamma and lut correction?

also: start thinking of a way i can reward you later(something non sexual and realistic)

[Anonymous No.369051]

>>369049
Here it is. We'll need to change everything manually. So do what the picture says for each and every single bitmap, including bumps and displacements

[Anonymous No.369052]

>>369051
And now this. As for rewarding me, don't worry. I just want to see results, bro.

[Anonymous No.369053]

>>369051
This is the result with everything but the materials and color correction ill keep on working as fast as i can

[Anonymous No.369054]

>>369053
Ok, there's too much noise. Let's stop that. Go to Render setup>Settings>Noise threshold=0.02
We're still previewing. That number should go as low as 0.002 for the final image.

[Anonymous No.369055]

>>369054
Also, what's producing that sky? if it's HDRI inside a Vraydomelight, disable it by now. We're gonna do some HDRI lighting later. If it's a plane with a texture, hide it, I need to see how the sky looks... has to be a vraysky by the way

[Anonymous No.369056]

>>369054
Here it is, i feel the lighting is somehow off, shouldn't there be more contrast?

[Anonymous No.369058]

>>369055
Shit, i forgot about a domelight that was on, now there is truly only one light: the vray sun. The background was a plane i deleted it.
What now masteR?

[Anonymous No.369060]

>>369056
there should be more contrast. Let's add it. And place the sun that way ---->

AND make sure your frame buffer is doing what this says

[Anonymous No.369061]

>>369060
What do you mean about the sun, its perpendicular to the camera seeing it from a top view

[Anonymous No.369062]

>>369058
Also, disable vignetting from the camera, it's producing a huge result.

I'm surprised that there's no overexposure, those camera settings, specially the f-number=4 and the color mapping's burn value = 1 should be making everything very bright, Are you using an exponential or HSV color mapping?

[Anonymous No.369063]

>>369061
Ah, just place it to the other side, it's coming from left to right... I think you need more detail from right to left, doesn't have to be too perpendicular.

[Anonymous No.369064]

>>369060
Here it is

[Anonymous No.369065]

>>369062
No, im using reinhard as your guide told me

[Anonymous No.369066]

>>369064
The vignetting is still too big, if you like it, just make it a little subtler.

And try to do what the picture shows again.

There's still work to do, don't worry too much

[Anonymous No.369067]

>>369064
It's getting there. If you have any questions, ask away. Once you keep up to everything I guided you, we're gonna play with the settings to make it a bit more realistic. I'll be preparing the next steps

[Anonymous No.369069]

>>369068
This is with vigneting off

[Anonymous No.369068]

>>369066
Im getting some weird results, this is the frame with clamping and vigneting.(at this point im not even finishing the render)

[Anonymous No.369070]

>>369069
this is with vigneting off and clamping from the vray buffer off

[Anonymous No.369072]

>>369070
Wait the last one was wrong, THIS is without vigneting and clamping, altough the vray buffer is showing me a bizarre colection of oversaturated oclors

[Anonymous No.369073]

>>369072
This is what the vray framebuffer shows me

[Anonymous No.369074]

>>369068
>>369069
OK, it's fine. That last picture shows what I wanted to see: Overexposure. Those weird results are a product of it, I'm sure you're seeing weird colors coming from the brightest parts. That's the indicator.

Let's now increase the f-number, one by one. Increase 1, render, take a look at the light cache process, and see if the whitest part in the scene is white or it has a weird color. If there's a weird color, increase by one again.

So basically, increase by one until you don't see that weird color. It has to be white.

[Anonymous No.369075]

>>369074
SUCCESS! i had to take it all the way up to 10 and i think there are some little bits of it left still but most is gone. I ll render the final image now to see how it is

[Anonymous No.369076]

>>369073
Yes, that's what I was talking about here >>369074

Now, increase by one until you don't see those weird colors. The explanation is this: Vray calculates everything in 32 bits, this produces colors beyond white.
RGB (255,255,255) = RGB (1,1,1)
Where 255 and 1 are the maximum intensity of the color
So, if you right click on those weird colors, you're gonna see that those colors are bigger than 1, which means overexposure, when you clamp the output, those colors turn to white again, but that's not what we want, we want real colors.

[Anonymous No.369078]

OK this is the rendered image now, should i still increase the f number?

[Anonymous No.369080]

>>369075
>Camera
OK, look, there are another 2 settings in the camera that will control the brightness: ISO and Shutter speed.

How and when to use each? Simple: bokeh, depth of field and motion blur. When you need those effects, you have to equalize the overall brightness using those 3 controls.

>Color mapping
Now that you got there, wait for your final render if you want, but that's not all. We still have to make the reinhard's greatness work. Reinhard produces a beautiful blend between Linear multiply and Exponential color mapping, when your burn value is 1, it's fully working in linear mode, when it's 0, it's fully working in Exponential mode. Make a blend by using any number between 0 and 1, I recommend using 0.4. With that value, you can decrease the f-number in the camera again. Until you don't see the overexposure.

[Anonymous No.369081]

>>369080
>Until you don't see the overexposure.
More like, go back to an f-number of 4, and increase until you don't see the overexposure. The number required will be lower than 10 now. Once you have no overexposure again, play with the ISO, increase it little by little too, 10 by 10. The idea is to have the brightest picture, with no overexposure.

[Anonymous No.369082]

>>369078
So... the next step would be to bring some yellowness to the scene by using the white balance from the camera. Choose daylight and make it a bit more blue than that. Increase the contrast with the curve in the frame buffer and render a bigger image to see how the bump is looking

[Anonymous No.369083]

>>369081
Ok, this is as far as i can go, after this the floor starts to be overexposed

[Anonymous No.369084]

>>369082
The bump is a whole other deal, bare in mind that i want it to look like>>368961 so i need to also have some kind of fine noise map on the reflection slot, right?

[Anonymous No.369086]

>>369083
OK, now this >>369082
After that, we're done with the lighting. The rest would be to use photoshop to add some lens effects (bloom and glares). But do that with the last image. What you should care about now is the texturing. The image you want to mimic has more attention to details and a little more objects that contrast very well. The lck of quality in your render comes from those white walls and the floor textures. Add some realism to them, place bitmaps on those surfaces and dirten them up, so that it looks like streets now.

You should also start downloading those Vizpeople HDRI's I was talking about before.

[Anonymous No.369087]

>>369084
>some kind of fine noise map on the reflection slot
Yes, just add some glossy reflection with fresnel turned on for that material.

[Anonymous No.369088]

>>369087
Also, a noise bump is not a very good idea. It will be procedural and everything, but it always looks better with a bitmap. You can also use the same bitmap for the reflecitons

[Anonymous No.369089]

>>369086
Ok, so hows this for the lighting??

also, when you say adding dirty bitmaps you mean using uvw unwrap?

[Anonymous No.369090]

>>369089
If you have a simple shape, there's no need to unwrap. You can also add a vraydirt map on the diffuse channel of your material. Try it. The unoccluded color will be the color of the surface, and the occluded color would be the "dirt", which could also be any map, it's just ambient occlusion.

[Anonymous No.369093]

>>369090
Im having some trouble mimicking the glossines of the wall. It only kinda works on one plane but not on the other. (im trying out the material in the upper left corner of the image)

[Anonymous No.369094]

>>369093
Let's bring some motherfucking magic now man. have you ever used active shade?
It's time to do so.

Go to render setup > bottom of the window > Active shade > Click on the viewport you've been rendering > Render

You now have some freedom. Wait a little, and you'll get results in real time, move that sun around the place, and see how much effect it has on your reflections. Also, what is your material setup?

[Anonymous No.369095]

>>369093
Man, the reflection on your window frame is huge, I just noticed.

[Anonymous No.369096]

>>369094
Im fucking around with the materials right now, but wait a minute upon closer inspection, could it be that this image>>368961
doesnt have reflection but rather a bump map, or does it have both?

[Anonymous No.369097]

>>369096
I'm afraid it's only using a very obvious bump map. It should use some reflection, but the effect comes from a bump map, probably even displacement... haven't you added any map to the bump slot? do it

[Anonymous No.369098]

>>369097
This is a previw of the "wall" materials they all have bump maps and slight reflections with the glosines set to 0,45.
Ill adjuts the size of the bump maps and then tell you how im doing the metal and windows

[Anonymous No.369099]

>>369098
OK, increase the size of the sun by 5, that will give you better shadows, also...
make it a bit brighter with more contrast, adjust that curve man in the frame buffer, be free, adjust it until you see a nice contrast with a decent lighting with no defects. Make the white balance a less blue and make the sun go down a bit, also, make the sun light hit the front walls a little more.

You're almost there man.

[Anonymous No.369100]

Hows that for the bump material on the stucco walls? i still don't like them how can i make them more similar to the example picture i posted?

Meanwhile ill try to improve the black metal, glass, sidewalk and street

[Anonymous No.369103]

>>369100
Maybe increase the grain size a little bit and make it stronger

[Anonymous No.369104]

>>369100
forgot the pic, but im working on what you said also

[Anonymous No.369106]

>>369104
How's this for lighting? ill keep working on materials.

Also: should i chamfer the borders of the model or is it not necesary in this scale?

[Anonymous No.369109]

>>369106
1. The bump map: I think you're not using a very good one, try changing the map.
2. As for the lighting, we need better bounces of light, so go to render setup>indirect illumination>choose the medium preset and 1000 for the subdivs of light cache... or brute force instead of light cache...
3. Chamfering........... well, you will improve the quality, for sure. The interesting part about the chamfered edges is that highlights appear there and it looks way better.

[Anonymous No.369111]

I changed the materials a bit including the bump. Im rendering one with brute force now

[Anonymous No.369112]

>>369111
pic

[Anonymous No.369113]

This one is using brute force. Is it me or the difference is subtle?

[Anonymous No.369114]

>>369112
This shows how you haven't set your uvw's well... go ahead and map that thing properly, dude. Also, look at this bump map, use this, but ONLY in the bump map. Use a nicer color for your diffuse

[Anonymous No.369115]

>>369113
Brute force is unbiased, which means it will produce a more accurate result. If you had no problem in terms of time, then use brute force

[Anonymous No.369120]

Ok, this is what i got so far, could we start adding the uvw map?.

Also: here's my email [e-mail](govlin not goblin)
would you kindly add me to gtalk in case i fall asleep on the keyboard?

[Anonymous No.369121]

>>369120
>could we start adding the uvw map?.
I meant the HDRI, sorry sleep is starting to get to me

[Anonymous No.369315]

>>369121
Im bumping this thread so that it doesn't die, i will be uploading more images tomorrow

[Anonymous No.369316]

>>369120
If you want stony stucco wall, use these instead.

http://www.mediafire.com/download/clahrfva2kaarnm/Stucco_Tex.rar

Theres also a grassrock mix that you can use with the same normal map.

[Anonymous No.369555]

>>369316
This is what i got so far, very close to the final result

[Anonymous No.369556]

>>369555
That's a great improvement

Now you need to use a better texture for your asphalt.

[Anonymous No.369563]

>>369555
that looks shit m8

[Anonymous No.369568]

>>369555
you should edit it a bit in photoshop. the tree on the left is too bright compared to the one on the right, make it more green and vibrant, with more contrast. same with the two people, more constrast, their black is too gray. same for the car on the right, specifically the tyre.

[Anonymous No.369602]

>>369556
>>369568
Will do both of these and reupload
>>369563
Thanks for the constructive criticism

[sage No.369961]

Hello, this is the final version i delivered to the client, he was very happy about it, altough i know i could do a lot better, i will keep on improving the picture and reupload it

[Anonymous No.369967]

>>369961
how much did your client pay you?

$5?

gz m8

[sage No.370044]

>>369967
Actually i make a living out of this, if you're really curious

[Anonymous No.370082]

>>370044
the tree shadow on the people is a nice touch, but you went full retard with the tree itself.
Your previous tree model was much, much better, both as a model and its coloring.

The cars are still horrible, with bad reflections and too bright.

[Anonymous No.370136]

>>369961
I really enjoy how the sunlight in this arbitrarily changes from over head to top right part way down the building and I wish I could get the stucco on my house to reflect clouds, that'd be god damn awesome, or doors that reflect cars but not people, is that bitch a vampire? But that MS Paint tree, it's really what pulls the whole thing together by boldly stating "fuck you logic! I'm a god damn low resolution picture of a tree from google image search!"

Seriously, though someone payed you for that? Don't you feel even the least bit bad for taking their money?

[Anonymous No.370139]

>>370136
>never did any archviz

when ppl hire a freelance to do some architecture shit they aren't asking for some photorealistic rendering of a baroque lious XIV dining hall, they just want ppl to see what the shit is going to look like on the street/skyline/whatever and it's proportion to ppl/traffic/etc. maybe you should just shut your jizzhole and go back to rendering anime boobs or whatever

[Anonymous No.370141]

>>369961
OP, I'm glad you achieved the things you did. Now it's time to get better at it.

I'm writing this as I design a park for my municipality, in 2D, so I know how hard it is to get better when you have a lot of clients waiting for you and your designs. Don't bother with these kids, all they know is how to model a gun in zbrush and a blob monster with box modeling, so they're not even worth the time.

I'm gonna tell you something that's gonna get these kids butthurt as fuck: download some trees and cars from evermotion, that's gonna make your stuff look better in just a few clicks. Also, your clients will be even happier (they also won't give a fuck about you pirating shit for your archviz).

Don't forget to make another thread.

Boludos boludearán.

[Anonymous No.370150]

Why must archviz look like shit?

[Anonymous No.371511]

Bumping this so it does not die, im busy on some other shit will upload changes in a couple of days

[Anonymous No.371537]

>>371511
Looking forward to it, you nigga had better fixed the trees and the cars.