[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / g / ic / jp / lit / sci / tg / vr ] [ index / top / reports / report a bug ] [ 4plebs / archived.moe / rbt ]

2017/01/28: An issue regarding the front page of /jp/ has been fixed. Also, thanks to all who contacted us about sponsorship.

/3/ - 3DCG

View post   

[ Toggle deleted replies ]
File: 1.85 MB, 1314x1180, render_017.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
676703 No.676703 [Reply] [Original]

I have been trying to make a realistic terrain render, specifically a scene where a hole in the ground appears.

Wanted to know how close to realism I am here, made a gif of the before/after. How close am I to realism? Thanks bros.

>> No.676804

Use your head anon.
Think about the materials and what the shit is made of.

I don't know what's making the hole, but it looks like solid fucking rock. If it's an animal, think again. If it's a drill then maybe I can see it.
Think also about WHY the ground is coming up and how it would actually look. Looks like you're just cutting into the ground in the same shape of the rocks. That's not at all how it would look. Different parts of the rocks would be showing underneath because the rocks aren't just flat planes, they're 3d objects underneath the dirt.
Not to mention, the ground that isn't rock looks like sand. Sand wouldn't just cleanly crack like it was suddenly solid. It's like there's just a flat, solid, plane, and a tiny layer of sand on top. That's not how the real world works. That's not even how your scene works. There's other rocks buried in it.

Honestly, you just stuck a hole in the ground, made some cracks and asked if this looks real. It doesn't.
Think about what it would look like in real life, and think about what everything is made of and how it would react.

>> No.676805

And use the /wip/ thread next time for fuck's sake.

It's specifically for constructive criticism.

>> No.676807

OP here.

Check this out.


>> No.676815

You rude prick!
Anon just explained whats wrong with the scene so obviously its just another bad nasa hoax.

>> No.676817

Thats not nasa website, dont you see the jpl in front? Thats called phishing

>> No.676819

lol. is this guy serious?

>Nasa Jet Propulsion Laboratory

>> No.676820

how do you not know what JPL is?

>> No.676821

OP here, also honestly I dont know what to think.

This is the second time I have come across an official nasa release, and thought it looked.. off.

also the second time I have rused /3/ into giving "critical feedback" on my "work", and last time everyone thought it didnt look real either.

Its the only way to see if nasas shit really passes, to ruse people and claim you are working on a project.

This was the last thread like this, posted it a few months ago.

no one thought that one looked real either.


>> No.676823

This is comedy fucking gold right here. Well done OP.

>> No.676824

Thanks, but it doesnt feel well done.

It feels frustrating. I constantly see this -garbage shit- released by NASA. And I just -know- that I will need to head on over to /3/ and trick some people into calling out the obvious -pile of shit-, just so that I know I am not crazy.

Yes, I suppose it is humorous, but after seeing so much -diarrhea- released as "official footage". I am dead inside anon.

I want it to be real, I believe in the globe, I believe in space.. yet NASA is clearly -butt fucking- these images.. and I don't even know if they are actually on fucking mars anymore.

>> No.676825
File: 3 KB, 106x78, samefagging hard.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

>> No.676826

how autistic are you to not be able to follow a conversation? Yes, it is mostly me posting, that is what happens when a few people respond, and I respond to them all. I de facto have more posts than the single poster replies, as I am the one replying to each one.

I hate you.

>> No.676827

3d artists aren't experts in realism.
It's about whether or not something is believable enough to look real, but also whether or not something looks good from an artistic standpoint. There's a fuzzy line between realism and artistic realism.
OP image just looks like some basic ass materials thrown together in substance, then just edited to look like that. It just looks like a bad render, but it could still be real. There's a whole thread filled with images that look like renders but are real.

Not to mention, if 3d artists aren't experts in realism on Earth, what makes them experts in realism on Mars or in space. We're all subject to our own environments.

>> No.676828

All me

>> No.676829

All good points. And yes, I agree we will never know for sure unless we teleport to mars.

The best I can do is ask other people what they think. Appreciate the reply.

>> No.676830

In fact, we have a whole thread for it >>643090

>> No.676831

It is impossible for man to leave this planet. You were told this long ago.

>> No.676832

I'll add:

the difference between those pics in that thread, and the gif in my OP, is that we have a before after in the gif. which gives MUCH more information.

>> No.676833

There's also not a real sense of scale in the image. That's probably what's fucking with you.
The whole image looks like it's taken from eye height of a human, but odds are it's actually all on a pretty small scale.
The hole is probably only a few millimeters wide, which makes everything else comparatively small, and makes the cracks a bit more believable. On a larger scale it wouldn't make sense, but something like poking a something down some sand and pulling it out would bring up some material and cause cracks like that. Just think of everything on a smaller scale and it all fits together just fine.

>> No.676834

*poking a small drill

>> No.676835

Actually it is about on the scale of a human, its the mastcam on the rover, so it will be human eye level, give or take.

and i knew this, so the scale wasnt really a factor for me.

>> No.676836

anyway, need to get some rest. i feel ill. thanks for taking the thread seriously despite my deception.

I am sick of being shit on by these faggots.

pardon my french. Ill check back in, in a bit.

>> No.676858

Don't trust what /3/ says, people may be falling to confirmation bias just because they were asked for criticism. BTW, those images are color-corrected, by NASA admission. It would be more useful to look at the unedited photos.

>> No.676863
File: 128 KB, 693x340, mastcam4b.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

So a few things why this comes across as fake:
>it's from an alien planet
It's quite literally nothing we've seen before. Probably causes some dissonance when you're trying to compare it because you immediately go for a frame of reference, but it's a freakin' alien planet. Any frame of reference you manage to find would be far off.
>alien planet pt.2
Physical characteristics are not the same. The rocks on Mars are probably way different from what we have on Earth, as such they likely erode and fracture differently from what we'd expect. That's not to mention what impact an otherworldly atmosphere would have on erosion and what not. Hell, light interacts differently there. With the Sun much further away and going through a much thinner yet dustier atmosphere, lighting's bound to come across as somewhat uncanny.
All of NASA images undergo some amount of post-processing. I doubt it to be in any major transformative manner, but we all know a touch of post-processing can shake things up quite a bit. On the post linked in >>676807 it even says
>The scene is presented with a color adjustment that approximates white balancing to resemble how the rocks and sand would appear under daytime lighting conditions on Earth.
Which just comes across as an odd thing to do (from an artistic point of view). It's like if you took a picture just before dawn, where skylight paints everything this beautiful blue, but you white balance the blue away then wonder why everything looks different. It can get rid of mood and make everything look clinical.
While the MastCams are true-color, they are still scientific tools. They're not some DSLR with sophisticated color science. It's probably capturing colors to some degree of inaccuracy. If pic related, an image on Earth taken by a MastCam, is unedited and raw output, I think we can deduct why images taken with them can look a little funny.

>> No.676871

I've shown a 3d scan on here before and people still said it looked wrong. still though from a vfx perspective that image would certainly pass as high fidelity but not /realistic/ I don't doubt that its real but it does look jarring so I don't think your crazy.

>> No.676876

FFS you are an idiot. Enjoy your tinfoil hat.

>> No.676929

that IR image still looks real. the mound of dirt in the nasa pic looks like post.

>> No.676949
File: 317 KB, 1024x913, 2371MR0125720051001947C00_DXXX-br2.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Here is a RAW image. My diagnosis: NASA post-processes like crazy for press release, and OP is a faggot.

>> No.676951


>> No.676988
File: 3.19 MB, 2656x2368, images.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]


yea, and if you look at the luma/color curves on those images, it still looks fake as fucking shit.

they thought the screendoor effect would throw us off lmao.

wheres the noise? looks like a fucking render tbqh.

>> No.676989

>spend billions of mcdollarbucks to send a golf cart to mars
<skimp on the camera budget and find the cheapest shittiest lowest resolution black and white camera for taking pictures of your "experiments"

>> No.676990

>if you look at the luma/color curves on those images

>> No.676992

meaning, if you adjust the histogram, you can clearly see its a fucking render.


>> No.676993
File: 2.80 MB, 1314x1180, MastCam.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]


>> No.677003

Try harder, pleb.

>> No.677004

A pointless statement. Contains no humour, doesn't help further discussion, not constructive criticism, not an ego-boosting self compliment either, not a metaphor, not a motivational quote, not an argument, just simply nothing. A pointless statement.

>> No.677006

Indeed, the most banal thing.

>> No.677010

Haha b anal

>> No.677015


Wow. Pareidolia!


>> No.677017

maybe. maybe not.

but, if i were rendering terrain, I might have a library of actual organic terrain formations to serve as a model for an algorithm to generate organic looking randomness.

its not hard to imagine a case where the algo make a rock with similar structuring to the input data parameters given.

but, your IQ must be a little above average to even think this, so you may not be aware.

>> No.677018

it quite literally fits that continent map like a glove, thats actually very very rare statistically speaking.

>> No.677023

I think it may be time for you to visit your optometrist.

>> No.677034

A pointless statement. Contains no humour, doesn't help further discussion, not constructive criticism, not an ego-boosting self compliment either, not a metaphor, not a motivational quote, not an argument, just simply nothing. A pointless statement.

>> No.677038
File: 1.20 MB, 1314x1180, fake and gay.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

It definitely does not.
It just looks like it does because the map fucks with your perception. It's gestalt shit.

>> No.677040

lol. are you literally just going to tell me how to think?

it looks exactly like it, thats my opinion. fuck off kid.

>> No.677050

And opinions can be objectively wrong

>> No.677052

A pointless statement. Contains no humour, doesn't help further discussion, not constructive criticism, not an ego-boosting self compliment either, not a metaphor, not a motivational quote, not an argument, just simply nothing. A pointless statement.

>> No.677055
File: 8 KB, 230x230, gestalt.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

I meant "your" in a general sense. Not you specifically.
Gestalt is the brain seeing connections and shapes visually that might not actually be there. The map on top has some color on top of it, which is just adding to the shapes that are there already. It makes it all seem more continuous when it really isn't. The positive space on the original doesn't really match up to the map very well. The map just fills in the gaps however it needs to to make that shape.

>> No.677057


A pointless statement. Contains no humour, doesn't help further discussion, not constructive criticism, not an ego-boosting self compliment either, not a metaphor, not a motivational quote, not an argument, just simply nothing. A pointless statement.

>> No.677058

anon, it actually still looks like it fits perfectly. im not so sure your argument is good, cause i agree. it fits like a glove.

>> No.677059

>yo ayy, ay yo, nasa dropped that NEW cgi render dawg

>ah fuck! hol up leme get an appointment at duh tax mayne owwfice so we gona keep gettin deez dope azz FUCKING BLENDER screencaps dawg

oh, well yea it shows. it does show.

>> No.677063


>> No.677113

Thoroughly ordinary person.
Not the dumbest in his class but not the top.
Has an okay job somewhere in the middle, not the mail room but not an executive.
Gets through life okay but is nothing special at all.
Feels cheated.
Feels he shouldn't be where he is, that he is better than all that.
Feels he should be special.
Discovers conspiracy theories.
Suddenly feels he's onto something dark and big.
Feels his knowledge gives him power.
Feels like he's no longer just yet another average insignificant human.
Feels his life has been leading him to this.
Feels he's special.

And that is why average minds crave conspiracy theories.

But I'm sure your tinfoil hat is better than everyone else's, Anon.

>> No.677114
File: 20 KB, 639x439, movie_projector.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]


>> No.677115

>People conspire to do good things...
>"Its just business/politics/charity/research, anon."
>People conspire to do bad things...
>"You're a crack pot, Anon. No one does that!... Just ignore all those gangs, and mafias, and dictatorships. Those people aren't conspiring.

>> No.677117

Gangs, criminal businesses and dictators are real things. They have been proven to exist.

Secret illuminati lizard people who run the media to hide the fact the earth is flat are not real.

Conspiracies exist. They get exposed and 99 percent of the time they're exposed because someone involved just couldn't keep their fucking mouth shut. Watergate was a conspiracy.

NASA faking mars rover photos has zero proof. Not one person of the many thousands involved in the Mars projects have blabbed. Yet mediocre minds will still point and shout "Lizard People!"

>> No.677131

>Has an okay job

You lost me there, I am no wagecuck like you my good friend!

>> No.677139

>Implying all conspiracy theories labelled as "wacky nonsense" contain lizard people...
The "lizard people illuminati cultist baby eaters" are a false narrative meant to dissuade normies from looking beyond the MSM's politically expedient talking points... I mean, who wants to look like that wacko Alex Jones, am I right? No, the only acceptable opinion to have is the one society pushes on you. Everything else is a "fringe conspiracy theory." But look on the bright side, anon; at least you get to choose between pepsi or coke... I mean, republicans or democrats.

>> No.677187

I don't live in your "shithole" country.

>> No.677192

>"9/11 was a government conspiracy" is a government conspiracy

>> No.677235

Meaning you're a NEET. So you're even worse than he said.

>> No.677240

>"Welcome to Zion, Neo... Now chop off your dick and demand to be called Lana."

>> No.679032


If you can't talk like a fucking adult I have no interest at all in what you have to say.

>> No.679039

Shut up, normie.

>> No.679098

the hole looks fake and it's lighting doesn't match with the rest of the pic at all. Try to make the dirt around the hole look like it's laying on the rock and match the lighting. It looks like a cutout pasted in using mspaint

>> No.679104

do me a favor and read like the first 10 replies

>> No.679743

I see some harsh polygons in the shadows, and a glitching shader in the top left... that's all I have to say

>> No.679761
File: 139 KB, 300x300, DhYDQbfX4AA79Px.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]


Name (leave empty)
Comment (leave empty)
Password [?]Password used for file deletion.