HOME | DD
SanderWit — Digital Camera
Published: 2006-12-29 07:42:59 +0000 UTC; Views: 6557; Favourites: 73; Downloads: 224
Redirect to original
Description
--FULL VIEW PLEASE--Hey everybody.
So here's the final render. The Casio Exilim EX-Z60 digital camera my brother has. It was rendered with Indigo in a bit under twenty hours... It was modelled with Blender and some textures were done with the Gimp. Though I think this one is done, critics and comments are highly appreciated for I might wanna do another angle render, perhaps than with some different parameters.
Take care and the best of luck in the new year!
Regards
Sander.
Related content
Comments: 83
Hi sander, Yafray's also GI photon based. With a bit more freedom too. I personally like it more, as...its faster. Also, the materials can be just as realistic. GI settings don't really require tweaking, except to decrease noise, just like you increase Indigo quality to decrease grain, xcept yafray noise is lower frequency. (With Cache) And a physical sky is easy lol. Just make a dome. Lolx
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I've used Yafray a lot and know the results are vcery cool, I also wanted to do some renders with Yafray. And indeed, Yaf is photon based, well, it mostly is, but the thing about Indigo, is that it isn't. That's it's fame. The unbiased renderer. Yaf can't do so and therefor some results are easyer to achieve with Indigo though it takes ages to render. Yafray is also pretty easy when you get to know her and has fabulous results, but at the moment, I'm sticking with Indigo. Perhaps some time soon.
Cheers.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I lurve Yafray. And I'm not bad at tweakin render settings. And material settings. The thing with Yafray is that your mirror color mus nva be white. An...lots of rules and regulations. It could be extremely realistic, but require...tweaking. It depends of your patience and effort. I have less patience.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I lack both.
Surely I'm gonna put my mind into Yafray soon.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Lol......I thought I'm the only jerk who like Yafray more than Indigo nowadays.
Actually Indigo is non profit so you cannot make prints. Lol
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
What makes you think that? Where does it say that? I'd like to know for this is what the website states:
--- Indigo is free for non- and commercial use, but as of writing is not open-source. ---
Guess making prints with Indigo-rendered-images shouldn't be a problem. Perhaps I'm wrong though.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I'll check it out. I'm afraid that Indigo doesn't have dispersion, and other stuff... unless you edit XML, n I'm lazy...
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
i love the lighting and the nice reflection you threw into the back lcd of the camera *nice details haha* nicely modeled as well.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Hehe, thanks. It's some big hotel named Ennis somewhere.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Thanks mate, it was kinda the aim and therfor thanks for the recognition 
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Wow, and all done in blender?!?
Amazing!
I could never do anything that good in a 3d program!
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Sure you can. Just practice and practice and practive.
By the way, it was rendered with Indigo. That's what gives the image it's realism though it has quite a lot a detail.
Cheers mate.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Yeah, you were right, this definitely does look better.
By the way, are you, by any chance, a member of Photoshoptechniques.com??
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Thanks. No, not by any chance, sorry
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Ah, ok. Your nick resembles someone from the forums on that site, and then you wrote that jumbled letters thing which coincidentally was posted on the very same day on that site. Well, great job on the camera!
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
.. cool , that very cute and smoth
i love it
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Looks superb. The brushed metal texture looks the part, and the rest looks right about photo real. Great job man.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Thank you, really appreciated.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I really like this
The angle and lighting is superb
Great job
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Thanks a lot mate, glad you like it.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
hi
it looks good man
I just wonder that, indigo has long rendering time, so ifor which reasons or which adventages do you use indigo renderer?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Thanks.
Indigo is unbiased (see this [link] for more info) and has a really realistic rendering method. I like it that I don't need to get annoyed by choosing render quality, shadow buffers, reflections, caustics and all that jazz. The renderer works pretty much just like real light works. Millions and millions of tiny specks of energy who bounce and bounce and have a real good time until your computer is tired and the image is grainless. It's mostly like Maxwell. Perhaps you know that renderer. The main difference is that this renderer is free and still under construction.
The best of luck to you in the next year.
Cheers.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
"I like it that I don't need to get annoyed by choosing render quality, shadow buffers, reflections, caustics and all that jazz" .yes..this would be good reason for me too.. but ı wish it has less rendering times
the best luck to you in 2007 too
take care my friend
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
<= Prev |