Better to render this in which all changes to the after will be clearly visible.
This rendering is most preferred.
Type "was" and "was": the D
In general, to have been clearer.
Choose to your taste render. But if you choose a bummer, it is possible and the kitchen😁
I think that Dima would agree 🙂
Rash - an artifact that appears as a result of reflection the super bright (brightness is beyond the range of the standard RGB) objects in materials with Hilight glossiness . Typically, such objects are 3d models with self-luminous material VRayLightMtl, visible (check mark removed Invisible) light sources the VRayLight containers, very bright Environment background (HDRI).
As in your case, I do not know. But, you just need to check your scene for the presence of such objects.
If striking back through the window, for example the VRaySky , then use the function Environment the Override , scroll the scroll of V-Ray :: Environment.
And finally, of course, can be simply screwed in Subdivs mats with Hilight glossiness, which appears white and rash. If the rash is not white, and gray you have, then glance here .
Hello!Settings and lighting scheme are not needed. I recommend that you just follow the recommended settings. In particular, you should work on V-Ray Color mapping.Now, your render looks sluggish, discolored. Correctly mapped Color mapping, solve this problem. As for the lighting, then on the original photo, a clear white balance in the direction of blue. What is most likely caused is the bluishness of the glow from the main light source on the right. Therefore, make it more bluish, it should not be white.The geometry in the scene is quite similar to the original (photo). She is all right. But with the materials you need to work a little. In particular, the texture of the carpet and the couch in the photo is very clear. She is so "terry". At you, she flat. I see a bump, but it's not bulky. Either look for a more similar (to the original) texture, or apply the display. And, which is best, do both.With regard to "post vs render," the goal should justify the means. If you achieve the desired result fasting will be faster and easier than messing around for hours with test renderers, then post. If the post can not pull out the desired effect, then rotate the render. Engage in "sports" rendering, whose goal - at any cost to render without using post-processing - to waste time in vain. Especially, considering that this is almost an empty experience, since all the thin tincture of the current scene may not be fully applicable to the other.For example, in English, a 3d renderer, sounds like a 3d artist. In the first case, the emphasis is on the visualizer, and in the second, on the fact that this person is associated with 3d.In other words, 3d Artist, rather it is translated as a 3d artist. Which is quite right!This means that you use 3d in your work, but do not limit you as a blunt performer of a highly specialized service. The 3d task of the artist, in contrast to the "3d visualizer", is not to render renderings, but to create images. And your personal business is how you will create them.For example, I do not view render as something basic and unchanging. For me, rendering is nothing more than just a clipart, for the illustration I need. And it does not matter what I do, the interior for an architectural project, or a bottle of rum for promotional printing.The main goal - the final image.By the way, many, still do not know one "small"😁 details, when they take a photo of a professional photographer as the basis for their render. The fact is that even the coolest advertising (not to be confused with enthusiasts) photo artists, apply postprocessing to their work. From color correction, to completely non-fiz. Correct processing, when reflections, shadows are added and just a few frames taken from one angle are combined, with different lighting and exposure, but in one composition. This makes the "sporting rendering" an even more stupid undertaking, since in this case, the athlete😁, tries without post-processing to repeat post-processing. It's just as stupid as retouching a photo in 3ds Max, not in Photoshop ...As for the post-processing of your render, on the original, most of the shadows are less dense. In dark areas there is more information. At the same time, both under and behind the couch, the shadow is very, very black. At you slightly on the contrary. Most of the shadows are too dark, but the shadow under the couch is less dense than in the photo, and behind the couch at all, almost completely absent. Peresvet on the pillow, etc ..I advise you to read the current discussion. Here the princes of HDR rendering are very detailed. This will help you more flexibly manage exposure and density of shadows (gamma) during post-processing😉
Download file HDRI std rgb channel Download HDRI file non-clamped color channel
Hello!Yes, in general, we would do, approximately, the same way, only I use not curves, but color balance. More specifically, look at the very beginning of the topic about rendering post-processing. Specific values, only a matter of taste.In your case, I'd probably make a picture a little lighter / brighter, and then, you, it's very cloudy coming out.When saving * .hdr file, there is nothing to choose. Leave everything by default, that is, Use Standard RGB Channel.As for the teeth, you do not understand correctly. The lack of anti-aliasing filter, on the contrary, reduces the appearance of such artifacts. While the inclusion of anti-aliasing filters, causes ugly edging on the render.The teeth are associated with antialiasing, but are not associated with filters.In fact, between the unlit curtain and the bright tulle - no teeth. There is a normal soft aliasing. Just the value of the brightness, from the dark curtains to the bright tulle - goes beyond the RGB range and what is actually a smooth smoothed transition in HDR space, in the RGB range - brighter than white. That's all.If you take the soybeans original HDRK and, with the help of the slider Exposure, shift the exposure to the dark side, then you will see what I'm telling you. Of course, the curtain, at the same time, will become completely black.By the way, it is for this very reason that you have a black edging on your version of the post. Simply, on the border of the selection, that part of the tulle that you rule, the color of the curtains is partially mixed (antialiasing). As a result, by reducing the brightness of the tulle, you also obscure the darker (initially) pixels of the curtains and they become black. That's all.You can get rid of these artifacts. This is done at the rendering stage, the correct setting of the environment and the curtain material😉
Hello!To be honest, I'm not an expert on the actual calibration of the monitor, but my long experience of photorealistic 3d visualization, architectural, subject and biological, says that the question of monitor calibration is not actual for 3d renderers.In general, what is calibration? This is a setting for something. In particular, printers, usually, adjust the monitor for a printing device. More precisely, the result of printing. Take a test picture on the computer. Print it out. Just put near the monitor and see if the green color on the monitor looks green on paper, whether red is similar, etc. If they are different, then calibration begins. The colors on the monitor are adjusted so that they are as close to the colors on the paper. This is done in order to open the picture on the monitor, you already knew the cable will look on the paper in ink-color of a specific printer, since printing the same image on another printer or printing machine, the colors can again be different. At the same time calibrated to a specific printing device monitor, it may not be nice to show everyday images.For example, doing internet surfing, in a web browser, you will see all the pictures not as the author of the site conceived, for the average monitor, but what they will look like if they are printed. Of course, you can start making color profiles, for one porch one, for another - another, but this is already from the convenience of working with the monitor turns into its complication.If we are talking about the calibration of the monitor "to show beautifully," so to speak, the attempt to draw the best quality picture out of it, then the question is subjective and again, you will look cool, and send this picture to a client who has an average monitor, he Do not appreciate it, because he will be dull and pale. So, from the point of view of the trideshnik, the monitor should not be calibrated at all, on the contrary, it should be as average as possible, but the image itself should be edited so that anyone would not open it - saw a rich and rich picture😉Returning to the question of 3ds Max, then it's not quite clear, what is the calibration done to?Under what do you want to calibrate the monitor? Why did you decide that the red blue or green color on it should look different than what it looks like now? Moreover, the 3d render does not actually have an original and is simply an artificially generated image.There is nothing to equal. There is nothing to calibrate the monitor.As for the message in Photoshop, you can not say anything without seeing it. Maybe you did not correctly understand what he wants from you😁
Hi, I want to develop the monitor calibration theme a little. As it is correctly noted, the monitor is calibrated for a specific printing device. In this case, the calibration should be performed under the right conditions - a neutral gray room, uniform neutral lighting, which is difficult to achieve. At the same time, the color from the catalog (the already printed reference one) is compared, the color obtained when printing on a certain device and the color on the monitor. Even a well-calibrated monitor still gives some error in color, although the color rendition is quite close to what you want. Again, do not forget (or should know) that there are two systems of the color wheel - RGB and CMYK. RGB is used to view images on the monitor and for digital printing, CMYK for offset printing (printing) and has limitations on the brightness of the color, i.e. If the bright saturated color on the RGB scale is converted to the CMYK scale, then all the brightness and color saturation will disappear and the program (photoshop) will select a replacement for this color by the nearest possible by CMYK. The result is a completely different color (less saturated). This is where the calibration of the monitor helps, in order to compare what should happen on paper and how it looks on the monitor. Again, many printers have their own profile (setting up a printing press), which can be requested and applied to the document. Then and only then calibrate the monitor, i.e. Adjustment of the picture by CMYK + profile of the printing press + calibration of your monitor. Only in this case the color on the monitor will be almost the same as when printing. Therefore, you should think ten times whether you need a calibration yourself. If your work is closely connected with the printing house (booklets, business cards, banners, etc.), then yes, otherwise it does not.