This is the minimum point of reference, after which we will be able to speak the same language about the work with VRay renderer. Get to know everything and be sure to follow the recommendations in these articles, repeat all the settings recommended there. The second thing you need to know is how to control the overall brightness of the image resulting in Vray. This will definitely help you to an article on the use of standard 3ds Max camera in the VRay . True setting Collor% B Ceppinga necessarily solve the problem of "greyness" of the white stuff. The third and equally important, you should know, as well as any 3d renderer, if you certainly want to become one 🙂, it is true to customize the workspace. In particular, the most important aspect of it - setting the gamma correction in the Max the Workflow 3ds . Always with everything to meet and follow all the recommendations set out in these articles. We believe this week has gone from you - the other, but without this in any way. If you want to learn everything - learning should walk as much as you need. After you and all will meet, follow all recommendations, you yourself will see how to transform your scene. In any case, it should be understood that no matter how seem paradoxical, but beautiful photorealistic rendering subject of one object on a white background - a more complex and less trivial than2F "> architectural 3d visualization. It is less time-consuming process, but requires more skill. So, get ready for the fact that you need a lot of patience before you will achieve excellent results. Going back to your screenshots, continue to need to demonstrate and why the viewport, eg the Top of the projection, with all geometry to be able to judge the correct setting up lighting and, in particular, on the right and appropriate arrangement of light sources in the scene. Whatever it was, waiting for the results of your work and when you are with everything to meet you, be sure to share it the fact that you came out in the end and began to look like your guitar 🙂 we are always here for communication and if you need any advice or recommendation, be sure to consult with us, we'll be happy to help you. even if it is a small WIP describing his experiments and screenshots of what you have until you came out ne achieved the desired result, as we all comment and give helpful tips for you, which, for sure, will induce you on track😉
Good time of day, Max, Anton and all forum users.
Watching your visualization, and the visa of many other authors wonder: How did they do that ?!
About visualization studio, I heard, in principle, even more than that ... But to achieve a good result never succeed. How do I know that in addition to the materials and settings, the main role falls on the surroundings and the lighting in the scene.
At the expense of the studio itself, it met some options for the studio - the most common: 1) rendering with HDRI environment map in the slot (above mentioned about this card - Post # 912 ); 2) studio in the form of geometry ( fasting Tim'a one way of creating geometry studio # 903 ) + the correct placement of the light sources; 3) and of a combination of the first and the second method is also met.
On visas, your models, such as the model of manual megaphone , vintage motorcycle with sidecar , and the like, lighting and reflections looks great, but in fact there's nothing special. What is your secret of visualization. I would like to know how you do it, it looks like your studio to visualize how to properly arrange the light sources, which geometry studio (if it is in the stage), at least in general terms.
Hello!This question is not asked for the first time. But, with all the desire, "open our secret", we do not have the opportunity. Simply because there is no secret.Many still do not know what is the difference between a good trideshnik and a bad one.They differ not only in the result of the work, as it may seem at first glance, the result is rather a consequence of this difference. A good trideshnik, this is the one who tries to imitate a photograph, analyzing the actual lighting situation. A bad trideshnik, this is someone who tries to imitate someone's tridere-renders, imitating every idol and "guru" there. You ask how to imitate studio lighting.Then I have a question for you.Do you know how photographers shoot objects on a white background?No? "Then I can not answer that question." More precisely, the answer will be trivial. Just like it does in a real studio with real lighting devices.Yes? - Then I'll tell you without any problems how and what to imitate in 3d. That is, I will share my vision of how to simulate a soft softbox, than to make directional light, what the background material looks like, etc.Try to tackle the issue of photography. On the Internet, an infinite amount of information on this topic. Then you will have a fairly clear idea of how the studio looks with this or that lighting. What devices are used, from which side, what and where shines. So you have specific questions about the specific implementation of similar conditions with 3d tools.Without this, you will follow the path of the bad trideshnik described above. And we here do not do such, we are for good trideshnikov😁 Why do people know everything how to visually interiors, and only one can do an objective visa?The question is in the technical aspects of implementing lighting? No .. Just the very concept of interior lighting - is banal. Dumbly rectangular light stuck in the window and that's it.But the objective view is not given because the concept of studio lighting is not so banal and consists of a multitude of techniques and solutions. Those who do not get studio visualizations, simply do not know it. Here is the simplest example.How to make a white outline on a glossy object that does not stand against a black background?Do specific materials?Do you exclude their coverage and shading?Suffer with kompuzingm? No. Just see how photographers do it. If after that, you still think that you need to pee in the studio of another trideshnik or read more lighting lessons in 3d Max - then you belong to the second category of trideshnikov and we will not help you ...If you are still a good trideshnik, then welcome to the world of photography😁Acquainted with its techniques, the conceptual issues of the studio renderer will disappear by themselves. Instead, specific questions will arise on the implementation of a given device.That's what we'll look at and review on our site😉
Hello, a question on the studio visualization of a bicycle. I asked professional photographers personally how they make a photo on a white background - the answer was exhaustive - in each case differently, it all depends on the situation. I got on the Internet, lots of options, from using light boxes with backlighting to the backlight, and finishing with just a white rag-background, hanging behind the model and several light sources, the main one of which is the brightest spotlight directly to the ceiling at a very small angle And giving a soft reflection from the ceiling, respectively, and soft and contrast lighting. In short it got confused. I understand that using light boxing, and in the case of 3D Max it's some kind of box, no matter what form I put the model in, it will not give me the HDRI environment and accordingly the lighting from it, and the "hang" white background only from the side Shooting for me, too, is impermissible, because You must later make a 360-degree flight over the camera. The result is a big question, how to solve the situation? I vprintsipe mixed all the options - and light in the ceiling and background, but the standard white, the usual environment, which at standard settings is just black. It seems like everything, I do not like non-contrast shadows, reduced the size of lights, then the white plane on which it stands is great, increased the intensity of the reduced lights-overexposure. Tell me!Here is an example of what happens:But an example of what I would like it to happen:
Hello!I hope that having talked to photographers and trying to understand the principles of real studio photography, you began to understand more the importance of what I am saying here, pointing out the necessity of understanding these principles for photorealistic 3D object visualization😁As they say, until you start to understand, you will not understand. But you are already on the very right track and it's good.As for your survey, you do not need any different situations. At you it is unequivocal and concrete. There is a clear task - to illuminate a large-sized object, which is a children's bicycle. Therefore, there is no question of what lightbox is out of the question. This is not a jeweler and not a bottle of alcohol. Great in the lat-box you can not thrust, even children's. If only this lightbox is not the size of three refrigerators.Professional photo studio, this is a large closed room, without a single window and with the most dark finish. On this, consider, ideally a black space, that is, what our black environment in 3ds Max is.Paste in the background, put the lighting and will be what you need. I would say that the black environment of 3ds Max is just an ideal environment for studio "fotosemki."Then, you always talk about flying around the camera. But he does not need us at all. We need the so-called Turntable, that is, the turntable. There is no need to fly anywhere with the camera, it must be static, like the lighting of the stage, should be set exclusively for it, only the object itself must be turned in front of the camera. Otherwise, we get an underdog.So, I advise you not to be wasted on the general theory of "all cases". Focus on lighting is great. Look for the lighting scheme for such large objects and then we will discuss how to implement it in 3d.Still, I want to draw your attention, and in general the milestone of the participants in the discussions. Here we do not set ourselves the goal of giving personal advice or doing individual training. Therefore, everything you do, please do publicly. Discussing the studio? So, lay out the screenshots of the studio that you did. It does not matter whether it's good or bad. So that all readers will see what kind of 3d techniques are involved, so that they can follow the process personally. Even if we give, it would seem, individual advice, in fact, it is a tip for all readers. Simply, in your example, we are considering a hypothetical situation, which can also arise from someone else who follows the topic. Therefore, the realization of this or that method should be available to all. This is the purpose of our resource. Otherwise, we would simply give individual consultations in private conversation and exclusively on a paid basis. So, please, treat this with understanding. In addition, such openness, first of all, will help you personally, as we will understand more literally what exactly you are doing, and we will be able to give more precise and more specific advice😉
Hello Anton, Max and all members of the forum!I started learning and studying photography techniques in the studio and decided to do something similar, but also in our virtual environment.So, after reading the material about studio lighting and methods of photographing objects, then the past questions about tuning the studio immediately fell away by themselves. But in their place came a lot of new questions mainly relating to the lighting itself, namely the imitation of light from the instruments for shooting.Anton you already mentioned about the soft box, so now you should learn how to simulate such a light from the soft box as in reality. Also of interest is an interesting lighting method, the so-called "umbrella for skylight". I would also like to hear how you can implement it. For comparison, here are a couple of screenshots for clarity.And of course I also did not sit around 🙂As an object for visualization, I chose the model of my coffee table, I chose dark studio for visualization. In it objects are particularly good and contrast, well, I really like these scenes myself😉. For clarity, here are a few screenshots. On them, then I will be equal in the course of work.Now the nuances in the course of work:I tried different ways of simulating light from the soft box. Ordinary lights with directional light immediately fell away, tk. A lot of various attempts did not give me the desired effect of soft light and shadow. Tried to illuminate the scene with reflected light - the likeness of thisBut did not remain satisfied with the lighting according to this scheme.After all sorts of manipulations in my scene with ordinary lights, an adequate thought occurred to me😁.I decided to simulate the light from the soft box by means of a primitive (in my case it's Plane), and as a light source I set up the VRayLight material and assigned a primitive, because the light from the soft box reminds me of the luminosity of the light in the material. Moreover, the primitive can be anything, which is very convenient if you want to highlight several sides of the object at once 👌The result surprised me almost immediately - the effect of light became very similar to the one I wanted to get, but there were no shadows as such, or rather they were, but some languid and inexpressive, having tucked in the settings VRayLightMtl found a checkmark with the mode of directional light See the screen of the checkbox with a tick on the Direct illumination) and the shadows immediately fell into place😁So on this subject there is a question: is this approach suitable in imitating light from soft boxing or is there another option, more rational?Well, I spread for discussion what I did, also the screen of the scene with the location of light sources and setting the light material as a soft box.In general, the result at this stage is satisfied, at least better than it was before, but still something is missing. I would like to hear criticism and wishes for the very setup of the studio, the arrangement of light sources and everything else related to improving this result.(P.S: Anton, Max, do not hit your logo very much, you just want to leave a trace from the source of information and in kopipastah you will immediately see where the material comes from
Do not worry, just work, and even looking for assistants 3d modellingu , this does not always have time to answer, but we did not forget about you😁
As for your question. What I always try to make the post-processing was not necessary. Therefore, the background behind the model is always white or almost always 🙄 white. If, for whatever reasons, background or some of its area, it is impossible to make a perfect white (255,255,255), the post-processing I do not disdain. Especially when it comes to commercial rendering.
About the fact that you burn out the shade and get a "flying object", it is true you do not light it. Try to shine not only on the sides and top, and while you would not light on the subject, under it you would not be lighted and under it there will always be a shadow, at the same time further whiten the background.
If your shadow burns GI simply mute it😉
But HDR lighting for once I do not use, at least in the subject imaging. Any glare can be easily "draw", just put in the right place, in front of the object, visible light. Unlike HDR'ki, light position, you can change how you want, and to bring the studio to the desired kind of you, but not limited static image HRDIs.
The last option I like your rendering. It was very even nothing. The only thing is that the strong overexposure left and right on the contrary, should be a bit longer highlight. Then the lighting is uniform.
Kind time of days to all inhabitants of the given resource, in particular to you Ilya.Looking at your renderers I would like to share my experience in the field of a subject visa. As already mentioned above, refine the materials. And as a studio renderer, I suggest that you try the rendering in the Lightbox (Lightbox). It's about this technique of filming and will be discussed below😉.Studying the material about the subject photography, lighting technique and equipment, with the help of which real photographers do all this, I decided to master photography using a lightbox.On the Internet, you can find many examples of both the light boxes themselves, and the technique of shooting in it.To clarify the essence of the matter, I support several pictures with lightboxes.Looking at the lightbox, you can notice that there is nothing inherently natural in its design, and the essence of the lighting technique is immediately obvious. The only thing that immediately causes difficulties - how to do this in 3Ds Max'e.As Anton and Max have already said, a studio that is as close to reality as possible is needed to get a realistic rendered photo.So immediately I want to notice, the more real the lightbox model will be, the more realistic will be the glare and reflections on the model.As a test for this post, I did not particularly bother modeling lightbox, my model is very simple.The walls of my box that shine through three Vray lights, have a material similar to tulle or curtain material, the rest of the walls have a plain white Vray material. The background (background, unfounded), too, has a standard Vray material, with a slight reflection.With modeling and materials I think problems should not arise, but if there are questions, I can lay out a step-by-step guide on creating a lightbox in the relevant topics on modeling and materials.I would like to note the nuances in the course of the work done:1. I will repeat about the realism of the lightbox itself, the more realistic its model, the better the result;2. To set the angle and lighting, I used the real-time rendering function for convenience, activate the Active Shade checkbox to activate it.At the expense of versions of Vray render I can not say from which versions the Active Shade function is available, I think the guys will correct me.Well, for example, a clean render in a lightbox without postprocessing.
Hello, I'm just starting to learn 3D Max, and I need your help. I hope you will help me.While reading your site, I came across one entertaining idea: "A good trideshnik, this is someone who tries to imitate a photograph by analyzing real lighting situations"I started to understand how photographers solve problems with lighting. I came across a curious site http://photo-monster.ru (can anyone come in handy). I began to apply their advice to action, and something does not come out. Relations with this I have questions that I divided into three points. Help please understand them:First:For objective photography, photographers use a variety of ways to create a background. I singled out three main ones:1. Imitation of an infinite plane (Figure 1)2. Stand-alone (if you want to create highlights and gradients on the background) (Figures 2 and 2b)
3. Softboxes (Figure 3)And also their all possible combinations. (Figures 4 and 5)I tried to recreate their analogs in max1) An infinite plane can be done in several ways:A) The plane is a kink (Figure 1a)B) By rotation (Figure 1b)C) VrayPlane2) Separately standing planes3) But how to simulate a soft box?I do not understand. There is an idea can, for example, build a box and assign material to it. But what is the Mtl c assignment of transparency, net. Can VRay2SidedMtl, since it allows you to see the light that the object is illuminated from the back side. Or VRayLightMtl.How do you do in softboxes? What material do you use? What settings should I pay attention to when creating a softbox?Second:For lighting photographers use the following equipment:1) Umbrellas2) Reflectors3) Soft boxes4) Various types of nozzles: curtains, honeycombs, color filtersSoft boxes are used for basic lighting, and reflectors for background and drawing. The use of nozzles depends on the situation. I did not see any umbrellas in the subject survey.The given light source in max can be replaced, for example soft-box - VRayLight. It can be adjusted to the size and the shadow it gives soft. With reflectors, it's not entirely clear what is more correct to use Target Light, Target Spot or Target Direct.
What kind of light do you use for objective photography? On what settings should pay attention to a beginner trideshniku? Is light worth getting closer to real parameters? If so, what is the value of Multipliier if you want to put it on if it's 100 watts?Third:With the settings VRayPhysicalCamera is quite a pipe. I just found the following parameters for the subject survey:Aperture from f8 to f11 (f-number)Exposure 1/125 seconds (shutter speed)ISO 200Please tell us what parameters still need to be changed? What kind of VRayPhysicalCamera do you use?
Its nice to just read. Thank you!
With specific regard to your question, then I'll start from the end. In particular, we do not recommend using 'physical' camera. To be engaged in the selection of "Aperture" values, "Shutter" and "the ISO" is ultimately only for brightness control rendering, instead of simply krutnut a single parameter in the Color mapping, it is possible unless the particular boredom😁 We recommend to use a standard at all times. Why and how? Read about it in this tutorial: Replacing the standard VRayPhysicalCamera the Camera the Max 3ds .
With regard to the main part of your question, I'll try to make time to tell his version of the technical implementation / simulation of a photographic equipment in 3ds Max and V-Ray.
However, if someone of you have found a solution to this or tion of this issue, please tell us about their achievements. It is not excluded that your version of the implementation will be the most original😉
Irina, hello!And so in order.Background.Imitation of an infinite plane is the most successful solution. In 3d, this is just a corner with a chamferent face. The more shallow the bevel, the less obvious it is the background, not the infinity. As a mat, normal VRayMtl can act. If the studio is white, then pure white Diffuse and everything, no more options. If it is dark, then the diffusion becomes the right color, the main thing is not pure black, then it will not be visible to the shadow and the meaning in the background as such will be lost altogether.All other effects can be done without removing this plane. That is, if you want to "draw" a glare, or darken a part of the reflecting surface, it is enough to bring a self-luminous or dark object into the scene. Typically, this is an ordinary Box with a black VRayMtl or a self-luminous white VRayLightMtl. To prevent these boxes from interfering with the scene, you can turn off their visibility by the camera (Visible to Camera), as well as the reception and dropping of shadows and GI, if they stand in the way of light sources. Leave only the visibility of these objects in reflections / refractions.It is important to understand that the color of the environment should be black, not white or gray. Then there will not be a parasitic, in this case, GI highlighting of the entire scene and the reflections themselves on the rendered object will be contrasting.As for the soft box, that is, a studio that does not have sharp and soft reflections, then I do not literally do soft boxing, but simply draw gradient textures of the right kind and insert them into a mat of self-luminous boxes. Then the reflections on the object are also soft.Lighting.It will not be entirely true to imitate a real IP just for the sake of its imitation. It will be more correct to simulate the effect that photographers are trying to achieve using a particular lighting or reflection instrument.For example, an umbrella. It is not directly a stoker of light, it works in conjunction with a source (a searchlight, a flash) that shines on it. In turn, the material (tissue) of the umbrella reflects the light incident on it, in fact being a secondary light source. But unlike a lamp that shines on an umbrella, the spot of light on it "blurs" and turns out to be soft, that is, not with distinct edges, but with gradient ones. This property and is used by photographers to get not directional, but "soft" gradient light, without clear boundaries, one that can not be obtained directly from a light source.Completely the same function perform soft boxes. Only they do not work for reflection, but for the light and the source of light is not before them, but behind them, through which they are fabricated. When the light source shines on the fabric inside the soft box, the same gradient spot appears, glowing with a soft glow on the other side of the fabric.As already written above, their technical implementation is very banal. It's just a Box primitive of the desired form and a texture gradient in the corresponding slot of the self-luminous material. If you need to not only reflect this soft box in the materials of the visualization object, but also literally shine it, then it's enough to use the Direct illumination section and turn on the generation of direct lighting from this material.Alternatively, VRayLight Plane with a texture in the Use texture slot can act.If you look at real pictures of professional photo studios, then they can be confused with scenes of 3ds Max:With large flying self-luminous Boxes and miniature subjects😁On color filters we will not stop, it is obvious that this is just the right color in the material's lighting settings or VRayLight.As far as directional projectors are concerned, this is any directional IC from the standard 3ds Max set. For example, Target Spot.I myself sometimes use Target Spot, both to create light spots on the background. Just on the background or Box with VRayMtl, a candle with several Target Spot, getting a bright spot light of the desired shape.
(this photo)Then on the object a soft gradient reflection is obtained.As for the brightness values in accordance with Watts, Kandelas, and other physical quantities, forget them. Do everything by sight. Dimly - make it brighter, bright - do it dimmer. No fizz. Correctness in a physically incorrect environment.Camera.There are no options. We recommend that you always use a standard 3ds Max camera. Do not bother your head with nonsense and read the last sentence of the description of lighting😁
Above already somehow raised a theme about visualization of a white object object on a white background. Temporarily I had to disappear, but now I decided to finish this task to the end.Indeed, white on white - sounds crazy. Maybe I did not exactly put it. For certain, many are familiar with popular (and well-selling) microstock males (author - ioannis kounadeas). I want something like this: absolutely white background, soft shading, no noise and light, drawing of all the details. Something suggests that in this case, you can not do without a lightbox. Although now I try to manage Box in the quality of the floor with checkmarks Matte objects and Shadow in V-ray properties. It turns out, to put it mildly, is not it.Settings - all as in the lessons renderstuff. I tried to tick the V-ray :: Environment rollout, switch from Reinhard to Linear Multiply, thus surviving the scene. This is what I wanted to do "absolutely white background".I also climbed in the Environment and Effect and changed the colors in the Common tab. From white to black. From black to white. In different combinations. Color, Tint, and even Ambient. Changes and the truth occurred, but not for the better.Reminds bearded anegdot: frontal rubbed, wheel kicked, and the car does not go.There were other actions: in one lesson on the object on the white there was a slizh ..., that is, the studio was downloaded. At first I decided that I had found my happiness and at last I could rivet the object with bundles: the background is white, the shadow from the object is present. But when you turn the camera, when you change the material to white everything again became bad: the monotone gray color of the object, no shadows ...At this stage I am guided by the following statements:1) for those who so far "do not understand anything" (at least, almost nothing can be done), the V-Ray settings from renderstuff are the only true ones. Including for object visualization. Well, it's like the covenant of the Lord from Mount Zion, with the only difference is that the settings are logically justified;2) following the first point, we affirm that the whole point inA) studio - surrounding objects;B) the lighting system;C) materials.Question: Is this true?While I will send the results of work, I hope that someone will respond.And, yes: is it worth changing colors in Environment and Effects?
Artem, greetings!In this topic, more than detailed recommendations are given about the studio and generally how to choose the lighting scheme. Tu also gave very specific recommendations about the technical or practical implementation of this in 3d. In particular, there are answers to the question of how to simulate a particular studio lighting device, how to make an "infinite" plane, what material to apply to it to obtain a white background. Repeat or poke my nose will not.I advise you once again to carefully read all the pages of this discussion. Do not understand? Read it again. Again it is not clear? Read again. And so far, you will not understand. If you still do not understand, then you either persistently ignore the solutions that are offered by us, or you are simply not yet ready to visualize such a level.As for specific advice in your particular case, Denis gave advice, word-for-word is the one that in this situation you would have been given to you by the author of a frog on a white background. You correctly understood, post-processing in the illustrations to the lessons of such a plan is not appropriate and they are supported by "raw" renderers, however, in your case, Denis's recommendation is the most correct decision.The only tips that I can give you, except those already described in this discussion, is to go buy yourself a good SLR camera and experiment with photoshots of different objects, while remembering to read the lessons on photo-techniques, including lighting. Maybe so, you will understand that the very first answer about the white-on-white is not empty words. In addition, you should listen to the opinion of more experienced colleagues than you (for example, Denis, gus_ann or frog author😁) and try to make friends with Photoshop. A visualizer trying to get a photorealistic image and not owning a composite, flower, retouched, it's like a eunuch trying to build himself from Casanova. Try to-pyzhsya and the desired result will not squeeze.I apply post-processing everywhere and do not support those who are engaged in sports rendering.