Garry_rocks

Eurobricks Vassals
  • Content Count

    19
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Garry_rocks

  • Birthday April 24

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  1. How do you quantify advertisement? Why do companies invest in commercials if there's no way to ever find out how exactly this results in sales? LDD is an advertisement of sorts and all TLG had to do was to simply keep the database up to date. It was (and still is) a free application with lots of bugs and everything, but it got really popular among Lego fans. Let's face it: LDD isn't that good to pay for it. But it's a really nice commercial and I guess it'll have its effect when it's completely dead.
  2. Yes, this! Every single word! However it gets really hard to not have all those fancy new parts available. Sad news.
  3. I've noticed a problem with flexible chains, they have some strangely twisted links at times. Here's what it looks like: If you care to see the whole MOC, here's some more for you! This is initial BR image: And this is my edited image (mixed with POV-Ray): Also, I came across a post on a previous page from jonnysp about LDD to .obj converter (he had similar problems with flex parts), I even downloaded it, but it doesn't seem to do anything. No files are generated. I'm learning to use Blender and such a converter would be a really huge happening for me! Could somebody help me with it, please?
  4. Thank you! Your rendering engine is really awesome, now more then ever before! I just can't stop making these animated images! But I actually see a model reassembled in that black window inbetween the sub-renders, isn't that the same thing called "parsing" happening there? For models with lots of parts this process is a huge problem as it can fail on my PC (apparently sometimes there's not enough heap space for Java). Anyway, thanks again for version 0005! Here are some more animations!
  5. If BR=Bluerender and you say it looks terrible... Those are default settings that we all love about Bluerender. And read closely, they are meant to look different. Why else would I do several renders. I made them different to combine all three into a single image. https://www.flickr.com/photos/garry_rocks/21228886621/ You say that Bluerender works faster than we could ever get POV-Ray to work. I know that's not true, why should I go past this quietly? Big transparent objects are rare guests in my creations, also they still look much worse with standard Blurender settings, so I'd rather have them rendered in POV-Ray. And yeah, you're right, this is rather pointless.
  6. Here are some examples. They are not really comparable since they were made different on purpose to get a "middle" ending result, but whatever. Mind that these images are 3840x2048. This model has over 7000 pieces. POV-Ray, visible bevels + OutdoorLQ radiosity and HDR lighting = 13 hours. Bluerender = a little less than 4 hours. POV-Ray, only LDD geometry + OutdoorLQ + HDR lighting = 26 minutes. No jokes. You keep saying that Bluerender is way too different, it's not. The settings are, and it'll take forever to find the same settings in POV-Ray. But it's not impossible. Bluerender slows down very much with the increased image resolution while POV-Ray mostly cares about radiosity settings and model complexity. Also try POV-Ray with no AA - it'll be even faster.
  7. Well, you're not right at all. POV-Ray allows renders just as fast as Bluerender when it gets to high-resolution images. "No radiosity" (or OutdoorLQ) + "only LDD geometry" gives you approximately the same speed in POV-Ray. Yes, currently there is no such option in LDD2POV-Ray, but it's not something that cannot be done. Also I saw some of my models rendered with Blender. They look far more realistic than anything from POV-Ray or Bluerender and (from what I heard) they are really fast. Once again, I really like Bluerender and I like what it can do. But only as a supplement to my POV-Ray renders with "lower-than-usual" settings, not as a stand-alone program. I don't think I'll ever use an image solely from Bluerender as a main representation of my model, at least not with its current capabilities.
  8. I was waiting for this! Very nice option indeed! It's a bit disappointing that in fact it is just a multiple render and that there are no simplifications to somehow speed up the process. It is still pretty quick for small image resolutions, so it's not a big deal.
  9. I don't see any offence here. You just got it wrong. I used those default (example) settings to show that SunFlow works just the same way POV-Ray does and there are no big differences between these two. What was the greatest advantage of Bluerender? It was its speed. Enhanced settings like multiple light sources and advanced bricks geometry should make rendering time much longer. Plus all that fine tuning process and all of your additional manual work. The initial idea behind Bluerender was "instant render", that's why there are pretty much no settings in it. I'm just saying that LDD2POV-Ray is much better for those heavy, properly set up and detailed renders, while Bluerender is for quick and yet still nice pictures when you think that a simple screenshot is not enough, but don't want to mess with render too much. Most of the images in this topic were made with only default settings. Adding tons of settings might turn Bluerender into another LDD2POV-Ray with all the same problems in it. How can we ever compare POV-Ray to Bluerender if we're using incomparable settings for both? EDIT: Why don't you try LGEO, it was made specifically for renders, wan't it? I thought it has just the right "realistic" bricks we need for render.
  10. I did some test renders using different types of lighting. All the alternative light sources were present in the initial scene file by msx80, so my own intrusion was minimal. Here's what I got with default (sunsky) lighting: The next one was using a directional light source. Looks kinda like POV-Ray with really low settings to me. And the last one was using that example of spherical light. And this one looks exactly like POV-Ray with no radiosity. Even those reflections of the light source are very similar. What was my point here? I tried to show that both SunFlow and POV-Ray have very close results when the settings are close. All of the difference is in the default settings that LDD2POV-Ray and Bluerender are using. The Bluerender has much more appealing default parameters, its materials are less shiny and reflective. This makes the images created in Bluerender look better than those from LDD2POV-Ray. And yet they don't look very photorealistic, not only because of the lack of bevels and logo on studs, but because of their cartoon-like bright palette. This is at least how I see it. I quite like Bluerender though, mixing it with low-quality POV-Ray renders gives really nice results and saves time.
  11. I had exactly the same thought: replacing some poorly modeled bricks from LDD with some more precise models from other libraries like those from LDraw (I only know about LGEO, not sure if it'll do here). I don't think that every single part needs a replacement, but those round parts and curved slopes are the first thing that gives the render away every time. From what I read, parts with segmented curves should take longer to render than those with continuous curves. As for the bevels and logo on studs in LDD2POV-Ray, I've heard it uses some "connectivity data" from .lxf file to place that logo and indeed has some algorithm to add bevels "on the fly". Ah yeah, one more thing! There is a parameter in LDD2POV-Ray "All bevels/Only visible bevels", so I guess there is a way to get that info about "simplified" bricks (like those Sunder mentioned above) from .lxf too.
  12. Man, before blaming me in not reading this topic you should try to read at least the post you're replying! I know flex problem was mentioned and I've read all your multiple posts with all your issues and suggestions. Please, be more patient. You've already flooded this topic enough to make it hard to read. I meant "shrinking" will only be useful for simplest "studs on top" cases, just like msx80 said! I only said that my models suffer from "flex" problem too, just like yours. And "cell shading" has nothing to do with SF code, but with Bluerender's. Please, don't answer if you don't know the answer. There is an option in POV-Ray that adds outlines to bricks. Instead of bevels you get a mix of wireframe and non-beveled bricks. You already have a wireframe option, just modify it so we could get something like this (I'm really-really hoping that's not too hard to make): Thank you very much!
  13. Shrinking bricks won't add too much to the render, really. It'll surely add some seams in between, but it's that "edge highlight" effect that makes the rendered bricks look more realistic. For Bionicle/HF builds these seams are completely useless. I guess adding "cell shading"-like option could be much more useful. Like it was made in LDD2POV-Ray: you could choose between modified geometry or crease edges+silhouette. It's relatively easy and it should really add a lot more to Bluerender's functionality! Also, my models are suffering from "some flex pieces are missing" issue too. Hope this is to be fixed with the next release :D And the last not least: how should I change "field of view" parameter in .sc file so that I could have a maximal zoom of my model? When I have the same image size 1920x1024 both in POV-Ray and in Bluerender, I still have a difference in sizes of the model. Here's an example from POV-Ray (don't pay attention to the lighting, is made that way on purpose): And here's from Bluerender:
  14. Well, I guess you should... Kinda POV-Ray is good enough and LDD2POV-Ray is a very powerful thing, but both have some obvious limitations due to POV-Ray's age. SunFlow seems to be a really nice and newer rendering program. Any plans on adding bevels/fixing geometry? Also there is another program, Simlab Composer, I've seen some great Lego renders made in it. I believe it's also a more efficient tool than POV-Ray, yet there's still no proper converter...
  15. Thank you very much for this new program! I did some tests and I'm really counting on its further development! But to be honest, it's not that faster than POV-Ray than it seems at first. With only LDD geometry, a single light source and a simpler radiosity like OutdoorLQ you'll get your render just as fast in POV-Ray and with pretty much equal quality. Also I had some trouble with setting my image size. I wanted it to be 1920*1024 and (since the ratio is different from the default) my picture looked distorted. In LDD2POV-Ray I never thought this was possible, I could have some parts of a model cropped, but never a distorted image. Also with a huge size of rendering image my preview window only shows it's middle part and there's no way to see the whole picture. Am I doing something wrong?