doujay888

I've been using Max for quite some time now, however, til now I haven't improved much on my lighting I've tried radiosity on several attemps yet
I can't get thru it. Im more familiar with the standard lights but the bottomline is Im not yet happy with the results of my work! can you give
me suggestions on how to improve my lighting? I have attached an image
using standard lights.... I need your suggestions on it, please?

My PC Config:
P4 2.80 Ghz.
1 GB RAM

Thanks in Advance,
Dennis

Attached Files

	RECEPTION.FNL_A4.pdf (97.8 KB, 78 views)
	IMG2.CONF.CG.pdf (83.3 KB, 43 views)

anvaraziz

where is image,,,,,,,,,,,

doujay888

image is attached now, kindly check pls! and give me some
suggestions.


thanks,
dennis

django

ok. what kind of light did you use? as ican see i think its an omni light?
(correct me if im wrong).if it is omni then try to shift to a photometric light..

ipdesigner

kabayan!..

im using radiosity most of my rendering ryt now..try to check the settings that i suggested to ACHENG...(in this forum also, work in progress)

good luck!

Acheng

hi dennis,
i also encounter the same problem. yup, it's better to use photometric light rather than using standard light. that's because standard only produce direct light only and u need to add more light to simulate the indirect light. U can try to read the radiosity reference supply by max. there u may find a lot of information about radiosity. i already see ur images, how long did u take to do the lighting? from my experience, i found it's hard to visualize the indirect light by our judgement or prediction. ur image is good if it's from standard light. u may look the the instruction by our good member( Sherwin Boston). he suggested and teached me alot about the problem,. here i thank to him. because he changed my opinion about the complexity of radiosity.

regard,
acheng

kicks

<u actually can use standard omni in radiosity or fakeoisity and get same result as photometric lights. However, you will complicate things by adding more variables. photometric lights have built in attenuation whilst with standard light, you have to set it yourself. Attached file is fakeosity with photometric freepoint.

talking about fakeiosity: (which comes in real handy if time constraint is an issue)

<the dilemma for rendering interiors via fakeiousity would always be lighting the ceiling. Tip is 1) position of light: which i usually put at 60/40 relative distance from floor/ceiling so your light is slightly above the distance between floor & ceiling. Set the intensity such that it will not burn the ceiling. 2) the number of lights used is relative to the proportional volume of the space(watchamacallit) height vs width. The lower the ceiling is vs the width of the room, the more lights you need.
< some use separate lights for the ceiling,which I do not recommend.(more light, more render time)

__________________
kicks


IF YOU DIM YOUR LIGHT SO THAT OTHERS MAY SHINE, THE WHOLE WORLD GETS DARKER.

Mokiloke

There is a fantastic tutorial that is really worth doing if you're interested in fakiosity. It the montree one in the tutorial section of this web site.

THis is the most important in your case but you should do some of the others as well
http://www.cgarchitect.com/resources.../tutorial3.asp