3 ms·
It seems like your point is not so much that we can't technically render photorealistic scenes, but that artists don't put in the work to recreate the incredibl
by nearbuy 6y ago
It seems like your point is not so much that we can't technically render photorealistic scenes, but that artists don't put in the work to recreate the incredible level of detail we have in reality.
- bonoboTP 6y agoYes. But in principle, tech could be advanced enough that it doesn't require so much manual effort. Like, if someone takes the time an works long hours on modeling a worn book with all its wrinkles and curls and crookedness, you can probably ray trace it realistically. But you could also say that artists can digitally paint a whole scene without any 3d engine or rendering tech. The point is, currently it only works for simple scenes and needs tons of manual work otherwise. Reality is realistic effortlessly.
- CydeWeys 6y agoThis isn't a big distinction to me? Either way, it's still true that it's nigh impossible to generate a realistic rendered every day scene. Whether that's because the environment modeling isn't there yet or the ray tracing isn't there yet doesn't make a big difference to me. Maybe the super detailed modeling will be the "last stand" prior to achieving general photorealistic renders, and the final breakthrough will be some kind of improved ML procedural generation algorithm for everyday lifelike objects.