3 ms·

This 3D scene took me 59:04:42 hours to render

4 points by atum47 6y ago

I just watched this video [1] showing the progress of ArchViz with the new RTX technology and how it's possible to render complex scenes with very realistic lights in real time. It reminded me about this very simple scene I rendered (around 2009) that took me almost 60 hours to complete: https://victorribeiro.cgsociety.org/yjoi/my-last-background 1 - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mvjKM-iVxYI

codevark 6y ago
In the late eighties, we'd render scenes on an accelerated Amiga 2000 that often took over a week - at resolutions that were so low, they'd be useless toady. Waiting..
Minor49er 6y ago
While the advancements are impressive, do you have any more insight into the improvements in rendering technology? Also, I'm not a graphic designer, but I spoke with a developer years ago who mentioned that indoor and outdoor rendering are quite different. Your image is an outdoor scene, but the NVidia video focuses on indoor architecture. (I see that they have a window in their example with some grass, but it's not a very wide space.) Do you think your rendering time would have been cut down back then if you composed a scene similar to what NVidia demoed? Any thoughts on RTX outdoor rendering?
- atum47 6y ago
  I left the ArchViz market for good back in 2015. From time to time I like to watch what kind of innovations they come up with, but I'm not super familiar with all the new tech. All I know is that with things like Quixel [1] and megascans they can produce really amazing environment scenes (the kind I was trying to achieve with my render) that render in real time. To be honest, there was a lot of things I could do to improve my scene rendering time, but I wanted to try using grass as real geometry so each blade of grass would interact with every photon of light. I remember the blades of grass being reflective and refractive (although you can't see that in the low quality render, compressed as JPG). 1 - https://quixel.com/ https://quixel.com/

4 points by atum47 6y ago

codevark 6y ago

In the late eighties, we'd render scenes on an accelerated Amiga 2000 that often took over a week - at resolutions that were so low, they'd be useless toady. Waiting..

Minor49er 6y ago

While the advancements are impressive, do you have any more insight into the improvements in rendering technology? Also, I'm not a graphic designer, but I spoke with a developer years ago who mentioned that indoor and outdoor rendering are quite different. Your image is an outdoor scene, but the NVidia video focuses on indoor architecture. (I see that they have a window in their example with some grass, but it's not a very wide space.) Do you think your rendering time would have been cut down back then if you composed a scene similar to what NVidia demoed? Any thoughts on RTX outdoor rendering?

atum47 6y ago
I left the ArchViz market for good back in 2015. From time to time I like to watch what kind of innovations they come up with, but I'm not super familiar with all the new tech. All I know is that with things like Quixel [1] and megascans they can produce really amazing environment scenes (the kind I was trying to achieve with my render) that render in real time. To be honest, there was a lot of things I could do to improve my scene rendering time, but I wanted to try using grass as real geometry so each blade of grass would interact with every photon of light. I remember the blades of grass being reflective and refractive (although you can't see that in the low quality render, compressed as JPG). 1 - https://quixel.com/ https://quixel.com/