3 ms·

Then your art will always resemble the physical reality we already know. Computers and mathematics enable us to render literally anything. And all you can think

Then your art will always resemble the physical reality we already know. Computers and mathematics enable us to render literally anything. And all you can think of are things you see every day. I'm looking at wax, fire and smoke right now, there's a candle on my desk. If it's realism I wanted, I could just stare at that (and sometimes do).

redox99 5y ago
Could you give me an example of what you have in mind that current rendering engines can't handle?
- creata 5y ago
  An example would be good, but I think hypertele-Xii's point isn't about what engines can handle, but about where engine developers are (and aren't) spending their money and time, and what they're making easy for users to do --- that if they make realism easy, then that's where users will go.
- silentguy 5y ago
  Not OP, but I think rendering scenarios where light doesn't follow straight lines would be problematic for current rendering engines. Also, some hypothetical portal or other dimension scenarios.
- hypertele-Xii 5y ago
  Sure. Here's someone developing an engine capable of rendering infinite, fractal worlds: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V1MjZbGbi4I https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V1MjZbGbi4I Here's someone developing an engine with hyperbolic geometry (though dressed in mundane setting): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VYfWfrk5P7w https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VYfWfrk5P7w Mirror Drop is an abstract art puzzle game that's kind of difficult to define: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e1zHgYUE9HY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e1zHgYUE9HY Here's a game where the speed of light is simulated and variable: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uu7jA8EHi_0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uu7jA8EHi_0 The primary point of my argument is that we don't have things in mind that current rendering engines can't handle, precisely because our current engines are so hell-bent on replicating reality. Why dream of what your tools can't make?

redox99 5y ago

Could you give me an example of what you have in mind that current rendering engines can't handle?

creata 5y ago
An example would be good, but I think hypertele-Xii's point isn't about what engines can handle, but about where engine developers are (and aren't) spending their money and time, and what they're making easy for users to do --- that if they make realism easy, then that's where users will go.
silentguy 5y ago
Not OP, but I think rendering scenarios where light doesn't follow straight lines would be problematic for current rendering engines. Also, some hypothetical portal or other dimension scenarios.
hypertele-Xii 5y ago
Sure. Here's someone developing an engine capable of rendering infinite, fractal worlds: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V1MjZbGbi4I https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V1MjZbGbi4I Here's someone developing an engine with hyperbolic geometry (though dressed in mundane setting): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VYfWfrk5P7w https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VYfWfrk5P7w Mirror Drop is an abstract art puzzle game that's kind of difficult to define: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e1zHgYUE9HY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e1zHgYUE9HY Here's a game where the speed of light is simulated and variable: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uu7jA8EHi_0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uu7jA8EHi_0 The primary point of my argument is that we don't have things in mind that current rendering engines can't handle, precisely because our current engines are so hell-bent on replicating reality. Why dream of what your tools can't make?