4 ms·
In VFX at the high-end (the smaller studios do often take shortcuts) we do model full layered materials with thickness, at least for mid to hero-level assets, s
by berkut 4y ago
In VFX at the high-end (the smaller studios do often take shortcuts) we do model full layered materials with thickness, at least for mid to hero-level assets, so we would do the glass with proper volumetric thickness, with fully-correct inter-reflecting/refracting dielectric BSDFs modelling the glass, with correct IOR and total internal reflection.
It is slower to render than using "thin glass", and lighting the checkerboard surface underneath the glass isn't as efficient (you can't do naive Next Event Estimation through the refraction of the glass volume, but you can do manifold walks to solve that), but we do it at that level of fidelity often enough when required and have been for years. There are times when it's not required though, so approximations can be acceptable in more forgiving situations.
- viraptor 4y agoYes, you totally can do it if you want to. What I meant is that that kind of CGI scene composition does not include a glass sheet on the surface. They used it to add the reflection to a checkered pattern instead of trying to find something like polished marble. But if we found a thousand different versions of that scene in CGI, I would bet that every single one of them would use a checkered pattern plane that's slightly reflective. Maybe even uses marble subsurface scattering. But none would add a sheet of glass on the plane as a not-forced modelling choice. That's what makes the photo identifiable as a photo.
- berkut 4y agoSorry, I mis-understood: I agree.