Which Render is More Realistic?

jdo

I'm new to working with 3D art (any art, really), and I'm still trying to figure out render settings (among other things like lighting) to make renders more realistic. I've been playing around with gamma correction, and would like those of you with more experience to comment on the results. Which render is more realistic? Also, is there something I'm doing wrong (like some setting I should tweak) that you can see?

I took two renders: one with gamma correction off and 1.0 gamma, and one with gamma correction on and 2.2 gamma.

I think the one with gamma correction makes the eyes look too washed out, but that may just be me. I also noticed the gold looks too dull in the image with 2.2 gamma and gamma correction on. Something looks off about the hair in both renders, and I can't decide where it looks better (I'm using Garibaldi Express). I really like the skin in the render with gamma correction.

Thanks.

fastbike1

Gamma isn't the only, or perhaps even the major factor in a render.

I like the left image better because there is more depth. The right image is flat and washed out. I wouldn't however consider either one realistic to any degree.

You should try to understand the use of shaders and textures and how they relate.

Finally, you then need to understand lighting. If Iray is your choice of render engine, then it wouldn't hurt ti understand how light works in the real world.

A lot of things to learn, so don't give up. Pick one piece at a time.

Richard Haseltine

Are you sure the Gamma Correction on option was set? The With render looks very much like an image rendered with gamma 2.2 but without the correction option (which removes the baked-in gamma correction from the textures so that they don't get double-corrected and washed out).

mjc1016

Richard Haseltine said:

Are you sure the Gamma Correction on option was set? The With render looks very much like an image rendered with gamma 2.2 but without the correction option (which removes the baked-in gamma correction from the textures so that they don't get double-corrected and washed out).

Or are you sure you didn't adjust the Gain setting (it is very close to the Gamma one)?

jdo

Thank you for the replies.

Are you sure the Gamma Correction on option was set? The With render looks very much like an image rendered with gamma 2.2 but without the correction option (which removes the baked-in gamma correction from the textures so that they don't get double-corrected and washed out).

I did turn Gamma Correction to on. With Gamma Correction on, I tried rendering with and without manually changing the gamma value to 2.2 for each image map with the image editor. It made no difference.

Or are you sure you didn't adjust the Gain setting (it is very close to the Gamma one)?

I didn't touch the gain setting. Gain was set to 1.0 in both renders.

I thought the image looked washed out, but I also thought it might just be because I'm used to looking images without Gamma Correction, and that's how it's supposed to look. Being a noob at this, I thought it was something like I just needed to get used to the different look. I guess it is washed out. I tried different scenes with Gamma Correction on and off and got similar results. I triple checked the settings.

I tried a render with gamma correction off, and gamma set to 2.2. It looks even more washed out.

If it's not supposed to look washed out with gamma correction on, what might be causing that? I just tried the same scene again and checked the settings each time, so I know I didn't touch gain.

I'm using 3Delight, because I'm on a Mac and IRay takes crazy long (and makes my fans go nuts).

Gamma isn't the only, or perhaps even the major factor in a render.

I like the left image better because there is more depth. The right image is flat and washed out. I wouldn't however consider either one realistic to any degree.

You should try to understand the use of shaders and textures and how they relate.

Finally, you then need to understand lighting. If Iray is your choice of render engine, then it wouldn't hurt ti understand how light works in the real world.

A lot of things to learn, so don't give up. Pick one piece at a time.

Thank you for that. Once I figure out what's going on with my gamma corrected renders, I'll go back and work on those other things you mentioned. Hopefully I'll get better as I work through this stuff.

I attached the new renders and the render settings.

jdo

Okay, to try to figure what's going on I opened a new scene and inserted a Genesis 1 male figure. I did not add any lights. I took 3 renders:

with.png: 2.2 gamma and gamma correction on

without.png: 1.0 gamma and and gamma correction off

highGamma_noGC: 2.2 gamma and gamma correction off

Is "with.png" what should be expected? Does that look right? Does it look any better than "without.png?" It looks washed out to me.

Richard Haseltine

I wouldn't say either of the renders (ignoring the 2.2/GC off one) looked ideal - but the headlamp does not give nice lighting to start with.

jdo

I wouldn't say either of the renders (ignoring the 2.2/GC off one) looked ideal - but the headlamp does not give nice lighting to start with.

So, for my first post, do you think I could get a better result with gamma correction if I played around with the lighting? I tried turning the lights down, but of course there's much more I can do with lighting.

jdo

I mean, do you think lighting is the reason (or a main reason) the image ended up looking washed out?

mjc1016

Very likely lighting was/is a major factor...

Chohole

Lighting is something that can easily make or break a good render, whicherver program and/or render engine is used.

frank0314

What are you render settings cause they can also be a cause.

Richard Haseltine

Assuming Genesis Male loads with some kind of SSS shader (I can't recall off-hand) then the lack of shadows on the headlamp is going to have light scattering all over the place - that will tend to wash the maps out.

jdo

What are you render settings cause they can also be a cause.

I left everything as the defaults, except gamma correction and the gamma slider.

Cris Palomino

oahmad04 said:

 

I'm using 3Delight, because I'm on a Mac and IRay takes crazy long (and makes my fans go nuts).

I would suggest using CPU and Iray.  I'm on a Macbook Pro and it doesn't seem to take any longer to render with Iray as 3DL but I get far better far better results.  Take a look at the various Iray threads for tips. 

jdo

I would suggest using CPU and Iray.  I'm on a Macbook Pro and it doesn't seem to take any longer to render with Iray as 3DL but I get far better far better results.  Take a look at the various Iray threads for tips. 

That's weird. I'm also on a Macbook Pro, and it takes way longer for me. Also, it makes my Garibaldi Express hair disappear, but there's probably a way to fix that. Thank you, though. There's likely something I can change to make Iray work for me. I'll look at the Iray threads and see what I can find.

mjc1016

Richard Haseltine said:

Assuming Genesis Male loads with some kind of SSS shader (I can't recall off-hand) then the lack of shadows on the headlamp is going to have light scattering all over the place - that will tend to wash the maps out.

It does...Omnifreaker's HSS and Velvet is ON...so that will wash things out some on it's own.

jdo

Richard Haseltine said:

Assuming Genesis Male loads with some kind of SSS shader (I can't recall off-hand) then the lack of shadows on the headlamp is going to have light scattering all over the place - that will tend to wash the maps out.

It does...Omnifreaker's HSS and Velvet is ON...so that will wash things out some on it's own.

I tried turning both velvet and subsurface off. It definately makes a difference. So, I should turn these values down if I want to use gamma correction. Is there a rule of thumb for how much I should turn them down, or is it different for each render?

Richard Haseltine

Did you try using a light or lights that cast shadows? With SSS you really need your lights to be shadow casting (if you need to get light into enclosed spaces you can still switch cast Shadows off for the object in 3Delight)

jdo

Did you try using a light that cast shadows?

My scene (with the red-haired guy) uses two distant lights. Shouldn't those cast shadows?

jdo

I'm not sure what I should be looking at for shadows. My distant lights have "Shadow Type" "None." Is this a problem?

Richard Haseltine

Yes, set the Shadow Type to Ray Traced (Software Only).

jdo

Yes, set the Shadow Type to Ray Traced (Software Only).

Oh, wow. Yeah, that's a pretty dramatic difference. I should also do my homework and figure out what to do with the other shadow settings. The scene looks dark, but I can always adjust the lighting. There's also a weird completely black spot on the right eye, but I'm guessing I can fix that by changing the shadow settings.

jdo

Thank you everyone for your help. I have a lot to work on. I took a new render just with some quick changes based on what I learned from this thread so far. I turned gamma correction on and set gamma to 2.2. I reduced velvet and subsurface values. I set the shadow type for my lights to ray traced. I turned the lights up a little. It still needs work, but it looks like an improvement to me. I don't understand why the eyes still look so washed out.

I'll do my homework on Iray.

jdo

I don't understand why the eyes still look so washed out.

I fixed the eyes. I just set the reflection type for the cornea to raytraced. Progress is being made.

Richard Haseltine

Mapped reflections in DS are often not a good idea - they don't adjust for lighting at all, so a light reflection map will make the surface look overlit. This used to be a problem with some of Jack Tomalin's early PC sets (before we got real DS materials) - I think a lot of them have since been updated.

evilproducer

And just to re-iterate what was said above by someone and sort of glossed over, and that is, worry about learning how lighting and shaders/textures interact with each other before worrying so much about gamma correction. It's like putting the cart before the horse. It doesn't matter what software or renderer you use. If you have poorly set-up shaders and poorly set-up lighting, the image will look bad, no matter what render settings you use.