Render or Real?
-
I'd guess that the last one is real, if heavily photoshopped. The house has all kinds of details that imply that it is really lived in. A CG artist always puts things in to "enhance" the image, but the things you see inside the house, are IMO not arranged in order to make a render. The noise in the image looks photographic - I don't know how easy it is to fake it, but I don't remember seeing a convincing CG DOF simulation.
Anssi
-
that last one is real, with post touch up on the sky i think... next
-
the last one shows an example of what i was talking about with the original car.. it's a photo but shot at the worst time of day for this type of shot (harsh overhead light).. whoever shot it figured it doesn't matter since photoshop has a shadows/highlights tool and or levels/curves layer.. + the magic replace blown out sky button..
regardless, it's not a 'real' photograph even though it was partially made with a camera.
-
Correct, previous one was a photo.
Which one of these things is not like the others? Only one is a render, the rest are photos.
-
Id go with number 5 as my first choice of render and no 6 as my second choice.
-
I think its number 6. Its has that speckled unbiased render feel to it (though some people like to take photos like that too I suppose
). Also, the big pillows feel too rigid. And the wicker is too uptight. Plus it might not mean anything, but its also the only one that is shaped differently as an image.But that's just a guess,
Chris
-
Looking at it again i think i'll have to agree with you chris. those pillows look pretty suspect.
-
i think the third one (real or render5.jpg) is the render though the light fixture looks suspect on the last one..
-
Another one...
edit: looking at this from an outsiders point of view this should be very obvious
-
-
Real- one of the bulbs is out behind the column, though that maybe a red herring. Something really weird is going on the right hand side though- there's been some very clumsy photoshop erasing or clone stamping on that waist high white counter- the floor and blue wall behind cut into it very oddly.
-
Real- Was sure it was CG at first as the glasses and candles look so oversaturated, but the shoe/vacuum cleaner marks on the carpet are (I hope!) too good to be CG.
-
Real- very tricky one as the handrail, brackets and floor looks very fake, but the burned out exterior looks very realistic and the movement joint in the concrete block wall is probably a detail too far for most CG modellers.
-
Fake- It's very good, but everything looks CG: too much noise, the cushions have no seams, the floor is too flat, the bump is too shallow on the wicker furniture.
Or was it a trick question?
-
-
Remus: that's a render. If I'm not mistaken, this model is one that I've seen so many "variations" of already (probably this one or a very similar? too). Plus its bronze material looks a bit fake, too.
-
I agree, Remus that's a render,the originl is in alabaster.
-
This will answer my last one - http://www.carreonphotography.com/architectural-photographer.html & http://www.3dallusions.com/
-
@jim said:
Obviously, I have chosen a render as the first photo. But then... knowing you would be expecting a render, I clearly would have chosen a real photo.
[attachment=0:2coe7aii]<!-- ia0 -->079.jpg<!-- ia0 -->[/attachment:2coe7aii]
i think its rendered
i thought the car was a bit strong for the background it doesn't blend well, in other word it stands out
-
@remus said:
Another one...
[attachment=0:3sba8bgr]<!-- ia0 -->rorr.jpg<!-- ia0 -->[/attachment:3sba8bgr]edit: looking at this from an outsiders point of view this should be very obvious
obviously rendered!
very nice render though,
how i wish i could do that
Advertisement