Female figure on curved up background (not suited for work)

kwistenbiebel · 27 Nov 2007, 23:36

The following is an experiment on creating a curved up background to obtain some subtle transitions and a diffuse athmosphere.

By the way: can you guess the render engine?

RAW renderings (no post editing):

.

kwistenbiebel · 28 Nov 2007, 03:25

Another one but rendered with a different render engine (Which one ? )

I color converted it to look like an old photo and added some 'depth of field' and film grain :

Ross Macintosh · 28 Nov 2007, 12:43

Beautiful renderings. Are you sure you even used a renderer? Okay, I'll accept they are renderings because chances are you aren't that good of a photographer.

Excellent.

kwistenbiebel · 28 Nov 2007, 14:05

Thank you Ross.
The first 2 images are Fry renders.
The last one (black and white) was made in Podium.
The woman figure is a .3ds model imported in SU.

Cheers,
Kwistenbiebel

Gaieus · 28 Nov 2007, 14:24

Just don't go wild Biebel!

Nice renderings anyway.

kwistenbiebel · 28 Nov 2007, 14:37

@gaieus said:

Just don't go wild Biebel!

Ah some subtle nudity....I hope the internet isn't entering some Victorian age.
A naked body is just a beautiful thing.

I have no intention in making it pornographic in any way...
although I have a good pornographic memory...or was that a photographic memory......with me it kind of relates to the same thing I'm afraid

Gaieus · 28 Nov 2007, 14:49

I didn't mean to be "Victorian" - was just joking...
And yes, the renders are indeed nice.

ehaflett · 28 Nov 2007, 15:34

Awesome work, Biebel, I'm dumbfounded.

Did these renders motivate anyone else to readTHIS POST ?

boofredlay · 28 Nov 2007, 19:18

Eric... Booooooo

mateo soletic · 28 Nov 2007, 19:32

Where is that 3ds model ??
By the way nice work.

Frederik · 28 Nov 2007, 21:28

What a nice model, Chris!
You're a true artist...

kwistenbiebel · 28 Nov 2007, 23:58

Thanks!

...And the last one of the series.
The image is meant to emphasize on the beauty of the female body and not to be disrespectful. if people would find this last image to be offensive I'll kindly remove it. (I hope not though).

Cheers and thanks for watching,

Kwistenbiebel

RAW Fryrender output:

solo · 29 Nov 2007, 00:02

It was just a matter of time...LOL

She has a pet.

kwistenbiebel · 29 Nov 2007, 00:10

It's merely a shadow

nomeradona · 29 Nov 2007, 01:37

christ,

the viewpoints you have shared here are much even surprising... excellent.

kwistenbiebel · 29 Nov 2007, 02:08

Thanks Nomer,
I wish I had your artist skills and use these images as a starting point for a real painting...
I did do some paintings some years ago, but I can't control oilpaint that well as you can.

Phil Rader AIA · 29 Nov 2007, 19:37

Can you explain a bit of the process for FryRender. Is it a standalone renderer? do you export the image from SU and import it to Fry. Is there a plugin for SU to work directly with Fry?

Just curious how it compares to VRAY or Maxwell

kwistenbiebel · 29 Nov 2007, 23:38

Fry has a Sketchup plugin that contains a pulldown menu and an icon bar.
When you have a material selected in SU's material list and click on the Fry paintbucket icon the Fry material editor pops up. Sun and sky setup has it's own panel, just as the general settings and camera panel.

It takes some getting used to, but after some experimentation it works quite smoothly.
You start the rendering by choosing the export>3dmodel>Fryrender in the file menu of SU.

Once the export is done the FRY standalone GUI will pop up and the rendering starts.
That GUI has a 3D viewport where you can change the view and you can also change mlaterials/environment/camera/render settings over there (actually the same things you can set up through the Plugin itself).
The Fry standalone isn't as elaborate as the Maxwell studio as the developers wanted to make a 100% 'render from host' product.

You can download a demo on the Fryrender.com website.
It is fully operational (though the size image is max.800X600 and watermarked ).

Cheers,
Kwistenbiebel

Jackson · 30 Nov 2007, 17:33

@kwistenbiebel said:

The image is meant to emphasize on the beauty of the female body and not to be disrespectful.
It's not so much emphasizing the female body as emphasizing a particular part of the female body. I'm not offended, but that last pic (and to a lesser extent the first one) is a bit tasteless IMO.

Stinkie · 4 Dec 2007, 15:45

With all due respect, I firmly disagree. If Christ's renders would have been pornographic, then you'd have a valid point. But are they pornographic? In my opinion: no. They merely show a naked body. Nothing wrong with that: the nude has been an artistic genre for centuries.

Maybe it's because I studied art, but these images seem fairly 'common' to me. They're just your average tasteful, even bourgeois nudes. (Not meaning to insult you here, Christ.)