I'm hoping someone is going to provide an answer to Al's #1 point - what is the difference (or is there) between a bump map and a displacement map? I understand the difference that the computer is making with the map (bump vs. displacement) but I'm curious if the maps are different? In both cases white is high and black is low, etc. Are they different?

I use Paint.net which has a Black / White control and a Brightness / Contrast control right on the top tool bar. I open the image I want to use in Paint, click SaveAs, rename it and click Black/White. The image becomes a black and white version of the original and then I adjust the Brightness / Contrast to get what I want. But I don't know how this would be different if it were a Bump or a Displacement.

Thanks baz -

I think somewhere in that long thread is the answer I'm looking for, and this is my starting point (I'm quoting from the thread) -

"while on the subject of helping out vray, vray SR1 creates vray materials of all materials in the scene even the materials on lines (multi-coloured from CAD imports) could there also be a script to remove all materials from lines? that way vray wouldnt create any unnecessary materials"

Only after reading that comment did I realize that the two offending lines only exist in the original CAD file.

I don't think you should make it any more real than it is. It's got this clean minimal look right now, trying to make it more photographic will just detract from it.

And I like the two buildings image you posted earlier - for the same reason. The image is striking as is, making it more photoreal would seem to be a mistake.

I like the depth of the windows.

But something optically weird happens when I scroll up and down. Maybe just my monitor but the building bulges in and out with my scroll wheel. Or I'm having an acid flashback from 25 years ago.

This is a link to a thread on the modo forums where Ernesto Pacheco, who made the 3 tutorials that sepo provided a link to, explains that these are the first volume of a three volume series.

http://forums.luxology.com/discussion/topic.aspx?id=36169

I just watched the first of these three videos. Very very good. Helpful to anyone working in between CAD, SK, and modo.

I think lots of people, like myself, who come to modo from arch or archviz are not actually clear about what a sub-d program is and how it's different from a program like Rhino or SolidWorks.

This short video is a good introduction - http://www.guerrillacg.org/home/3d-polygon-modeling/subdivision-surfaces-overview

It's important to understand that you can't really export data from a sub-d program. You can model a perfume bottle and you can render and animate the model but you can't hand off drawings to a fabricator. It's not that kind of a program.

I love modo, but I also love SketchUp. I can do incredible things in modo but I had to get some drawings up to the shop in a hurry today and the drawings had to be dimensionally accurate. Speed and accuracy, with dimensions? That's not modo, that's SketchUp. Modo is opening whole new areas for me but it's not replacing SketchUp at all. When I get up to speed with modo I expect I'll be using both programs, working side by side, serving different purposes.

I have purged everything in the file, checked Hidden Geometry, set the file to Wireframe, but nothing I do can seem to get rid of the two thin lines that you see emanating from the center at about 7 o'clock.

I'm not sure if this is a problem in V-Ray or in SketchUp.

Any thoughts on where else I might look to track them down will be very appreciated.

That was Greek you were speaking right? Ancient Greek if I'm not mistaken?
Seriously though, I'm familiar with the terms volumetric spotlight and caustics, although I haven't yet experimented with them - I've been working in modo for about 3 weeks. But what is 'cathedral glass'?

This should be in the 'Renders I've Failed At' or whatever that thread was called but I can't seem to find it.
I'd like some advice on how to get some highlights into the glass itself. I like the brick wall. I like the floor. I like the reflections. But the glass itself is quite dead.

Rendered in modo.

Also, I'm wondering if Solo would have any interest in offering a 'Master Tutorial' about his last post in this thread? I keep looking at that image and I can't imagine how it was achieved.

Any help is appreciated.

I especially like the 'watery' quality of the light coming through Eulgrand's window. It makes me think there are trees outside, moving in the wind and the reflections on the wall are in motion. Very convincing to my eye.

That's just about the most convincing piece of wood I've seen in render so far. Especially on the edges where the grain is split off.

Excellent work. Same for the two buildings from the last thread.

My mother in law is an architect from Germany and she has a lot of old architecture magazines around. Sometimes the black and white photographs in the magazines will be a bit like your work. The photos have faded and lost a certain amount of detail but they become darker in the shadows and somehow crisper. It's like they lose depth and come forward into the frame of the picture.

Whatever, love your stuff. Looking forward to anything else you might post.

MrWip -
I wonder if there is a way to combine the two. The walls and floor are beautiful in the V-Ray version but the light on the walls and the window sill is more convincing in the Artlantis version.
Whatever, you've sure set the bar pretty high! Beautiful work.

My knowledge is limited to AutoCADLT, SketchUp and modo so I'm not at all surprised that some of the features I find unique to modo are not unique at all. I'm a furniture maker and a stair builder. I recently purchased, from a junkyard, a pile of old wood painted signs that were destined to be burned. I'm going to cut them up and make cabinets out of them. I was faced with the question of how to render wildly irregular surfaces - some shiny, some dull, many different colors, different degrees of surface distress, etc. I think modo, especially considering it's Painting feature, might be able to do that for me.

Of course I've spent so much time working my way through modo tutorials I haven't been in the shop in three weeks!

Since beginning this thread I've purchased a license for modo. I never got to try out the Vray suggestions that were so helpfully offered because my trial period came to an end and I had to choose between modo or Vray. Not enough $$$ for both.

I chose modo. modo has what it calls a Shader Tree which is essentially a layering system. You can stack multiple layers on top of one another - displacement maps, bumps, diffuse maps, image maps, noise maps, process maps, etc. to get what you want. I'm just scratching the surface but it's very exciting what it can do in this particular area.

This link is to a thread on the modo gallery forum of someone who modeled some industrial nuts and posted at the bottom a screen grab of his Shader Tree showing the layers.

http://forums.luxology.com/discussion/topic.aspx?id=35065

And $3500 to go with the time and the stamina.

I have to admit that that's a very good trick - using the toolbars as a framing device. Very ingenious!

Use Pixplant and make the texture?

Oh God, we're all stumbling around in confusion in alternate computer worlds of our own making! Like thomthom I hate the fact that I can't orbit my emails or text documents! It's so limiting.

Maybe it's time for bed. But after your comment of trying to orbit your girlfriend in your dreams - maybe even that's not safe.