AccuRender nXt

advanced rendering for AutoCAD

(A Positive General Discussion point)

Just a quick look at my methodology when I use nxt.

I like to have most to all of my images to be one click output. Try hard to set up ar4 and now nxt so that external editing is not required. This helps me reduce time washing when doing design and colour changes which i'm always doing with clients (time=$$$). I'm a big fan of using model for not just single photo type images, but follow on with pan's, animations and also 2d uses. External editing clouds this path, unless it can be automated. Clients want the whole project to have the same look. So the first point for me is getting the basic setting in nxt to meet my needs.  Sometimes yes external editing is needed and I understand that. I'm very very happy with the help and support I get from this forum but sometimes feel the first suggestion to an issue is editing out side nxt. My focus will always be to get nxt to do the render. I think there is a lot of people using nxt that think the same way I do. Then using this methodology must make nxt a better program in the long run. Is this the right way or should I embrace external editing as part of the process???

Views: 206

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Just a passing thought, Ian. 

Almost all professional photographers (probably all) find it necessary to post-edit their photographs before presenting them to the client or to the pubic.  It's inherent in the photo process.  Neither the film nor the digital CMOS sensor can reproduce absolutly the image we see in the view finder.  After the image is captured, it requires help to reproduce close to what were shooting for.  Rendering software also has inherent "weaknesses" that need to be adjusted in Post-Editing.  It would be great to have a One-Shot-Print-Give-To-Client system.  Not yet. 

No surface rendering software is so great that Post-Editing won't help enhance the final image.

 

Any disagreements, snide remarks, or foul language should be directed to Roy, as I'm not smart enough to defend my comments sufficiently enough.  Hi Roy.

 

 

 

Passing the thought around.........

I do a lot of post-edit of my images before giving to clients, But my point is that should we not push and extents of the setting in nXt to get as close to that final "post-edited" image as we can. I believe that given time to play and adjust setting in nXt that you can hit 95-98%  mark all the time. "With Roy's help of course".  I had AR4 setup and each time a pushed the extents of the settings in the program from project to project the less post editing I needed to do.  Trying to do the same with nXt.

Most of my renderings are 95% there straight from nXt.

The only post editing I do is a little fiddling with colours, contrast and tone and dropping backgrounds in.

The nXt editor does help with getting the lighting balance right.

So I should continue to embrace post-editing to maximize my images. But I should continue also to push nxt to it's limits to reduce post-editing.  I must stay on this path because only 10% of my work is internal 90% external and 25% of my projects run on to movies and interactive models. "I need nXt to do most of the work"

I feel after reading your comments that I need to state what I'm looking for when asking for help from Roy/forum with issues I have with nxt. Maybe the statement that I'm looking for the best result from within nxt because the project model will be used differently than I single image, would be helpful I think. But always embrace the post-editing information that comes with the forum process. To give me all the tools to get the best results from nXt.  Thanks for your comments guys.........

RSS

Search

Translate

Latest Activity

Roy Hirshkowitz replied to Peter Milner's discussion Hidden lighting
"If they're behind a diffuser-- yep-- modeling the diffuser as a light source will get you most of the way there.  The type of lighting that a lot of folks are using, though, is these exposed 3M lighting strips.  They resemble…"
9 hours ago
Jan Verzelen replied to Peter Milner's discussion Hidden lighting
"okay, but why should one try to draw each separate light source? As you mentioned before, most of the time these are behind a diffuse cover. "
9 hours ago
Roy Hirshkowitz replied to Peter Milner's discussion Hidden lighting
"It works pretty well for this-- where the surfaces are diffuse.  Peter's got a more reflective surface which probably would show reflections of the individual light sources in the roll.  It's an interesting problem (and an actual…"
9 hours ago
Jan Verzelen replied to Peter Milner's discussion Hidden lighting
"this s what i get when trying to simulate led strips. i used rectangular hidden and visible area lights with the path tracer."
9 hours ago
Peter Milner replied to Peter Milner's discussion Hidden lighting
"I'll give it a whirl tomorrow."
10 hours ago
Roy Hirshkowitz replied to Peter Milner's discussion Hidden lighting
"Yep-- these sometimes do exhibit discreet reflections.  Does the hybrid engine do any better with these? "
10 hours ago
Peter Milner replied to Peter Milner's discussion Hidden lighting
"Most hidden LED strip light is now sold from a roll by the metre. This is the sort of stuff we use. I've tried using a rectangular area light, but that gives me an unrealistic rectangular reflection. I may have to resort to Photoshop to fake…"
10 hours ago
Roy Hirshkowitz replied to Peter Milner's discussion Hidden lighting
"You might try modeling them with a hidden, rectangular, area light. Many of these LED strip lights are encased in a plastic diffusing tube for this very reason. Make sure the light is facing the right direction."
10 hours ago

© 2014   Header image courtesy Peter Milner   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service