Pls halp.I'm about to switch to blender, but the devs are so incompetent they can't even make subdiv work correctly on a stock object
did you smooth shade the object first?Because I don't think you did.
>>603643this is what I have now after object level smooth shadingNow the area light looks horrible - no glow to it no matter how much intensity I set. Even Vidya looks better. How do I add glow?
>>603644compositor nodes.
>>603644>How do I add glow?Post processing.
>>603652I want it realtime in viewport. I managed to achieve this, but with 2.8 which is horribly broken and unusable atm
>>6036532.8 is an alpha build with eevee viewport engine. Stable release doesnt have this engine so wait. There's a shitty material preview that's the best you get in viewport.BTW eevee is a realtime engine that doesnt really represent actual render results either, it's just a pretty visualization.
>>603653Again, why would you do this in your 3D application? You are setting yourself up for frustration. Export the appropriate elements/passes to generate your glow from and do it in a compositing suite, like AE or Fusion.
>>603661That's not what I want bro. This is realtime, pushing it to the limit in viewport in blender
>>603662Afaik you cant see compositing in viewport in real time. The best you're GOING to get is eevee with a bunch of sliders wich isn't really out yet, the alpha is unusable
>>603665What about other renderers lad
Things don't glow in real life.
>>603672Monitors cant get bright enough to mimic that lad
>>603674>Scientists and engineers spend decades on research and development to eliminate optical artifacts like scratches, grain, bleeding, bloom, aberration and lens reflections>Hipsters put them all back in digitallyfml
>>603682again, unless your monitor can get as bright as the sun, you need a bloom effect to achieve realism
>>603683>bloom>realismgo home, anon, you're drunk
>>603692>
>>603683Bloom doesn't exist in real life, you mong. Your eyes have enough dynamic range to compensate for bright lights. If you're talking about realism as in photography, that's artifacts from lens refraction. The only bloom you could be realistically subject to to the point where you think is "natural" is in vidya where they crank post-processing up to a kajillion.
>>603700again, you cant look into a monitor and have it be bright enough to match the real world. Bloom is the result.
>>603703What do you mean "the" "real" "world", anon? Are you mentally deficient? Bloom isn't a compensation for "eugh this isn't bright enough", it's an imaging artifact from cameras. It. Does. Not. Exist. In. Real. Life.
>>603704You look into the sun, your eyes start to see spots, glare fills your vision, you crash your car. Thats not possible on monitors. Stop trying to push your troll.
>>603708>look into the sun while drivingWell, thanks for confirming that you're retarded. Only an idiot like you would stare into the sun willingly. By the way, bloom isn't glare. Bloom comes after glare. And fine, I'll give you a point now since glare does actually exist when our eyes are overwhelmed by a bright spot in our vision.
>>603709you're retarded if you think that. Its in 2.8 by default, so suck it
>>603709bloom is like the effect that you get at 6pm in summer days when the sun almost sets
this whole thread is fucking pathetic
>>603640>I'm about to switch to blenderYou're about to make a mistake.
Seems like anon doesn't understand how eyes and cameras react to light (in the real world, not in vidya) :/
What in the hell is this thread...?
>>603763explain, senpai.
>>603770use google, you lazy ass nog
>>603711Are you talking about atmospheric scattering, or what the fuck?
>>603790Actually human eye gets natural bokeh-like effect.You can see it if you look at the lamp post at night or look at something bright in the dark.
ARE YOU USING FILMIC?
>>603640>but the devs are so incompetent they can't even make subdiv work correctly on a stock objectlisten, when your answer to any problem in any large 3D software is dev incompetence then you are the problem.Start using google.com and don't spam this board with your degenerate questions if you are unwilling to invest 5 minutes of research.
>>603794That’s glare.
>>603797YES BUT HOW IS THAT RELEVANT NIGNOG?
>>603814It is always relevant, otherwise your renders SUCK. BIG. TIME.Also I remember somebody mentioning something about textures, there’s this site, Poliigon, where there are many available. Check it out.
>>603828>It is always relevant, otherwise your renders SUCK. BIG. TIME.I've been using it this whole time you faggotnot having bloom without having to composite is just killing this anon
>>603829>is just killing this anonProblem solved, then.
>>603831say that to my face
>>603672Things do glow in real life thanks to atmospheric conditions
>>603640This whole thread is like watching a pair of special ed students fight...
>>604233hahahaha exactly
>>604233>>604254t. brainlets
>>604255Yes, we can't get on your level...but somehow you don't understand the difference between atmospheric scattering and imaging artifacts produced by cameras lenses.
>>604261apparently Blender 2.8 devs cant either haha
>>604263This has to be a troll, or a 12-year-old.
>>604264t. infant
