>He thinks his renders are better because he uses paid software
Why does nobody on this fucking board pirate shit
>He spends thousands of dollars in an animation software he could make faster and free on Blender
>>688036>>688035>>688037>buying and piratingyou do realize there is an inbetween option right?what are student licenses
>>688046Blendlets cant wrap their head around this concept.
>>688035Nobody thinks that, you absolute disgusting and retarded shithead. The end result is always dependent on the artist AND the tool, but the work of the artist weights much more. But a better tool can make your work much faster and there are tons of things you simply cannot do with one tool, so you need a better one, or more than one. >>688037There is no open source equivalent of Houdini, so if you want to do high quality VFX with lots of simulation you are fucked with Blender. It's simply not possible since Blenders Simulation tools are shitty and 20 years behind. Even Ton acknowledged this. There would be no "Man in the High Castle" or "Next Gen" without Houdini. End yourself you fucking retarded open source cocksucker.Both of these are not even top class, forget making a real triple A blockbuster movie just with open source software.
>>688035Cycles isn't a very good renderer. I stick to what I've learned, mainly Renderman and Octane.
>>688035>>688037>blender shill>starting another shitty software war thread>trump picskys asap OP, you're cancer on this Earth
>>688059thisCycles is utter garbage, I really don't know why anyone would defend it
>>688081Who said anything about blender until now, friend? Blender lives rent-free inside your head.
>>688150Reread the quoted posts, reretard.
>>688046I buyrate, personally
>>688190>buyrateWhat do you mean, exactly?
>>688150oh yeah, I really wonder which free software anyone could refer to on this forsaken boardnice try though, you should be proudtell us about your extra chromosomes now
>>688191I'd think it's buying stuff and instantly refunding but still keeping the files. Although this won't work for software.
>>688035From what I've seen on this board, Mental does seem better than Cycles. I have no idea what is going on with all that noise.
>>688452and it's not only the noise mate.. Cycle's physical properties and color space are inherently messed up
>>688471How so? I've never had a problem with color space since filmic came along. Previously I had to save raw and edit in photoshop to fix exposure.
>>688583filmic is a crutch that attempts to correct the problems, but the overall thing remains incorrectin other words, it's a subjective fix on top of a flawed foundation
>>688615>the overall thing remains incorrectBut how, exactly? I did a quick test, and it appears to handle color well.
>>688036Many either do and don't mention, or they use actually use Blender, which you couldn't steal if you try. Also, if you are someone who can afford the license without much issue, there will generally be less issues with getting stuff to just werk, while being sufficiently up to date to utilize the pirated software with the rest of your workflow.
>>688046are there any guides to removing the digital watermark from the student licenses
>>688035>he thinks he will stay employed using blender
>>688621Clueless here, but is that standard procedure to leave specular on your plane? Colors would be more true and darker/richer without.
>>689807Yes, if physical plausibility is the goal. That shader follows Disney's approach, which uses specular as an artist-friendly control, on dielectric materials, for F0 reflectivity. It corresponds to the range between 0 and 8 % reflectivity, and 0.5 (the default) is 4 %, typical of dielectrics.
>>688037>>688035Blender is for 16 year olds who make a 30 sided non manifold object with double faces in between games of fortnite, and think they are ready to work for blizzard
>>688793Yes, its called pspad
>>690352Are zir triggered faggot?
>>690352>Blender is for 16 year olds who make a 30 sided non manifold object with double faces in between games of fortniteoh shit my sides
>>690352ha ha wtf
>>688055>There would be no "Man in the High Castle" or "Next Gen" without Houdinibut those both suck donkey dick you buttblasted incel
>>690542whoa settle down there little blendlet
>>690542Remember to fold your arms and hysterically stomp around like a 5 yo in a store when somebody calls out your BS.
Gonna be honest;looking to get into 3D modelling but I really dislike the rendering style of the likes of Blender and Maya. 3DSMax looks ok along with MAYBE ZBrush but the both of them still kind of look generic imo.Is there a chart of examples somewhere where I can look at the kind of models made in such and such programs and then pick my choice?Is that possible?
>>690563You can do whatever style you want in any of them. That's a shading/texturing thing, it barely has to do with modeling. Look into low-poly art for a good example of how much style can vary irrespective of the particular build-up of a model. Or how one sculpt in ZBrush can get many different looks from their 2019's non-photorealistic engine.
>>690563>kind of genericwth? They both do their job well and they are just tools. It's entirely up to the artist what good or bad comes out of it.
>>690563>I really dislike the rendering styleYou are making no sense. What exactly is it that you want to say?
>>690569computers render models made in the program in a certain manner that is very subtle but apparent if you look closely.the way the program wraps itself within the confines of its mathematical code creates an effect that I'm having a hard time describing.it's like if you were to play a ps1 or an n64 game and such on an emulator and were to play it on its native console.The game plays the same and might also look the same but depending on the person that rips it, a dithering effect is created that can interfere with the source code.Hopefully someone has an idea of what I'm talking about.
>>690572No, nobody has any idea what you are talking about because you are making no sense. An 3D scene rendered in Arnold in 3DsMax will look EXACTLY like the same scene rendered in Maya if rendered using the same materials and parameters. The DCC has no influence on the renderer if the renderer is programmed accurately. These are pixel exact even when rendered from different DCC's. So what exactly are you talking about?
>>690577If you have an older version of a modelling software versus a newer version of said software,do you ever notice the finer details to a degree where you can tell the difference between the two?
>>690563>>690572>reaching uncharted levels of autism
>>690590Good god please stop, fuck off and just do your thing or whatever it is you want to achieve with 3D computer graphics. You sound like a colossal sperg.
>>690352put me in the screencap
>>690563>>690572I kinda get this. It's like the inexplicable subtleties that make it easy to differentiate between a western drawn anime girl and a native nip creation. The westerner could be the best at emulating the style but there are always slight, seemingly insignificant abnormalities in the line weights, framing, and colors that make it apparent that a gaijin is being the pen.
>>690563Don't be fooled by aesthetics. They may seem diffrent right out of the box, but a renderer can look any way you want it to with proper material, light, tone mapping and color correction.
>>691103i don't even know if your worship of authentic japness is more or less retarded than the other guy's insistence that "dithering changes the source code"