The Renderer's Rings

[Godzilla]

Is there a texture map with a noise pattern on the inner side of the ring ? That kind of noise looks a bit like Vray rendering artifacts caused by a low irradiance map settings for glossy reflections. Brings down the visual quality for me. Has a biased feel or smth.

+1.


I don't really care for the reflective surface it is on, either.

[CTZn]

(Well I certainly hope that's all it is and not some weird artifact....I just noticed a distinct pattern in the noise...)

A pattern type called... texture reflection ^^

I'm impressed again by your modeling skills. The diamonds have not changed much in brightness since the first render, but the 3 gems did. What was it ?

Also in the ref render the light is really bouncing out of the diamonds; I suppose that the cut you use for them would "reflect" the light out in a similar angle than it entered, if the angle is not too large I suppose. This should help you in placing the light (more spotty ?), like if the ring was a mirror catching it. I hope this was intelligible

edit: oh and what about camera diffraction then ?

[PureSpider]

I think you got the bevel thing wrong Wyt...
What he meant was something like that:

They all have a rounded inner side (rounded to the inside, as opposed to your ring), which your ring doesn't have.

[WytRaven]

I think you got the bevel thing wrong Wyt...
What he meant was something like that:

They all have a rounded inner side (rounded to the inside, as opposed to your ring), which your ring doesn't have.

Thx for that Pure that's a good reference. The gold band is incorrect but not as shown in those examples. I've re-checked my wedding ring a noticed that it is not concave as I first thought but is actually about as close to flat internally as one can get considering the construction materials and size. If it is convex then it is imperceptible. This is a men's ring remember they are a lot less "curvey" than women's rings

I'll fix the concave tonight after work.

As for the pattern...it may be the environment map I'm using I really hope not becuase I'll have to block parts of it if thats the case and that could take much trial and error...

[benn]

Blogged!

[WytRaven]

I'm impressed again by your modeling skills. The diamonds have not changed much in brightness since the first render, but the 3 gems did. What was it ?

The lack of change in the diamonds is more to do with lighting than anything else. The change in the 3 feature gems is due to them now effectively having open backs so much more light is able to get in from behind.

Also in the ref render the light is really bouncing out of the diamonds; I suppose that the cut you use for them would "reflect" the light out in a similar angle than it entered, if the angle is not too large I suppose. This should help you in placing the light (more spotty ?), like if the ring was a mirror catching it. I hope this was intelligible

I assume you mean ref photo? In which case the photographer commented on the fact that that photo was over exposed and so the diamond detail was washed out. Keep in mind that in the ref all diamonds are forward facing.

Note in my last test that those diamonds facing the camera are just as bright (without the over exposure) as the ref photo. It is only those at angle to the camera that appear less bright but from those you get better colour effects.

edit: oh and what about camera diffraction then ?

I am using appeture diffraction in these renders but without an additional obstacle map (only the generated blades). I have never been able to use an additional map without the whole image becoming slightly blurry.

[WytRaven]

Did I mention that I hate UV unwrapping?

This gold ring is effectively a deformed torus right? Unwrapping it should be simply a matter of marking two edge loops as seams. One around the circumference of the ring and another around the circumference of the cross section.

Easy yeah? Nope. Blender refuses to unwrap that into a rectangular texture. It tries everything possible to distort/screw/wreck/bollocks the humanly obvious natural rectangular topology that should result.

At the moment it's looking like I am going to have to manually calculate positions for all vertices on the seams (approx. 900) and pin them around the outside of the texture. Even then I suspect that blender is going to deform the internal vertices into some wavy-ass shape

[WytRaven]

Feel my pain

MyPain.jpg (107.99 KiB) Viewed 2756 times

[Polinalkrimizei]

And what is so wrong about this one? Distortion can be removed quite easily via proportional editing!

[Polinalkrimizei]

wait... this looks a lot more rectangular to me. It is "cylinder from view" from the uv-menue, you'll just need a tileable texture then...

Brilliant work btw!

[Godzilla]

Feel my pain

MyPain.jpg

Seems like an unnecessary amount of faces, to be honest.

[Borgleader]

You could always use UV seams To make a seam select vertices, press Ctrl+E and select "Mark Seam".

Now on this setup I had the top ring of vertices and one loop on the side (it looks like it's only the interior ones but it's the entire loop). Also you can see on the side, the blue color shows that there's almost no UV stretch

[WytRaven]

Unwrapping it should be simply a matter of marking two edge loops as seams. One around the circumference of the ring and another around the circumference of the cross section.

I know how it's supposed to work but Blender just won't play nice at all. Keep in mind this is not a true torus it's just "like" a torus and so seam placement should work the same...

Cylinder from view is all good except the it lays the inner and outer side of the torus on top of eachother which in my case is annoying.

I'll have another attempt tonite and see what I can achieve. I got the shits and chucked a hissy fit last night

Thx for all the suggestions though. Much appreciated

[Borgleader]

lol oops didnt see that...well oddly I got it to work O.o

[WytRaven]

Seems like an unnecessary amount of faces, to be honest.

Well that depends entirely on what you are doing with an object. This object is for extreme close-ups and even the slightest hint of a polygon edge would ruin the illusion of photo realism. It uses many poly's where many are needed and few where they aren't. But that's beside the point...