I get that textures and bevels make a difference. I get that most lighting setups are a combination of some sort of HDRI and area lights. Area lights, IES lights, daylight mode and the different textures that can be added to these using various methods. I have a very good understanding of the tools in Octane. It feels a lot of us are wasting time re-inventing wheels which have been invented many times before. Grinding in the dark is not an optimal way of learning anything. I don't like this huge mystery around "good lighting" and the idea of practicing indefinitely until I get similar results. There has to be easily definable parameters when we break down whatever the best people in the industry are doing. These artists are placing lights in their scene, manipulating light position/size/distance/power/texture parameters, and somehow getting much much better results than most people who are trying to learn good lighting. There is a certain quality in the renders of people I follow (on IG look at romanbratchi, omaraqildesign, philiplueck, derekjelliott, wes_cream, benoitchalland, studiotendril, helloplayful the list goes on.), and no matter how much I tweak my lighting setups I can't get close to it. I'd like to break down what we perceive as "good lighting".
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |