PDA

View Full Version : Terragen 4 final is out!



prometheus
11-01-2016, 01:21 PM
http://planetside.co.uk/whats-new-in-terragen-4/?utm_source=Terragen+Monthly+News&utm_campaign=b612d4ada5-&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_ece86fd3b4-b612d4ada5-420009297&mc_cid=b612d4ada5&mc_eid=d383f29d4d

adrian
11-02-2016, 03:04 AM
Sounds and looks great, however the only thing that puts me off is the dearth of learning material for it (at least that was the case when I tried out Terragen 2).

Dougster
11-02-2016, 01:25 PM
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLaH1PMiI_7AiqtJht63dr1jHVAvH_BtfV

https://www.renderosity.com/mod/forumpro/?forum_id=12398&show_faq

http://www.planetside.co.uk/wiki/index.php?title=Terragen_Resource_List

prometheus
11-02-2016, 02:47 PM
Sounds and looks great, however the only thing that puts me off is the dearth of learning material for it (at least that was the case when I tried out Terragen 2).

There are some things I donīt like about terragen, previously the previewer was so slow I just couldnīt stand it, it still is, but they implemented a new ray traced preview mode that is much faster and makes it workable..that one is still a bit slow compared perhaps vue, depends on quality settings and type of clouds etc.
I am not comfortable with the ui which I think has not much options to change color scheme, I simple donīt like various colours on the item buttons, I suppose itīs design should be to more quickly recognize the various elements, but since it is both color, icon and text labels, I think that is just too much and it just distracts/irritates me.

The node connections is a bit poorly implemented, it could use rubber band or angled connections instead of straigth crossing direction connections, it simply look bad.
I would like a quad view option instead of placing and position objects in top view, then go back to cam or perspective view to see how that looks, then go back to top view and change position again if I am not satisfied, so the viewport configuration I do not like.
I would really like to see terrain editing options ala vue as well, material presets etc..

That said..the render quality is superb, both lighting and micropolygon detail is in my opinion better than vue, same goes with clouds, terragens cloud fractals are the best that can be seen for a landscape software that uses fractals (fluid sims are most realistic for hero clouds, but can be difficult to do for large areas)
Compared to vue cloud fractals, the terragen cloud fractal is very realistic in noise turbulence, feathering smoothness, and in shadow opacity.
The atmosphere is great too, though here I really think it is easier to set up atmosphere in vue compared to terragen.


Final rendertimes, well...you will probably end up with similar rendertimes as vue ..always a question on what you got in the scene and what quality settings you set in the atmosphere for cloud quality VS render quality..
1200x700 res at 45 minutes with increased cloud quality for clouds at a value of 2, which I think is quite high...
a little postprocessing on curves in photoshop in the lower image...
nvidia gtx 480 12gig ram, pentium i7 960 dual core 3.20 GHz a lot of web pages open as well.

The new easy clouds are sort of optimized to look good without tweaking, to the point that they canīt be tweaked within a any density rescaling, so the only thing is seed and lighting mostly...I think they need to add a way of activate some sort of tweaking here, even if they look quite good as they are.
Unlike vue, the fractals within the clouds donīt show typical round puffs floating around which never really occours in real clouds, so many vue renders have that distinct Error in how clouds really look and it takes a bit of tweaking in vue to avoid that, with the exception for certain fractals.

http://forums.newtek.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=134959&d=1478119390

kadri
11-03-2016, 05:47 AM
Half to one hour isn't much surprising.
I had so long render hours in my animation that my first priority from now is to get a balance between quality and render time.
Probably 5-10 minutes per frames would be great.
And without some kind of cheating-different method that is hardly feasible with that kind of shots mostly.
Curious how long that kind of scenes take in Redshift, Octane...Anyone?

prometheus
11-03-2016, 11:49 AM
Half to one hour isn't much surprising.
I had so long render hours in my animation that my first priority from now is to get a balance between quality and render time.
Probably 5-10 minutes per frames would be great.
And without some kind of cheating-different method that is hardly feasible with that kind of shots mostly.
Curious how long that kind of scenes take in Redshift, Octane...Anyone?

5-10 minutes per frame would indeed be great, but why not 1 minute, the thing is...is it really realistic to expect reaching that mark?
I mean, just getting 5-10 minutes for a product or room render with global illumination and enough AA, then add to that enourmous amount of polys for landscapes, and add to that enourmous calcutaion for volumetric clouds..and further that activate a godray atmosphere volumetrics.
If you get down to 25 minutes per frame with a very good quality in high res, that would be something.

kadri
11-03-2016, 12:16 PM
5-10 minutes per frame would indeed be great, but why not 1 minute, the thing is...is it really realistic to expect reaching that mark?
I mean, just getting 5-10 minutes for a product or room render with global illumination and enough AA, then add to that enourmous amount of polys for landscapes, and add to that enourmous calcutaion for volumetric clouds..and further that activate a godray atmosphere volumetrics.
If you get down to 25 minutes per frame with a very good quality in high res, that would be something.

Of course. Especially when i think that i had some scenes with 6 hours per frame.
That was crazy (for me at least). With that speed you spot bad parts too late etc.and the projects looks like it will take an eternity.

I was more thinking about faster solutions then we have now.
And yes we will add of course more this and that and they will probably render ones again slower.

prometheus
11-03-2016, 12:34 PM
Of course. Especially when i think that i had some scenes with 6 hours per frame.
That was crazy (for me at least). With that speed you spot bad parts too late etc.and the projects looks like it will take an eternity.

I was more thinking about faster solutions then we have now.
And yes we will add of course more this and that and they will probably render ones again slower.


with the resources of a studio making vfx for the movie prometheus, they landed sometimes at 24 hours I think per frame, and that was without any volumetrics just dealing with enourmous polydata for the landscape that cinema4d had to crunch out, and they didnīt even use full landscape scenery as you would be able to do with terragen, but rather a mix of real mountain photage with some landscape areas being 3d.
Canīt find the article that covered it right now though.

Planetside has promoted pixelplow renderfarem in almost every animated rendered at the end of the clips.
Michael

kadri
11-03-2016, 12:36 PM
They can afford it; me not :)