Photorealism
-
Hello. I am working on an outside scene and I can't get it to look photorealistic. It looks illustrated. I have a physical sun and some area lights. I also have a dome light turned way down. It is very simple model so I believe it is the lighting. Any ideas would help.
-
Hi walk-hour,
Please note that I write in a forum, and whatever I write is not an evaluation of your work but more an attempt to share as much as needed to get even a beginner started.
Preamble:
What is it that you try to achieve? Yes, you say Photorealism, but is it Realism, Hyperrealism, or Photorealism? Photorealism is quite a wide field, and I believe you will get many different answers to that idea.
Lenses are often the most crucial part of the Photorealistic quality. Since film time, the digital way of defining this has changed, and lenses with clear artifacts are commonly seen as more able to provide photorealistic ideals, as they leave a specific "feeling" in the image, mostly the opposite of being clinical.
. Lenses are typically a compromise, except for a few - often quite expensive ones; the great exception is Sigma's Art 40mm F/1.4, which leaves nearly no signs of any influence other than being nearly
perfect. I mention that as the term has changed over time. However, there are certain ideas about what it is; it depends on who you ask. It is similar to Filmic, which is an endless discussion for many.What is it?
So, what is the idea when the term photorealistic is used? (Part of my art education at the University of the Arts in Berlin (MFA) was Photography (3 years photography, then 3 years cinematography). Even after decades of shooting, I would not dare to pin that term into a small definition.
Long story short, using photorealistic is not a simple idea; the more one trains one's perception, the less likely one is satisfied with anything.
However – there are several resources to answer that:
The Complete Guide to Photorealism for Visual Effects, Visualization and Games 1st Edition, by Eran Dinur (Author)He fills a whole book with the idea of Photorealistic, and I enjoyed reading it. Is that all there is to it? No.
Or a tutorial/presentation series:
https://cineversity.maxon.net/en/tutorials/rendering-interiors-and-exteriors-1-4-create-with-maxonYour image:
Your image would work more towards Hyper-Reaslistic, as no sign of any optic nor filtration is there, and the visualization is very generative (Nothing wrong with that. To boost you with that, explore Ed Ruscha, a celebrated artist in L.A. and beyond.
The 400-pixel height image doesn't allow for many investigations, especially with the artifacts from compression.How was the edge treatment to catch some light? Hard to tell. There is no sign of color grading. I did not find a light wrap.
Typical elements in Compositing are often missing in a single render result; even compositing is not the theme; the qualities to match an image are, as it is the same as adapting a rendering to an image or working towards a photorealistic.
https://cineversity.maxon.net/en/series/integration1?tutorial=1_integration_introduction_01
I typically avoid the term photorealistic, as you might imagine by now, as it is blurry at best. Leave the lens cap on the lens and get a photorealistic black image.Reference:
What better reference could you get than from the Masters of Architectural Photography, and here rely on books? Web is not the best idea.
The key is your references, the one you shot, not anything from the web. Then you know what you get. Considering you are savvy with a camera.
If you want to have 3rd-party references, books about architecture are a good study. Typically, the VIP in that genre attracts the best photographers.
The parts you need. To look at why your example looks hyperreal and not as you wanted. Some things rendering engines do not deliver, and why often Compostings are the only way to work.
Here is an older series of mine that explains ten main qualities to merge things into reality:
https://cineversity.maxon.net/en/series/integration1?tutorial=1_integration_introduction_01Subjective treatments. Again, I have no idea what you have in mind regarding photorealism. This is a quick (a few minutes) Photoshop treatment of your 400-pixel high image from above. Compare it.
I hope the content suggestions allow you to find your aesthetic and create a signature look with your work over time—my best wishes.
All the best
-
Thank you so much for the response! I think I am going for hyperrealism. I will watch the video. Also, I have an MFA too.
-
Thank you for the reply, walk-hour.
Thank you for sharing a little bit about your background as well. Even if I answer in a forum, it is always a bit more general; it helps me set a focus, knowing more about one's background.
Enjoy exploring your project.
On a general note (again, answering in a forum), finding one's process and individual Artistic Intention is the key. There is some work, but getting into the "flow" is wonderful.
I hope the link below (A Show with my friend Max) will help; it is meant as an introduction to the theme:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OBgQrykF0ukMy best wishes
P.S.: If you need more, I can compile a little brainstorm PDF.
-
Cool
You can see my work at: koimage.com
The 3D is what I want to focus on going forward. Everything in 3d was made with Modo. You can see the illustration feel to them. I don't mind being stylized but I want to elevate the work now in Cinema 4d and Zbrush.
Thanks
Ken
-
Hi Ken,
Thanks for the material to explore.
Please note: What I don't do here is to critique work. I will not lead this forum into a place that would attract trolls who camouflage themself as a mentor and harm young artists with useless "harsh" critic. Hence I'm super careful here. This is a place to ask and get answers, but never any judgement. I hope that makes sense.
You have already grown a great and stable core in your work and yourself. Your portrait Photography feels mature, and I understand you like to lift your 3D work to the same level. Am I on the right track here?
There are so many things I believe I don't have even to mention.
Starting on that level, would you consider briefly excluding what you have done in 3D so far? To be completely open to immerse yourself into your audience? The question is what they (right now - you) receive from your work while the work is on its own, with no explanation added. If that works for you, allow me to ask this:
What story do you want to tell? What emotion do you want to establish in your audience?
Based on what you told me, I assume you can analyze the elements and how far you can push or pull them back. Mess around with them!
If that is not helping, What are the ten most influential photographers for you, and how do they attract you aesthetically? Can you translate their story-telling into your work?
I hope this will ignite enough that all that happens next is your content and expression. I want you to feel that you own it, not given by me. I hope I was careful enough to point – instead of lead.
Take your time, let me know how it goes. Enjoy the journey!
My best wishes
-
For photography: the Bechers, Andreas Gursky, Jeff Wall, Amir Zaki.
Wouldn’t it be amazing to start in that space for 3d!
-
Thank you very much, Ken.
Yes, I can see that influence in your work. (The feeling might be - mixing Donald Judd and Gregory Crewsome into one image).
This leads me to stay on a higher level than telling you to "press this button, move the light here…" etc. That wouldn't be a good response, as I feel you aim for something more sophisticated and authentic. Correct?
Give ten people those names and let them merge those into a new work; you surely will get ten different results. There is no quick fix if you are looking for personal improvement. There are techniques, as mentioned above, but each can improve or water down the work if there is no driving force from an artistic vision included.
The key question is, how do you use those four Photographers?
For a beginner, it would be advisable to start copying the (visual) impression and translate the aesthetic to one's work.
For the immediate level, analyze the source and find where they cluster to create a stronger focus with the works of those selected artists, as they resonate with one's direction. Refining and peeling off the layers to get to the core is not simple work but essential.
The pro level might involve more reading the interviews (or writing) each artist has provided over their career and finding the initial realization that leads to the motivation to invest years or even decades into a series, which sometimes becomes the "brand" of artists.
Jumping over one level might result in a gap, like a black hole that sucks all energy into it.
When this inquiry into self, based on the art of others, has some significant progress, typically, the motion is to release the story we like to tell. With that, identifying what works and what does not is easier (not simpler) but typically much faster.
Telling a story with every single part of your creation requires understanding what strengthens and weakens each element.
A typical strong request is to have that "Pixar Button" to tell the story by activating some magical stuff (e.g., a plug-in), which will not work if an authentic voice is the target.
However, the core of elevating one's work and quality must be strongly connected to the artist's core to be authentic, to develop momentum with this inertia, and finally, to have a strong and hopefully lasting impact on the audience.
I do not think you are far away from it, but you felt something was missing, which is surely not easy to develop. I hope the pointers above will help.
Tip: You mentioned color grading on your site. Similar to how Color Contrast (Itten) works, anything in the image might work as well (Shiny/dull, soft/hard, same for light; it is not limited to colors).
If, along the way, you define some qualities that your work needs to have, that is then easier to define. Telling you to do this or that (again) might send you on a detour at this part of your journey.
Enjoy
-
Working on a new scene now. Lots of materials. Trying to focus on the story behind the work. It is a memory from childhood with a story told by the work. I’ll send you a JPEG when done.
-
Hi Ken,
I'm glad to see you working on another project.
Those things can pull on you, so please let me wish you all the energy I can send to your new work. Please share whatever you like; I'd love to see it.
Based on your initial question, I have put some notes into a little PDF, which I would call a rough draft, and I will expand on it. I hope it can grow enough to become a chapter in a book.
Perhaps it might provide some ideas. This is the first time that I have shared anything like that here.https://projectfiles.maxon.net/Cineversity_Forum_Support/2025_PROJECTS_DRS/Photorealism_in_3D_The_Lens_Between_Reality_and_Perception_draft_01.pdf.zip
There are surely some additional chapters needed. I will expand it more. Please note that it is a private little thing, not an official Maxon document. So, if needed, the critique goes in my direction; thank you.
My best wishes for your new project
