🧵 Make the lighting better?
Anonymous at Thu, 20 Apr 2023 23:12:01 UTC No. 943675
I'm doing some little animations of 2d logos to 3d. I'm satisfied with the animation but not with the lighting. I've got 3 overhead spotlights with different size + an area light in front hitting the top of the model.
Anonymous at Thu, 20 Apr 2023 23:38:55 UTC No. 943679
>>943676
program? ambient occlusion and soft shadows
Anonymous at Fri, 21 Apr 2023 00:22:01 UTC No. 943683
>>943681
a bit of bevel in the model could help, is that eevee? just use cycles
Anonymous at Fri, 21 Apr 2023 02:03:41 UTC No. 943689
>>943680
>Uses blender
There is your problem, you think Evee is a good render? No, it's just some poor made up rendering done by developers who dont know a single thing about rendering.
https://code.blender.org/2018/03/ee
Why does the shadow in EEVEE look different than in Cycles?
EEVEE has no support for real soft shadow yet. Instead, it implements a filtered shadow. Although we would love to have smooth shadow calculation it’s proven to be too big of a technical challenge for the time being.
Anonymous at Fri, 21 Apr 2023 02:08:05 UTC No. 943690
>>943675
Just use renderman
Anonymous at Fri, 21 Apr 2023 03:42:39 UTC No. 943695
>>943689
None of that is going to help him if he has no idea how to light things in general. Nor will it help him better light a flat plane. You wrote all that and it's meaningless to the situation. You just latched onto something that doesn't contribute to the issue and used it as a worthless excuse to air your grievances. You haven't helped OP at all.
>>943690
Using literally any renderer will still look like shit if he doesn't understand what the real issue is.
>>943681
Difference between this and >>943676 is that the other logo actually has depth and layers to actually interact with the light and create interesting shadows. Yours has none. It's literally just a flat plane.
Lighting a 2d surface isn't going to look good in any way shape or form, literally because it lacks form. Give the light something to work with.
Anonymous at Fri, 21 Apr 2023 05:43:03 UTC No. 943706
I made this lighting setup, I'm a little more pleased with it but still trying to make it better
>>943689
I'm using Evee because it takes 1/12th the time as cycles. I'm trying to set things up so I can convert 2D logos into 3d animations with a quick turnaround time
Anonymous at Fri, 21 Apr 2023 07:33:35 UTC No. 943710
Use an HDRI
https://polyhaven.com/hdris
In many cases you don't even have to add any lights if you pick the right one, but you still can use extra accent lightning.
Anonymous at Fri, 21 Apr 2023 16:20:00 UTC No. 943739
>>943680
>blender
This may be a retarded question because I have never worked with Blender in my life but does it have photometric lights?
Anonymous at Fri, 21 Apr 2023 16:46:38 UTC No. 943740
>>943739
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vto
Anonymous at Fri, 21 Apr 2023 20:55:38 UTC No. 943762
>>943706
There, another problem with it, 2D. You should not expect 2D and 3D to work the same. You are putting yourself into bad habits just assuming something can't be done in a 3D system. Maybe try out crazy ideas and not just be "following the rules".
>>943695
Well it's no longer in a flat plane, it's flying. What do you have to say now, mr.unhelpful anon.
Still blender sucks at lighting and there are better rendering software that can do better job at lighting.
Anonymous at Sat, 22 Apr 2023 03:53:58 UTC No. 943794
>>943762
>Well it's no longer in a flat plane, it's flying
In this? >>943706
It's still a 2d plane, or it looks like one at least..
> mr.unhelpful anon.
I'm the among only ones that actually gave advice apart from "fuck Blender, switch to something else".
>Still blender sucks at lighting and there are better rendering software that can do better job at lighting.
For such a simplistic scene it doesn't need "balls to the walls" realism for lighting. The object needs depth. Pic related, a simple 3 point lighting setup works if the object has something for the light to work with. Shading errors are there because I was lazy modelling the logo and the bevels are fucking with it. Lighting is what's important here, in that if the object has depth the light can interact with it more than if it's flat.
Anonymous at Sat, 22 Apr 2023 11:53:03 UTC No. 943826
>>943794
All you did was made entire new thing and abandoned the old design. Not very smart of you, this is why we cll blender users dumb, none of you are creative in lighting, modeling and animation. Egomanics with geo headed people together causing problems for us 3D artist who actual did actual work experience with actual software.
Anonymous at Sat, 22 Apr 2023 23:17:58 UTC No. 943937
>>943826
>All you did was made entire new thing and abandoned the old design
I'm not OP, I don't have the SVG, nor was I going to waste time looking for it without any context. I just slapped together an approximation of it. I didn't even have to do that, but I figured he wouldn't "get it" unless he sees it applied to something similar.
If I did have the SVG, it would be a simple matter of just adding an extrude and bevel. Wouldn't have shading errors either.
>none of you are creative in lighting
Considering it's just a studio HDRI that I put on just as an example, I'm not entirely offended. This was a 5 minute example thrown together to show the OP that you can light something if it has depth. I'm not going to do his whole project for him or spend an hour meticulously lighting it just to say "hey, you can do this".
I'm not out to prove anything, I'm just trying to help.
Anonymous at Sun, 21 May 2023 10:39:54 UTC No. 946407
>>943706
already looks much better than the first one.
personally i'd try to avoid the shadows from looking that dark around the edges, you could also add a shadow catcher under the plane.so it looks less empty.