Making 3D look real

So I just got a calendar from Maxon (makers of Cinema 4D). Some really nice examples of 3D art using their software. As I looked at the images, I was struck by how some were really difficult to tell from photographs and some were obviously 3D. The difference, I think, is depth of field.

Depth of field was really noticable. On too many 3D images the DOF is infinite. Meaning that buildings 300 yards away are in razor sharp focus and you can see every detail on the bricks that make up the building. While the artist may want you to appreciate all the hard work he put in adding fine details… I don’t want to see them. I want them blurred out.

I think this is what makes impressionistic paintings work, as well. It’s the detail you don’t see that makes the image work. When you look out over a city at night with fog rolling in… you take it all in, but rarely do you notice fine details on anything. It’s all a mash of colors and light and vague shapes. Most of us do not have the eyes of eagles.

When a 3D image or a composited photograph has razor sharp details on everything and everything is perfect, our eyes see it as ‘not right’. We might not know exactly what’s wrong, but we know instinctively that it’s fake.

So it’s worth noticing what about photographs make them real. All the imperfections that we try to get rid of, but ultimately tell us that real people and the real world were involved.

cheers, Jim

added 2/14/09

fwiw… I wasn’t picking on Cinema 4D specifically (it’s a great product). This is sort of a general problem with 3D. The default cameras in most 3D apps usually have this ‘infinite sharpness’ thing going. A little DOF goes a long way… but I hear ya, the opposite (extreme DOF) does show up a lot.

cheers,
Jim

2 thoughts on “Making 3D look real”

  1. Jim—

    While I’d agree that a lot of very skilled modeling professionals need to enlist a director (or someone with a photographic eye) to light a scene and set up photometric camera properties if photoreality is the goal in 3D modeling, there’s nothing wrong with Cinema 4D’s DoF feature! Perhaps the examples in the calendar don’t show the feature—MAXON is probably trying to show off other aspects of their new version.
    Actually, I see too [i]much[/i] use of simulated DoF in modeled scenes these days. Folks glom onto this feature and everything looks as though it was snapped at f/1.4@1/1000s.!
    The judicious use of an effect in modeling/rendering systems, teamed with an understanding of camera physics (Maxwell Render and modo perform this quite well), will get you where you want to go better than tossing a kitchen sink’s worth of fx at a scene.

    I prefer a soft focus over a significant DoF effect when I render scenes. Film grain and reflex contrast, composition, camera angle, a little Dof with a tinch of edge erosion, volumetric lighting…all the ingredients in the right proportion can bring what it is all modelers want from a render—an image that provokes an emotional response.

    Always enjoy your take on tech,

    Gary

  2. fwiw… I wasn’t picking on Cinema 4D specifically (it’s a great product). This is sort of a general problem with 3D. The default cameras in most 3D apps usually have this ‘infinite sharpness’ thing going. A little DOF goes a long way… but I hear ya, the opposite (extreme DOF) does show up a lot.

    cheers,
    Jim

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *