I figure that an actual 12-bit RAW image is a lot better than a Chrome ball
reflection... Since we can now get the "almost" same effect from an extreme
fish eye lens as a Chrome ball, without getting the tripod or camera or
person shooting in the frame... sounds to me like a great trade off. Also I
noticed that you can't get the complete 180 with a chrome ball. (unless
someone knows something that I don't).
As for why I'm getting into all of this, its because we have vray here at
work, and it brings a tear to my eye. It does things with light that I seem
to have a real hard time doing in XSI. First off, the fact that I can't use
objects as light sources severely puts me at a disadvantage. I've been
spending my days in the parking lot taking pictures and looking at how
reflections work with base colors. 100% reflective balls, XSI can do, but
when it comes to 20% reflections, I can't seem to get that "real" feel to it
like vray does. Final Gathering is okay for outside shots, but for indoor
shots, the light bouncing just doesn't work like it should. I've even tried
going up to 50+ bounces and I can never achieve what vray does automatically
without effort.
All of the above is why I'm trying to figure things out... I like the chrome
ball, and I want to see if its really the only real way of getting the
maximum out of HDR images.
Anyhoo... any thoughts for the above I'd appreciate tips and tricks.
Thanks again guys! (and girls)
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-xsi(at)Softimage.COM [mailto:owner-xsi(at)Softimage.COM] On Behalf Of
Joe Laffey
Sent: Tuesday, May 30, 2006 3:56 PM
To: XSI(at)Softimage.COM
Subject: RE: Unwrapping chrome ball pictures...
On Tue, 30 May 2006, Martin Belleau wrote:
> I see the difference when I polar coord it, in XSI I simply rotated 90
> degrees in X (in environment node) Its far from perfect, but great for my
> reflections. I'm also aware that I'll need to do this for all exposures
> before combining into HDR.
>
> Ultimately I want to try using a fish eye lens instead of a chrome ball...
> putting the camera face up on the floor and taking a picture, then
> re-slapping that on a hemisphere. Anyone have any experience using a fish
> eye lens for this?
I have heard of some VFX guys using 2 shots from a 180deg fisheye lens.
But we use a chrome ball and shoot it from two angles, 90 deg opposed (a
la Dubevec). We get excellent results with this technique. Since you have
to shoot two angles either way (and a full bracket of exposures to get
HDR) I am not sure how the fisheye would save you time. I supposed you
wouldn't also have to mount the ball on a stand, and perhaps you could get
it into smaller areas, like larger miniatures.
Let us know what you are trying to achieve and maybe we can brainstorm
some stuff together. I am always open to new ideas that will keep the ADs
from screaming that the chrome ball takes too long ;-)
--
Joe Laffey | Visual Effects for Film and Video
LAFFEY Computer Imaging | -------------------------------------
St. Louis, MO | Show Reel http://LAFFEY.tv/?e01255
USA | -------------------------------------
. | -*- Digital Fusion Plugins -*-
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mail here will be rejected --> "Real Trap" <r_trap(at)laffeycomputer.com>
---
Unsubscribe? Mail Majordomo(at)Softimage.COM with the following text in body:
unsubscribe xsi
---
Unsubscribe? Mail Majordomo(at)Softimage.COM with the following text in body:
unsubscribe xsi
