Have you ever seen a photo-realistic digitally rendered object?

K

KingPariah777

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jun 18, 2003
Messages
1,903
I am talking about something rendered by a video card (demo or something) that is absolutely photo-realistic...not only with regards to texture mapping, but also polygon count, shading, and environmental interaction (shadows and such).

It seems that modern video cards and games get SO close...but you can still tell its a render.

Does anyone have an example of something like this, that is totally realistic, so much that you can't tell the difference between real life and the game/render?

Still renders don't count!
 
Mmmm interesting question.

Unfortunately I think when you say that modern GPU's and games get 'SO' close your way off the mark. Unless somebody has serious myopia and they don't wear corrective lenses then it's still all too easy to spot a 3D game engine.

We're still a long way off... Game engines have come a long way but I'd say it's only baby steps, definately not leaps and bounds.
 
something like that could be created, but it would run at seconds per frame instead of frames per second
 
Definetly not rendered on the fly but "Final Fantasy: The Spirits Within" was damn close to photo-realistic and that also was created a few years ago.
 
There have been a couple amazing photo-realistic 3d rendered movies.

If i can remember, there was 3d movie with a young teenage girl crying on a bridge. Then she finds a baby underneath it and shows a lot of emotion.

There was also another movie with a Ford Saleen crashing in to a wall going 200mph.

Those are just off the top of my head. If i find anything else, i'll post back.
 
EnforcerGT, Think he's talking about realtime rendering, not a CGI Film. As far as I know, no computer can do a photo realistic render in real time in motion... it took days to render a single scene in FF:TM, I dout it could be ever done in realtime. I consider it the closes to photo realism, just look at the final scene with the eagle flying over the mountains, you can barely tell thats CGI.
 
I think ATI's X800 series demo movie with Ruby in it is really good quality and close to being lifelike, and im not an ATI !!!!!! or anything
 
|MaguS| said:
EnforcerGT, Think he's talking about realtime rendering, not a CGI Film. As far as I know, no computer can do a photo realistic render in real time in motion... it took days to render a single scene in FF:TM, I dout it could be ever done in realtime. I consider it the closes to photo realism, just look at the final scene with the eagle flying over the mountains, you can barely tell thats CGI.
Click to expand...

Hmm... I reread his post and it doesnt say anything about rendering in realtime. I think he was just talking about anything rendered, such as intro movies, advertisement, movies and games.

But you are right though, no GPU in this world can render photo-realistic images/scenes in realtime.
 
This what you mean?

1f069facecamkitchen1.jpg


1f100extracamforest.jpg


1f100extracamkitchen1.jpg


1f690facecamkitchen.jpg
 
|MaguS| said:
the final scene with the eagle flying over the mountains, you can barely tell thats CGI.
Click to expand...

although i must contest that the eagles movments seemed slightly...ermm,, robotic, for lack of a better word..bbut the textures and the lighting was absolutely amazing..that movie was awesome CG wise..

i wonder when we will begin to develop three dimentional images, not just faux3d on a 2d monior..

holograms anyone? if so, how far into the future do you think that we will have them? 20 years? 40 years?...will i be dead before i can see my future children and childrens children in living true 3d holograms in my bedroom?

well, if they cant record 3d holograms and transmit them real time, at least be able to project it..even if it takes a few hours to make..

just a fantasy
 
Neutral, where did you get these images?

That last one, I could tell that its a CGI... but overall, it's pretty much awesome!!
:)
 
hmm didnt read first post all the way :p

what about that unreal 3 engine footage? that was trippy when i first seen it
 
ech3lon9 said:
Neutral, where did you get these images?

That last one, I could tell that its a CGI... but overall, it's pretty much awesome!!
:)
Click to expand...

"Neural" lol and I cant remember where I got them, it was like a year ago and I cant remember (to many forums) but yeah they are cool i ave a couple more but they are the best ones I put up. :)
 
Neural Interface said:
"Neural" lol and I cant remember where I got them, it was like a year ago and I cant remember (to many forums) but yeah they are cool i ave a couple more but they are the best ones I put up. :)
Click to expand...
Holy hell...Actually, I was talking about Real Time Renders...something along the lines of a Teapot...Something simple, but extremely real...

But good fucking hell, i can't believe those pictures, I have never seen anything like that...

She REALLY looks real.

excuse me ill be back in 15 minutes...
 
KingPariah777 said:
Definitely awesome, thats exactly what I was talking about...

I think a badass modern video card could render that in real time, dont' you?
Click to expand...

maybe in seconds per frame

not frames per second, heh
 
I agree, it takes a long time to render 3d images of that complexity. (I do maya as a hobby) and just a simple raytrace can take a long time. So I agree it would be in seconds per frame not. FPS
 
current consumer graphics cards cannot do raytracing in real time

and to render anything with realistic lighting you'd have to use raytracing
 
With movies like Final Fantasy and other things that Pixar have done, it takes 40+ hours to render a single frame. And they aren't even all that realistic. It will be a long, long, long time before we're playing games that look like that. A very long time.
 
Check out Fight Club when you get a chance guys. There are a few scenes in that movie that are CG and you probably can't even tell.

If I remember correctly, I think I read somewhere that Brad Bird or some big whig from Pixar said that modern video cards are able to render on the fly what took a render farm 10 years ago to render. The jist of the article basically stated video card technology was around 10 years behind film.


phas3d
 
RTHDRIBL != photo realistic environments and characters.

That single image of the womans mouth probably took over 20 hours to render. My friend is into rendering and running dual Opteron 250's and 3GB of ram and his shit still takes 24+ hours to render most of his images.

Shit like that is a long, long ways off. RTHDRIBL is just a few objects, all the backgrounds are just blurred images. It's nothing.
 
There is a huge difference between real time photorealistic and pre-rendered photorealistic.

Currently, no hardware can render a photo-realistic image in real time.

But, given enough time, most hardware out there could render a video clip thats damn close to photrealistic, it would just take time. Like 24hrs for a 10 second clip.
 
$$grh$$ said:
There is a huge difference between real time photorealistic and pre-rendered photorealistic.

Currently, no hardware can render a photo-realistic image in real time.

But, given enough time, most hardware out there could render a video clip thats damn close to photrealistic, it would just take time. Like 24hrs for a 10 second clip.
Click to expand...
I think we are further along than that...what about an object like a chair or something...I think modern graphics cards could render something like that in realtime that would almost be photorealistic...
 
KingPariah777 said:
I think we are further along than that...what about an object like a chair or something...I think modern graphics cards could render something like that in realtime that would almost be photorealistic...
Click to expand...

I have yet to see a movie (ie Shrek2, Shark tale etc etc) that is computer rendered that approaches photo-realistic. When I do, I will believe that that technology is around the corner for gamers.
 
Give us 10 years and raytracing on the fly by GPU will start to be a possibility if we look at how technology advanced compared to 10 years ago. New games like FarCry, Doom3 and HL2 is almost close to photorealistic.

There will be always new ways to do better with less ressources discovered each year.
 
rthdribl.exe is the only thing that comes close in real time.

It's the best that can be done with a video card and in real time thats in motion not still AS OF NOW.

I think those come close to your guidelines, hehe. And if someone can't come up with a better example than rthdribl.exe, then rthdribl.exe is on top.

I mean sure, you're looking for more polygons, shadows, and textures. But there isn't anything like it that comes close to looking photo-realistic. As you can see from rthdribl.exe, you don't even need all that to have something that looks realistic.

The nvidia demo timbury uses EVERYTHING you mentioned, but it doesn't look photo realistic. It looks damn good, but not real. rthdribl.exe uses lots of lights and reflections to make itself look realistic.

I hope someone posts something that looks as realistic as rthdribl.exe, but no one has yet, they've only posted stills.
 
Wasn't there an GForceFX demo with TheSpiritsWithin characters done in real time? Is it on par with the movie? Anybody know where i can download that now?
 
Sly said:
Wasn't there an GForceFX demo with TheSpiritsWithin characters done in real time? Is it on par with the movie? Anybody know where i can download that now?
Click to expand...

I'd like to see that. =)
 
Hehe, i did another google, hoping to be able to finally download the demo. No luck yet but after seeing the screencaps again, looks like my standards have gone up since i last searched for it.

It's from the GF3 era and it's only about on par with Doom3 models, if not lower.

http://www.pcrave.com/reviews/245.htm

I'm still looking for a downloadable demo tho :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top