Maxwell Render

Very nice, although I have a bit of a problem with your camera angles, except on the still life's

Great gallery, with an overall high quality of work!
Can you please tell me what setup you used for the render with the horizontal section? My walls never have such a uniform black, did you put "caps" on the cut end of the walls? Is the black background also a solid wall thats been cut? What program did you model in?

the model is a sealed environment - and i simply hid the upper surfaces from camera. The black is the background colour. I'm a Max user.
Hope that helps!

_________________
My Gallery:

http://www.maxwellrender.com/forum/view ... hp?t=30080

I believe Maxwell isn't the problem, it's polygonal modeling. If the couch was modeled in a mathematically correct NURBS program like Rhino, then you wouldn't see this problem, at least I've never seen it in anything I've done.

That's why Rhino rules if you want something to look 100 % real, the rendering can never be better than the underlying geometry!

Maxwell converts nurbs to polygons (triangles) during export. I've never used Rhino. Does it have any nurbs to polygon options? Can you specify how dense the exported mesh will be? Just curious.

_________________
Brian Looney
Maxwell + RealFlow
http://lunatic-studio.com/
Help! I'm dispersing into a haze of probability!

It's correct that Maxwell converts everything into Polygons, but very dense polygons. A simple sphere are converted into 12320 triangles at "Jagged & faster" (Rhino Render mesh quality) and 16128 at "Smooth & slower" settings. You can also specify custom settings, and basically get as high resolution you want. NURBS (as you probably know) has unlimited resolution, as it is vector based. I just looked at a simple speaker I designed, it's converted into 1,3 million triangles.

I've only seen these strange shadows on native polygon models. If I import models from Max into Rhino, then I get the same artifacts as seen here.

While I love working with Nurbs and am long time Rhino-User I consider the old "unlimited resolution/simmilar to Vector" saying nothing but a myth.
The remeshing option Nurbs offer might have been an advantage at the times when there was basically only Nurbs and Meshes without flexible Subdivision.
A cleanly built SubD model however shades better than any mesh created by the meshers of all Nurbs-programs I am familiar with
and can very nicely be adapted in its resolution. If that was different Game-Engines would probably work with Nurbs instead of meshes...