It is much less impressive if it is painted from a still life than if it were modeled and rendered; when one can cheat moist translucence by simply painting it instead of manipulating the shaders to achieve such an effect, I am less impressed with the result.
Please don’t use phrases like “computer generated” because you cheapen the work with that dismissive insinuation; if you have affection for the acronym ‘CG’, use Computer Graphics instead as it is less overtly demeaning.
I’m pretty sure that’s what you call taking a picture of something
…of not soda.
…and not posted on mcs
If it’s computer generated, it is impressive. If the image is made with crayons it’s fantastic!
this was made by Chuck Norris, and he used only black charcoal.
It is much less impressive if it is painted from a still life than if it were modeled and rendered; when one can cheat moist translucence by simply painting it instead of manipulating the shaders to achieve such an effect, I am less impressed with the result.
Please don’t use phrases like “computer generated” because you cheapen the work with that dismissive insinuation; if you have affection for the acronym ‘CG’, use Computer Graphics instead as it is less overtly demeaning.
I did use the word “impressive”, which might indicate that I didn’t intend to be dismissive. Perhaps it was a bad choice of term, though.
some may consider the painting method more difficult, but I have tried neither.
*by Pedro Campos
Really amazing Ai skills?
ray-traced?
soda.