File :-(, x, )
Anonymous
can neone believe this is CGed
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
can neone believe this is CGed
>> Anonymous
no,prove it
>> Anonymous
>>235281
yea i saw an article about it and wire frames ,as well as the setup

no way he can do any other view though just that angle
>> Anonymous
>>235281
yes, the shading is off between the head and body ot
>> Anonymous
DOUBT ITTTTTT!!!
>> Anonymous
>>235277
This is Geirangerfjord in Norway. The image looks too good, I think.
Compare: http://www.servifans.com/geiranger.jpg
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>> Anonymous
the foliage looks pretty good but the water not so much so yeah I could tell it's cgi
>> Anonymous
OP pic is not CG. 3D terrain is almost always generated by fractals or inexact height maps. Achieving this degree of verisimilitude would require countless hours of painstaking modeling and texturing. Since it adds nothing to depict this scene by CG, plurality is posited unnecessarily, defying the principle of parsimony known as Occam's razor. Cunty cunt cunt.
>> Anonymous
I could tell from the pixels
>> Anonymous
>>235566
agree... op is CG, it definatly looks like a computer graphic to me.... probably a .jpg ... its some sort of new form of compression
>> Anonymous
It was likely done by the government on their super computers. They can handle more pixel compressions than our PCs
>> Anonymous
>>235579
is it possible to compress a pixel? how small can you compress a 1x1 pixel?
>> Anonymous
>>235580
to 1/1000 of it's original size. But after that it's difficult to uncompress it without damaging the screen and the hardwares. You need the monitor off when uncompressing.
>> Anonymous
it is cg, I made it.
>> Anonymous
wonder how fast one of dem new quad cores would decompress such a pixel
>> pieisgood
http://interfacelift.com/wallpaper/downloads/01040_fjordofart_2560x1600.jpg

OP is just a photo.

Though the second image I can recall being rendered in Maxwell Render. It acts as a light simulator. The artist could take other shots, but Maxwell is made of slow and accurate.
>> Anonymous
>>235580
a 1px image takes

4 bytes as a bitmap
302 bytes as a jpeg
43 bytes as a gif
124 bytes as a png

so no, unless you count negative compression
>> Anonymous
1: Vue6 Extreme + Maya (or 3DsMax)

2: Photoshoop

3: Profit!
>> Anonymous
you trolls remind me of this xkcd sketch
http://xkcd.com/331/
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
I can believe the first pic is CG.
>> Anonymous
take a look at terragen
http://taenaron.deviantart.com/art/First-Snow-64804385

you can't do that... but you can do some pretty amazing stuff with it
>> Anonymous
Yes I can.
>> Doppelgänger !.97.to9elc
>>235659
Wait till Terragen 2 comes out.
>> Anonymous
OP's atmospheric fogging looks off to me. I don't live in northern Europe, so I don't know what the fog looks like up there, but the foliage in the foreground to the lower right looks a bit oversaturated compared to the rest of the image. I dunno, though. If I knew more about CG I probably wouldn't be browsing 4chan.

>>235646
That looks like Crysis
>> Anonymous
>>235646
holy shit I would love to play games with those kind of gfx...imagine a GTA game with that gfx...or muh fuggin TETRIS!!!
>> Anonymous
>>235646
Yeah, because rocks tile like that.

FFS, procedurally generated textures aren't the fucking hard to code.
>> Anonymous
>>235352
>>235281
AAHAHA TOTAL LACK OF SUBSURFACE SCATTERING
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>>235775

Labels, do you read them?
>> Anonymous
>>235737
a demo is out that limits AA and resolution which nobody has hacked yet

terragen: forever, amirite?
>> Anonymous
>>235817
Not really.
>> Anonymous
>>235556
>>235566
(start quote)OP pic is not CG. 3D terrain is almost always generated by fractals or inexact height maps. Achieving this degree of verisimilitude would require countless hours of painstaking modeling and texturing. Since it adds nothing to depict this scene by CG, plurality is posited unnecessarily, defying the principle of parsimony known as Occam's razor. Cunty cunt cunt.(end quote)

One. it doesn't look all that real to me.
Two. how would it be any more parismonious for this picture to be real, than to be fake?
Three. I don't think you understand the basis of Occam's Razor. While i do not prescribe to it, i understand it. the fact that you "postulate" as you put it, that it is fake is agaisnt the razor itself... for two reasons.
A. It is more difficult to prove its real than to assume its fake.
B. in trying to prove its real, you create too many points. thus defeating your very reasoning for it being real.

So, either you are just a really stupid nerd that wathces too much television and anime, or you are a copypaster... either way you need to die... Cunt.
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>>235580

You can compress it to 1/0 so dividing by zero = magic bag compression. OH SHIT, DIVIDE BY ZERO
>> Anonymous
>>235854
If you ever use words like "parsimony" or "verisimilitude" on 4chan again, I will buy a plane ticket, fly to the nearest city of your residence, buy a thesaurus in a bookstore, go to your home, break down the door, and then proceed to rape you anally with the thesaurus just to show you A THESAURUS DOES NOT MAKE YOU SMARTER.

Now, unless you WANT to get buttraep'd by a Merriam-Webster leather-bound special hardcover edition, I suggest you cut words like than from your 4chan vocab. Got it Mr. Smartypants?
>> Anonymous
>>236147

>>235854was actually quoting>>235556

also realism is a much better word that versimilitude whatever. and parsimony is just a bad word choice all together, normal people say stingy but I don't think you know wtf you were talking about
>> Anonymous
wait, ive seen that picture before. of a fjord in norway im pretty sure.
>> Anonymous
yup im sure

http://interfacelift.com/wallpaper/details.php?id=1040
>> Anonymous
OP pic is not CG for all the reasons>>235556mentioned, as well as proof posted above. To recreate a scene like that in proper 3D, with this much detail and photorealism would be torturous.

2nd pic is in fact CG.
http://forums.cgsociety.org/showthread.php?f=121&t=532817