Robatoy wrote:
I'm due to go back to work after New Years and I simply won't have the
time to dick around with frivolous things after that.
But I did get some constructive development done with my 3d stuff.
One thing that puzzles me. What is really required, in terms of
rendering quality, when I make a presentation to a customer.

Many of you have a keen eye. I would appreciate an honest opinion
which of the two images comes across as the 'obvious' better of the
two.
One of them takes a whole lot more horsepower than the other and
subsequently a lot more time.
EVERYthing in the two images is the same: lights, camera angle,
textures etc.
One is rendered in Raytracing, the other in Radiosity. Both in Strata.

http://i123.photobucket.com/albums/o...Rendertest.jpg

The one on the right is substantially better in most ways. Neither
of them qualifies as photorealistic though, so if "realistic" is your
goal, then you need to either do more work or lower your standards.
Not being derogatory here--true photorealism is really difficult,
expensive (in terms of compute time), finicky, easy to screw up, and
very seldom necessary. Honestly, both of these are quite good. The one
on the right could almost be a slightly posterised photograph at first
glance.

Colin