• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Real or Rendered?

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
It it weren't for the properties page telling me what kind of camera took the shot...I would guess rendered. That water looks like the water in HL2.

Comon people, if you want a real vs rendered debate, take out the camera info.
 
Originally posted by: ScottSwingleComputers
It it weren't for the properties page telling me what kind of camera took the shot...I would guess rendered. That water looks like the water in HL2.

Comon people, if you want a real vs rendered debate, take out the camera info.
Click to expand...

You know it's just as easy to put the exif data into rendered pics, right? 😉
 
Originally posted by: Czar
real

slight lense flare effect... no self respecting computer graphics artist would add a lense flare
Click to expand...

uhhh, wrong. I see pros do it all the time. many 3d programs have a special function for it.

cardinal rule is the flare always goes throught the center of the shot, if it doesn't, somebody either screwed up or cropped it.
 
It's quite obvious that some people here cannot tell the difference between a computer generated image and a picture of the real outdoors.

That's pretty sad.
 
After checking the link to the source image, I have brilliantly concluded that it is real 😀

NOTE: At first I thought it was rendered
 
Originally posted by: Eli
It's quite obvious that some people here cannot tell the difference between a computer generated image and a picture of the real outdoors.

That's pretty sad.
Click to expand...

Agreed.

You don't need a bigger version of the image to tell that it's real. C'mon now people.
 
Originally posted by: Eli
It's quite obvious that some people here cannot tell the difference between a computer generated image and a picture of the real outdoors.

That's pretty sad.
Click to expand...


Line stealer 😉

Originally posted by: PurdueRy
Well at least we know half of anandtech can't tell what it looks like OUTSIDE from CG....sounds about right
Click to expand...

😛
 
I voted rendered, because I've seen many very detailed renders lately that look very real (at high res), but have a sort of surreal lighting effect that looks very similar to that pic.
 
Originally posted by: Legend
I voted rendered, because I've seen many very detailed renders lately that look very real (at high res), but have a sort of surreal lighting effect that looks very similar to that pic.
Click to expand...
:speechless:
 
Originally posted by: illusion88
No one ****** cares if you have some image that is difficult to tell if it's real or rendered. Stop with these threads!
Click to expand...

But it's really funny to see people say that it's rendered based on their oh so awesome keen sense of sight. They're all like "yeah, that <insert object> just gave it away" ... or... "hmm...that <insert object> just doesn't sit right with me", and then BAM, it's a real image and they never ever post again 😛
 
Originally posted by: Schfifty Five
Originally posted by: Excelsior
Real..because I was there in April of 2004. Pics to prove it too.

Pic from the boat...

Inside the red-roofed church.

Pic on the boat that takes you there.

BTW, it is the Konigsee.
Click to expand...

Just b/c the place actually exists doesn't mean the photo can't be rendered.

But I'm not saying it is rendered, I voted for real....just saying that a real place can be rendered as well.
Click to expand...

I'll render you senseless
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top