Very poor rendering quality / speed

[Sypher]

I have noticed this in the past, but with the latest blog (about the lights/soft shadows/Christmas tree) I thought lets try it again.

Using the same settings as the example: 400x225, 16/9, best quality at 25-12-2014 16:00 with ceiling lighting it doesn't make as crisp pictures as the one on the blog. I have the very same problem with my own creations, it looks like pretty crappy

My system is not that low end: i7 950, 12GB RAM, AMD HD6970 graphics card (2GB VID MEM) on Windows 8.1. SH3D 4.5 with "Java 1.6.0_45 / 64 bit / 5,3GB max". This isn't the latest hardware, but since graphic heavy games like BF4 still work just fine why doesn't SH3D?

Render on the blog:


Render I have just created:


The settings are the same, so shouldn't the image be the same as well? It also took quite a long time for such as small picture, this is somewhat to be expected (due to the lights) but still..

Is there any way of improving this?

[hansmex]

I think you left the ceiling light on...
Look in the photo window and uncheck the box.

H

[Sypher]

According to the blogpost it should be on Or I misread it. But still, that's just a light thing. The objects are still not sharp, for instance the bike.

[Sypher]

Here is one without the lights:

[Puybaret]

The blog article says:

let's cancel the ceiling light by unselecting the Add ceiling lights check box

and the ChristmasLights.sh3d file doesn't have ceiling lights on.

But this point doesn't explain the difference of sharpness.
In your case, objects are (a little) less sharp because you used a point of view that is further, making all objects smaller in the picture. Frame the picture exactly the same way as in the original file and you'll get the same picture. The computed image doesn't depend on your video card or your computer power.

[Sypher]

Thanks Emmanuel. I have followed your advice and the render is indeed the same:

Blog:


Mine:


On the forum I have seen some crazy crisp/sharp renders. I haven't been able to achieve the same unfortunately.

[Puybaret]

You could try to create an image twice larger, then reduce its size with an image tool.