Vintage and OC is welcomePrevious thread: >>1021812
>>1026280
>>1026281
>>1026282
>>1026283
>>1026284
>>1026285
>>1026286
>>1026287
>>1026288
>>1026289
CUBEhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4aGDCE6Nrz0&list=WL&index=45
>>1026280oc
Made a few cool finds in the Anim8or gallery https://www.anim8or.com/gallery/I would definitely recommend NOT clicking on any links because one of them cleared my reading list and almost gave me a computer virus.>>1026398Wishlisted>>1026584Very FFVII-esque
>>1026651
>>1026652
>>1026653
>>1026654
>>1026655
>>1026656
>>1026657
>>1026658
>>1026659
>>1026660
>>1026661
>>1026662
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jKnRgsoO2ME
I find Bryce a bit too clunky to use for my tastes. I'd like to see someone recreate these style of renders in Blender.
>>1026280vghhh s.s...sovl!!!
>>1026716A guy on Twitter did make a thing for Blender emulating the look of Bryce actually. I use it, it works really well.https://x.com/cboyjet1/status/2020330353018433777?s=20https://x.com/cboyjet1/status/2018467415294964033?s=20
>>1026691That was pretty cool, but what's even cooler is that there's an entire playlist these https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uD4S_F-pykg&list=PL11rcBnKdlyPd--MRTJOMn__12IZ7S2So
>>1027074
>>1027075
>>1027076>>1026691>>1027074meant to use this link https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL11rcBnKdlyPd--MRTJOMn__12IZ7S2So
>>1027077
>>1027078
>>1027079
>>1027080
>>1027081
>>1027082
CHELOVEK-UTKA
>>1026280This started playing in my head when I saw this thread in the catalog.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NIAqGZMyOuQ&list=RDNIAqGZMyOuQ&start_radio=1
>>1027143ÐÑ‚o oчeнь Ñ…opoшoooo (its soooo good) ^^
>>1027355what makes H1 '90s 3D rendering so distinct?seems to be a particularly balance of proceduralism in both models and texture.just something about it. not as primitive as late '80s 3D art, but also not as deliberate as late '90s 3D art.it feels to me like the last time you could describe a scene programmatically, if that makes sense, like it gives off the feeling that the scene was described with commands rather than done graphically/organically
>>1027404That image in particular, and the rest are from the early 2000s but I get what you mean. I think it simply has to do with the limitations of the programs, and the skill of the people who made those images. Also iirc there were indeed tools to procedurally generate stuff like foliage, trees and things like that, as well as textures.
with "the rest" I mean the images below it, I dont know about the other pics posted before that
It's nice to see other people posting images in bulk now, we're making quite a nice collection.>>1027404>it gives off the feeling that the scene was described with commands rather than done graphically/organicallyThat is actually the case with some 90s renders. POV-Ray was a popular 3d program during that time and used a scene description language rather than a viewport.
>>1027649
>>1027650
>>1027651
>>1027652
>>1027653
>>1027654
>>1027655
>>1027656
>>1027657
>>1026283What kind of lighting is used for images like these? I want to emulate it on something more contemporary.
>>1027438these pics look really '90s, though perhaps that's just the gap between professional 3d cgi and amateur/home stuff.i tried out a 3d modelling tool back then thinking about it. i forget what it was called. i played around with it enough to make something akin to a wooden toy train, and it took probably over 10 minutes to render on a pentium IIIfor stuff made at home these look excellent, compared to the state of the art of the time however not so much, like pic related is from 2001, but no home user had a chance in fuck of rendering such a scene. the gap between consumer and pro hardware has gotten smaller over time
>>1026280Probably not the most interesting find as far as the actual renders go, but they do have a nice story attached.https://www.santoroland.com/work/cgi/
>>1028071
>>1028072>https://www.santoroland.com/work/cgi/
>>1028073Don't know how I quoted the link in my previous post, but whatever
>>1028074
