Attached Link: Raytrace experiment, filename 5hours.png, size 514K, female topless nudity

Nice try Thromm, but he's got a microwave. No time to bake! And you/we have been unceremoniously dismissed to boot!

Naturally, the logic is upside down. It's the professional, especially the professional animator, who cannot afford long render times and uses every trick in the book to get render time down. The "hobbyist", you'd think, would LOVE the suggestion of getting smashing, spectacular results by leaving his computer on overnight and cranking up the settings.

Myself, I am going in both directions. I have a scheme for animating frames in preview mode as final, which means about 3 seconds each with anti-alias on. This is for professional, release video. Opposing this, each night I am sending a render off into outer space and REALLY starting to learn raytrace for the first time.

The render attached required 5 hours and 41 seconds. It is actually a failure, but I don't care; i can afford to do one every night over the long haul to get craft. (It failed because the AO shadows around the hand are too sharp. I also can't seem to solve the issue of those damn daffodils turning black inside, even though there is no AO on any light, nor on the flower models themselves.)

Attachment is a large file even though a still: suggest download rather than opening into browser for true resolution.

::::: Opera :::::