A render using LWF

[Neilg]

So you're saying you don't use it?

Oh my word... Where the hell did I say that? I never said I dont use it, I even said I used it recently.

You've not read a single one of my posts on the subject have you?
edit: Dont even reply, i'm not making any further posts on this. I cant believe it.

[jujubee]

You know my comment was a joke right? Of course the ceiling and walls and tables and everything else that's supposed to be "flat" looks "flat".

LOL. No I didn't. I sat there looking at it afterwards for 15 minutes wondering it could be improved hahaha.

Anyways - as for cubicle - until he can provide some visual examples/situations/comparisons as to why he thinks one method is particularly better over another, it's just best worth taking his criticism lightly.

One image does not make a comparison - although it was a pretty good image seeing that it didn't really demonstrate a high range of colors - although the lighting 'looked' spot-on as far as I could 'guess.' Who knows how long that took to adjust other than what he claims. I also no post-processing from my experience is never a reliable methodology nor always a 'quick' adjusment.

I'm just as curious as anyone else how his other method could be better, and would like to be completely convinced into using that instead.

[jujubee]

You've not read a single one of my posts on the subject have you?

No. Just the ones here which you flamed people for trying to use it.

Dont even reply, i'm not making any further posts on this. I cant believe it.

Good.

[jonahhawk]

Am I going to have to throw ugly kittens at you two?

[paulison]

Man I wish i hadn't said anything in this thread now

you are all equally as spectacularly well endowed in every possible way *group hug*. happy now?..or..

LWF = noLWF = $win

or something

[Neilg]

No. Just the ones here which you flamed people for trying to use it.

Well done. Every point youve made has been in vain.

I've never seen someone quite so ignorant and close minded to any one subject. Incidently, that attitude and you are the very reason I made any posts about lwf in the first place - we've come full circle now.
Answer me one thing: why are you acting like this? Everyone said to drop it, I did, and then you come back with a completley fabricated accusation towards me with the sole intent of making me look bad and another completley insane juvenile rant about the subject. I've never slagged off your work and I dont really care what works and doesnt for you - you've admitted to not even knowing what my point was so why did you still carry on?


Paul - I kinda wish you'd came in and said your summary at the start, haha.

[simon123]

i thought lwf was lightwave format....

[jujubee]

I've never seen someone quite so ignorant and close minded to any one subject.

How am I closed minded? How am I ignorant? Is it possible to achieve great results without LWF? Yes. Did I ever say anything to the contrary? No. All I ever said was that it was one of the most accurate methods out there and tends to give relatively good results from the start with very little post-processing needed. Is anything about that wrong?

Incidently, that attitude and you are the very reason I made any posts about lwf in the first place

What attitude? I didn't give any 'attitude' until you started. I just went through all the posts, and if I must remind you what you said:

Incidently thats what started my hate campaign towards it.

Hmmm.

then you come back with a completley fabricated accusation towards me with the sole intent of making me look bad and another completley insane juvenile rant

See above.

I've never slagged off your work and I dont really care what works and doesnt for you

We agree on something - although I do care what works for you because if you find a better method I'd like to know and use it.

you've admitted to not even knowing what my point was

Where did I say that? From what I've read, I think I do know what your point is and I disagree - I still think LWF is a very reliable/accurate method that provides excellent results overall. No reason to 'hate' on it. I'd hope this would have been a useful comparison thread from the start but instead others hijacked it with a 'hate campaign'.

I don't have much time at the moment, but I'd really wish someone could provide a stripped Max scene interior with basic vray materials for us to try different lighting methods on for comparison - let the images and timeframe judge for themselves. It would probably have to be a new thread as this one has gone way off course.

[Neilg]

You still think my point was that lwf isnt good?

Thats why youre ignorant, because you dont read my posts. And the way I work isnt a 'better method', and i never claimed it was - ive just got used to it. Same way some people have got used to lwf. They are EQUAL when it comes to image quality.


It's not about comparisons, its not about timeframes. Your 'attitude' which I refered to was about you flat out demanding there be a winner, which is becoming more overbearing with every post.
By all means go and start it - but while I can take 5 minutes out to make a post, theres no chance i'll take a full day or two's work off. Especially to prove a point i'm not even making, that you just pulled out of thin air.

[Joost Ink]

oh, please guys, stop this.
It's going nowhere, even the entertaining part of it is now over.

[Neilg]

oh, please guys, stop this.

Gladly - jujubee if youve still got something to say to me send me a pm, nobody wants to read this shit anymore.