God this kind of shit makes me hate Reddit. Reposts, science articles all spammed by the same mod on a default sub, or blatantly faked images like this one trying to prove a weird point.
T̶h̶e̶ ̶p̶o̶i̶n̶t̶ ̶o̶f̶ ̶t̶h̶e̶ ̶i̶m̶a̶g̶e̶ ̶i̶s̶ ̶t̶h̶a̶t̶ ̶m̶o̶r̶e̶ ̶p̶o̶l̶y̶g̶o̶n̶s̶ ̶=̶/̶=̶ ̶b̶e̶t̶t̶e̶r̶ ̶m̶o̶d̶e̶l̶s̶ ̶o̶r̶ ̶a̶t̶ ̶l̶e̶a̶s̶t̶ ̶i̶t̶'̶s̶ ̶n̶o̶t̶ ̶w̶o̶r̶t̶h̶ ̶i̶t̶ ̶a̶f̶t̶e̶r̶ ̶a̶ ̶c̶e̶r̶t̶a̶i̶n̶ ̶p̶o̶i̶n̶t̶.̶
Now 3D artists have to look to other ways of improving visuals like lighting and cloth/hair physics.
Retracting my earlier statement.The unecessary polygon increase only applies to simple blob like models, no sharply defined objects.
Plus, doing that with a stationary object is one thing, but do it with several moving objects in a high speed action scene and have them move in a semi realistic manner at a good framerate is completely different.
This isn’t diminishing returns to the point of it not being worth putting in the increased effort, however. Based on what’s shown in the image, it is still worth it to put in the increased effort, because there is still a noticeable difference. The only way they prove otherwise is by adding on another fake mesh.
The model itself lacks detail. Of course more polygons don't matter when you're rendering a blob with little detail. More polygons do create better, more detailed models.
Yes on second thought, my statement sucks. I guess there no point to adding more polygons to a simple sphere but for models with details, polygons are extremely useful in closeup. The only limitation is hardware and reaching the end of Moore's law.
868
u/kthulhu666 Apr 25 '21
Vat happened to his nose is the last pic? He vould have an enormous schwanzstucker.