3DS Max Render Farms: The Backbone of 3D Modelling in Video Games, Film, and Architecture

As a 3D artist, I have come to appreciate the importance of render farms in the video game, film, and architecture industries. A render farm is a cluster of computers that work together to render 3D models or animations. It is a powerful tool that can save time and increase productivity by distributing the rendering workload across multiple machines.

One of the most popular software used in 3D modelling is 3DS Max. It is a powerful tool used in architecture, product design, and entertainment industries. However, rendering high-quality 3D models can be time-consuming, especially for complex scenes. This is where 3DS Max render farm come in. By utilizing the power of multiple machines, 3DS Max render farms can significantly reduce the time it takes to render complex scenes, allowing artists to focus on other aspects of their work.

Render farms have become an essential part of the 3D modelling pipeline. They have revolutionized the way 3D artists work by providing a cost-effective and efficient solution to the rendering process. In this article, we will explore the benefits of render farms, especially 3DS Max render farms, and how they are used in the video game, film, and architecture industries.

Overview of Render Farms

As a 3D artist, I know how time-consuming it can be to render high-quality images or animations. That’s where render farms come in. A render farm is a cluster of computers that work together to render images or animations quickly and efficiently.

Render farms are commonly used in the video game, film, and architecture industries, where 3D modelling is a crucial part of the production process. By using a render farm, artists can speed up the rendering process and produce high-quality images or animations in a shorter amount of time.

One popular software used in the 3D modelling industry is 3DS Max. A 3DS Max render farm is a cluster of computers specifically designed to render 3DS Max files. With a 3DS Max render farm, artists can render complex scenes with high polygon counts, realistic lighting, and intricate textures without having to worry about long rendering times.

In addition to saving time, render farms also allow artists to work on multiple projects simultaneously. By offloading rendering tasks to a render farm, artists can focus on creating new content, improving their workflow, and meeting tight deadlines.

Overall, render farms are an essential tool for 3D artists in the video game, film, and architecture industries. They provide a cost-effective way to render high-quality images or animations quickly and efficiently, allowing artists to focus on what they do best – creating stunning 3D content.

3DS Max Render Farm Specifics

When it comes to 3D modelling, rendering is an essential process that can take hours or even days to complete. This is where a 3DS Max render farm comes in handy. As someone who has used 3DS Max extensively, I can attest to the benefits of using a render farm to speed up the rendering process.

A 3DS Max render farm is a network of computers that work together to render a 3D model. By distributing the rendering workload across multiple machines, the rendering time is significantly reduced. This is especially useful for large-scale projects that require high-quality renders.

One of the key advantages of using a 3DS Max render farm is the ability to render multiple frames simultaneously. This means that instead of rendering one frame at a time, the render farm can render multiple frames at once, drastically reducing the overall rendering time. In addition, a render farm can handle complex lighting and shading effects, which can be difficult to render on a single machine.

Another benefit of using a 3DS Max render farm is the ability to scale up or down depending on the project’s needs. This means that you can add or remove machines from the network depending on the size of the project. This allows for greater flexibility and cost-effectiveness, as you only pay for the machines you need.

Overall, a 3DS Max render farm is an essential tool for anyone working in the video game, film, or architecture industries. It can significantly reduce rendering times and improve the quality of the final product. If you’re working on a project that requires high-quality renders, I highly recommend considering the use of a 3DS Max render farm.

Render Farms in Video Game Development

As a 3D artist in the video game industry, I understand the importance of render farms in our workflow. Render farms help us to render high-quality images and animations in a shorter amount of time, which is crucial in meeting tight deadlines. In this section, I will discuss the considerations for real-time rendering and the integration of render farms with game engines.

Real-Time Rendering Considerations

Real-time rendering is a critical aspect of video game development. It requires a high level of optimization to maintain a consistent frame rate. Render farms can assist in this process by rendering assets and lighting separately, which can then be imported into the game engine. This helps to reduce the amount of processing power required by the game engine, resulting in smoother gameplay.

Another consideration for real-time rendering is the use of dynamic lighting. Render farms can assist in the pre-calculation of lighting, which can then be integrated into the game engine. This helps to reduce the amount of processing power required by the game engine, resulting in smoother gameplay.

Integration with Game Engines

The integration of render farms with game engines is crucial in maintaining a streamlined workflow. Many game engines, such as Unity and Unreal Engine, have built-in support for render farms. This allows for the seamless transfer of assets between the game engine and the render farm.

Render farms can also assist in the creation of high-quality cinematics and cutscenes. By rendering these separately from the game engine, the quality of the final product can be significantly improved. This helps to create a more immersive experience for the player.

In conclusion, render farms are a crucial component in the video game development process. They assist in the creation of high-quality assets and lighting, as well as the optimization of real-time rendering. The integration of render farms with game engines helps to maintain a streamlined workflow, resulting in a more immersive experience for the player.

Render Farms in the Film Industry

As a 3D artist working in the film industry, I have seen firsthand how important render farms are for creating the stunning visuals that audiences expect. Render farms are a crucial tool for handling the massive amounts of data required to create high-quality 3D models and animations.

High-Resolution Rendering

One of the main benefits of using a render farm in the film industry is the ability to render high-resolution images quickly. With the increasing demand for high-quality visuals in movies, TV shows, and commercials, it’s essential to have a powerful rendering solution that can handle large-scale projects.

Render farms can distribute the rendering workload across multiple machines, allowing artists to render high-resolution images in a fraction of the time it would take on a single computer. This not only speeds up the production process but also ensures that projects are completed on time and within budget.

Special Effects and Animation

In addition to high-resolution rendering, render farms are also essential for creating special effects and animations. From explosions and fire to realistic water and weather effects, special effects are an integral part of modern filmmaking.

Render farms can handle the complex calculations required for creating these effects, allowing artists to focus on the creative aspects of their work. With the ability to render complex scenes quickly, artists can experiment with different lighting, camera angles, and effects without worrying about long render times.

Overall, render farms are a critical tool for 3D artists working in the film industry. By providing the processing power needed to handle large-scale projects and complex effects, render farms allow artists to focus on their creative vision and bring their ideas to life on the big screen.

Render Farms in Architecture

As an architect, I have found render farms to be an indispensable tool for creating high-quality visualizations of my designs. Render farms allow me to render large and complex 3D models quickly and efficiently, which is essential when working on tight deadlines.

Architectural Visualization

One of the key benefits of using a render farm for architectural visualization is the ability to create photorealistic images that accurately represent the design. This is particularly important when presenting designs to clients or stakeholders, as it allows them to visualize the final product in great detail.

Render farms also allow me to experiment with different materials, lighting, and camera angles, which can help me refine the design and make better decisions about the final product. This level of detail and accuracy is essential in the architecture industry, where every detail matters.

Virtual Walkthroughs

Another way that render farms are used in the architecture industry is for creating virtual walkthroughs. These are essentially 3D animations that allow clients to explore the design in a more immersive way.

Virtual walkthroughs can be used to showcase different design options, demonstrate how the space will be used, and provide a more detailed understanding of the design. This can be particularly useful for large and complex projects, where it may be difficult to visualize the final product from 2D plans alone.

Overall, render farms are an essential tool for architects who want to create high-quality visualizations and virtual walkthroughs of their designs. By using a render farm, I can save time, improve accuracy, and create a more immersive experience for my clients.

Technical Aspects of Render Farms

Hardware Components

The hardware components of a render farm are crucial to its performance. The most important component is the CPU, which is responsible for processing the rendering tasks. A render farm may have multiple CPUs, each with multiple cores, to handle large and complex renderings efficiently.

In addition to CPUs, render farms also require a large amount of RAM to store the data and instructions required for rendering. The amount of RAM required depends on the size and complexity of the rendering.

Storage is another important component of a render farm. The render farm must have enough storage capacity to store the 3D models, textures, and other assets required for rendering. The storage must also be fast enough to keep up with the rendering tasks.

Network Infrastructure

The network infrastructure of a render farm is also critical to its performance. A render farm typically consists of multiple computers connected to a network. The network must be fast and reliable to ensure that the rendering tasks are distributed efficiently and completed on time.

Render farms may use a variety of network topologies, including client-server, peer-to-peer, and cloud-based architectures. Each topology has its advantages and disadvantages, and the choice depends on the specific requirements of the rendering project.

Software and Automation

The software and automation tools used in a render farm are essential for managing the rendering tasks efficiently. Render farms use specialized rendering software, such as 3DS Max, to process the rendering tasks.

Automation tools, such as job schedulers and render managers, are used to manage the rendering tasks and distribute them across the network. These tools help to optimize the rendering process and ensure that the tasks are completed on time.

In addition, render farms may use monitoring and reporting tools to track the progress of the rendering tasks and identify any issues that may arise. These tools help to ensure that the rendering process is running smoothly and that the final output is of the highest quality.

Challenges and Solutions in Render Farming

Scalability Issues

One of the major challenges in render farming is scalability. As projects grow in complexity and size, the demand for computing resources increases exponentially. This can lead to long rendering times and potentially missed deadlines. To overcome this challenge, it is important to have a flexible and scalable infrastructure that can handle the workload. One solution is to use cloud-based render farms that can dynamically allocate resources based on demand. This can help to reduce rendering times and improve overall efficiency.

Data Security

Another challenge in render farming is data security. With large amounts of sensitive data being processed, it is important to ensure that the data is protected from unauthorized access and cyber-attacks. To mitigate this risk, it is important to implement strong security measures such as encryption, access controls, and firewalls. It is also important to regularly monitor and audit the system to identify any potential vulnerabilities and address them promptly.

Cost Management

Render farming can be a costly endeavor, especially for smaller studios or independent artists. To manage costs, it is important to carefully plan and budget for the project. This includes estimating the required resources and selecting the most cost-effective solution. It is also important to optimize the rendering process to minimize the amount of time and resources required. This can be achieved through techniques such as distributed rendering and efficient scene management.

In summary, render farming presents several challenges that can impact the efficiency and success of a project. By implementing scalable infrastructure, strong security measures, and cost-effective solutions, these challenges can be mitigated and the rendering process can be optimized for maximum efficiency.

Future of Render Farms

Technological Advancements

As technology continues to advance, the future of render farms looks promising. With the development of new hardware and software, render farms will be able to process more data at faster speeds, allowing for quicker turnaround times and improved efficiency.

One of the most significant technological advancements in recent years is the use of GPU rendering. This technology has revolutionized the way render farms operate, as it allows for faster rendering times and improved quality. As GPU technology continues to improve, we can expect to see even more significant advancements in the future.

Cloud-Based Solutions

Cloud-based solutions like the RANCH are becoming increasingly popular in the world of render farms. This technology allows for greater flexibility, as users can access their render farms from anywhere in the world. Additionally, cloud-based solutions are often more cost-effective than traditional render farms, as users only pay for the resources they need.

As cloud technology continues to improve, we can expect to see even more significant advancements in the world of render farms. Cloud-based solutions will become more accessible and affordable, allowing even small businesses to take advantage of the benefits of render farms.

Sustainability in Rendering

Sustainability is becoming an increasingly important issue in the world of rendering. As the demand for rendering services continues to grow, it is important to consider the environmental impact of these services.

Many render farms are now taking steps to reduce their carbon footprint. This includes using renewable energy sources, such as solar and wind power, and implementing energy-efficient hardware and software. As the importance of sustainability continues to grow, we can expect to see more render farms taking similar steps to reduce their impact on the environment.

In conclusion, the future of 3D render farm is bright. With the continued development of technology, the rise of cloud-based solutions, and a growing focus on sustainability, we can expect to see even more significant advancements in the world of rendering in the years to come.

Volumetric Displays: How was born 3D

Screenless displays that provide 3-D images viewable from all directions continue to undergo development on multiple fronts. But can they find a market?

In the opening scene of the 2003 movie Paycheck, we learn that the protagonist, Michael Jennings, has been tasked with reverse engineering a screen-based 3-D display made by his client’s competitors. The client’s executives are unimpressed—until Jennings pulls the bezel away to reveal a free-standing 3-D image that no longer needs a screen. The chiefs rejoice: “And they said 100 percent market share was impossible!”

Volumetric display market size

The global volumetric display market is segmented by display type into swept volume and display volume; by component into projector, mirror, lens, memory and screen; by technology into digital light processing and liquid crystal Silicon; by end-user into education, healthcare, aerospace, advertisement and others. The global volumetric display market is anticipated to record a CAGR of 32% over the forecast period i.e. 2019-2027.

Unknown to the viewers, the key transformation at work in the scene—the one that made the display so much more compelling—was the transformation of a traditional 3-D image into a volumetric image. Traditional 3-D uses a screen of some sort to converge light to an optical real image point somewhere in front of the screen. In a volumetric display, the “screen” is, in a sense, scattered throughout the image volume itself: light diverges from scattering or emissive point primitives within the volume to form the image in physical space.

Volumetric images possess a physicality that allows them to occupy space, much like the physical object being depicted.

Thus, rather than converging from a limited aperture, light from a volumetric display may instead diverge over very large angles. In fact, by emitting light isotropically, a volumetric image point can be seen from all directions. By turning convergence into divergence at the modulation surface or surfaces of the display, a volumetric system turns traditional 3-D inside-out, to create screenless real images that place no limitations on the viewer’s position. The resulting images possess a unique physicality that allows them to occupy space, in a way very much like the physical object being depicted.

This article offers a look at the main types of volumetric displays, and some recent advances in this unusual 3-D visualization technology. It also explores some efforts at commercialization—and what advances might be necessary to bring these displays into the mainstream.

3-D display families

To understand volumetric displays, we need to place them in the context of the three families of 3-D displays: ray displays, wave displays and point displays. Both ray and wave displays use a screen as a modulating surface. Ray displays, which include lenticular, barrier-line and some coded-aperture systems, form real points made by intersecting rays in space; wave displays, which include holographic displays and nanophotonic phased arrays, form similar points by focusing a wave front. (Some would argue that these families lie at different places on the same spectrum. We would add that you can determine which side of this spectrum you are on by simply asking, “does diffraction work for me or against me as display elements get small?”)

Separate from these first two families is the third group, point displays, which do not converge light from a surface but instead diverge light from a point. This display family has only one member, the volumetric display. Indeed, the definitions of the point display and the volumetric display are essentially synonymous: the display’s scatterers or emitters are co-located with the actual image points.

The primary result of this co-location is that, in the ideal case, the image may be seen from almost any direction. There is no display aperture (screen), and there may be little or no viewing zone restriction. Co-location of the display emitters with the image points also means that the human eye also accommodates readily to the volumetric 3-D image.

Once a scattering surface is dislocated from the image point it forms (such as when light scatters from a remote screen), however, an aperture is immediately formed that places restrictions on the viewer, and the accommodation cues are now no longer perfect, as they are subject to the diffraction limit of the new aperture. Thus, once the co-location condition is violated, the principal benefits of volumetric displays—perfect accommodation, no view zone restriction—start to diminish. Indeed, Curtis Broadbent, a prominent volumetric-display designer, suggests that once co-location is violated, it’s a clue that we are no longer looking at a volumetric display. “The imposition of limitations on the viewer,” Broadbent says, “violates the spirit of volumetric displays.”

Advantages and disadvantages

The point, wave and ray display taxonomy allows the display designer to identify what type of display she is looking at, and what design challenges are likely to beset a given architecture. The co-location of perceived points with their true sources in volumetric displays in particular creates a powerful and practical discriminant, allowing one to group displays that have similar affordances (that is, similar baseline properties that determine how the viewer can interact with the display) and to evaluate borderline cases. Four affordances in particular highlight the advantages and disadvantages of volumetric displays relative to ray and wave displays.

Human eyes accommodate to volumetric image points just as they do to actual material objects, because volumetric image points are material objects—at least for a brief moment.

Accommodation. Human eyes accommodate to volumetric image points just as they do to actual material objects, because volumetric image points are material objects—at least for a brief moment. However, ray and wave displays form optical real image points by the convergence of light. The quality of that point, or point spread function, depends strongly on the size and quality of the aperture that supports it. Is it coherent? Does it present a large numerical aperture? To match the accommodation of a volumetric point, a ray or wave display would have to completely surround the point, converging from all directions to form the image. Only then could the display aperture be prevented from degrading the accommodative effect.

View angle. The supremacy of volumetric displays also shows in their large view angle, which generally comes “for free” in volumetric displays. Wide view angle in ray displays and especially in holographic wave displays, in contrast, comes at the price of tremendous hardware and computational complexity.

Occlusion. On the other side of the ledger, occlusion—the ability of one object in a 3-D scene to partly obscure another—presents a considerable challenge for point/volumetric images. In general, the image point primitive wants to emit isotropically, but to create images with self-occlusion, it must be possible to turn off the point’s emission in some directions. In ray and wave displays, achieving occlusion is a much simpler matter that generally boils down to careful content creation.

Virtual-image formation. A virtual image can be thought of as a window into another world, which may have no mapping on reality, and it likewise presents challenges for volumetric displays. If a display is hanging on a solid brick wall, but the 3-D image shows an open landscape in the background, it may be necessary to create wave fronts or rays that back-cast to points that cannot exist in real space. Given the requirement that volumetric displays have physical scatterers or emitters co-located with image points, virtual images would seem to be fundamentally impossible for volumetric displays.

An array of tiny emitters that acts like a phased array, or even like Huygens sources, might be made to create virtual image points. But such a display would create an aperture (the array boundaries) that would limit the viewable angles of the virtual image point. It would cease to be a volumetric display and instead become a phased-array wave display formed with volumetric hardware. It would thus inherit the affordances, and challenges, of the wave display family at the expense of the advantages of the volumetric-display family.

(Sometimes that tradeoff is desirable. For example, in the late 2000s, Oliver Cossairt and colleagues converted a volumetric display into a multiview ray display, trading away co-location to obtain occlusion cues.)

Volumetric-display types

Volumetric displays encompass three distinct approaches. Swept-volume displays commonly use rotating emissive or reflective screens, including illuminated spinning paddles, spinning LEDs or translating projection surfaces. As an example, the Peritron display uses a phosphor-coated paddle that spins inside a glass chamber under vacuum. An electron beam hitting the paddle creates a point emitting visible light. Steering the electron beam and spinning the paddle creates a volumetric image from the emissive points.

Static-volume displays might form images by upconversion in nonlinear gases or solids or by projecting onto a number of diffusing planes. The Rochester Illumyn, for instance, is a glass chamber filled with heated cesium vapor. A 3-D position within that gas is illuminated with two beams at wavelengths (such as infrared) not visible to the human eye. The two wavelengths combine in the nonlinear material to form visible light that scatters from that position to form an emissive image point; scanning the two beams creates a volumetric image.

A third, relatively young category, free-space displays, operate in air, with no barrier between user and image; these can include free-particle, trapped-particle and plasma emission displays. The first free-space display known to the authors is Ken Perlin’s “Holodust” concept, in which ubiquitous dust motes are identified and then immediately illuminated with a laser to build an image in space. Later, the University of Keio demonstrated a display in which a powerful, pulsed IR laser is focused in air to create a plasma. Scanning the focus through the air draws an image composed of plasma dots. This process has been refined to use femtosecond pulses and a spatial light modulator to focus to multiple points simultaneously. Several displays use heat or fog to modify air so that it can scatter or modulate light.

This year saw the introduction, at Brigham Young University, USA, of another free-space display, the optical-trap display (OTD). An OTD operates by first confining a light-scattering particle in a nearly invisible optical trap. The trap is moved through space, dragging the trapped particle with it. The trapped particle is then illuminated with visible lasers to draw a 3-D image by persistence of vision. The prototype scans particles at roughly 1 to 2 m/s to form very small (1 cm3) video-rate images. These small images can be full-color and possess image definition up to 1600 dpi. Researchers hope to greatly increase the size of images in future prototypes by using multiple particles simultaneously.

In addition to the examples above, the volumetric-display scene includes several borderline cases, which often use volumetric hardware to produce a ray display (or vice versa). For example, the Texas DMD display, commonly called a holographic display, is perhaps better classified as a volumetric display. That’s because the focus of the holographic wave fronts from the DMD focus inside a diffusing liquid, which provides a scattering medium that enlarges the view zone of the display—and in so doing trades away the ability to occlude points. Holographic hardware thus creates a volumetric display, and thereby adopts the advantages and disadvantages of its new display family.

Another borderline example, the Sony Raymodeler, uses a spinning array of LEDs and thus appears superficially similar to swept-volume displays. However, these LEDs are not used as point primitives; instead the array projects a large number of views as a ray display. As such, the display can easily achieve occlusion and can create virtual images, but lacks the perfect accommodation of a volumetric display.

Efforts at commercialization

Despite the bullish forecast of the executives in Paycheck, volumetric displays haven’t exactly captured 100 percent of the 3-D display market. There have, however, been a number of commercial efforts. Two case studies hold particular interest: Actuality Systems’ Perspecta Display, a 10-cm-diameter swept-volume display, and the LightSpace DepthCube, a stacked-LCD static-volume display. Despite the displays’ physical differences, the teams behind them came to similar conclusions at the end of years-long commercialization efforts.

Actuality Systems

Gregg Favalora, the Harvard-educated founder and CTO at Actuality Systems, made his first attempt at a volumetric display in 1988 as a ninth-grader. He would later make volumetric images because he felt that a “floating 3-D image would be visually impressive, and in 1997-2000 seemed so feasible” owing to emerging technologies. Favalora noted the availability of Texas Instruments micromirrors and computational resources to do rendering. He had also identified a way (an aspect of which had been proposed in the 1950s) to project a sharp image onto a spinning disk.

Encouraged by money won in an MIT entrepreneurship competition to build a company, Favalora founded and raised seed funding for Actuality Systems at the turn of the 21st century. Its flagship display, the Perspecta, was capable of images with remarkably high resolution. Perspecta could generate a 100-million-voxel image with off-the-shelf—albeit expensive—parts. The display was marketed to a wide variety of potential customers as a tool for user-interface research, structure-based pharmaceutical design and petroleum exploration, and was assessed in medical visualization. The technology’s high price point, however, constrained the customer base, and Actuality Systems’ assets, such as its valuable patent portfolio, were acquired by Optics for Hire in 2009.

LightSpace Technologies

During the same period, on the other side of the country, Alan Sullivan was building a 100-TW laser at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory. Looking for a new opportunity, he came upon a startup that included, in his words, an “empty room, a sketch on a napkin and more or less a blank check” to develop 3-D displays. Sullivan jumped on board. The following years brought reorganizations and promotions, and Sullivan, now CTO, had shepherded the start-up’s static-volume prototype to a pre-commercial state. Now in 2003, all they needed was a market.

Unfortunately, the search for a market outlived two companies, the second of which, LightSpace Technologies, Sullivan founded himself. Despite the display’s high price—more than US$10,000—there were a number of interested parties. But all made demands that the display could not meet. There was interest from the medical field, but the display needed to be entirely free of artifacts. Slot machine manufacturers loved it, but they needed it to be extremely inexpensive (say, US$50 per unit). The oil industry was keen, but it needed a much larger display for large-group collaborative decision-making. After years of searching, Sullivan thought he might have found a niche market in interventional radiology, but it was deemed too small a market by his investors.

By 2007, Sullivan had reached a state he describes as “total exhaustion” and left LightSpace. Before leaving, he submitted a 200-page document full of suggestions for improvements to the display. The recommendations reportedly all turned out to be good ideas, and recently the LightSpace DepthCube has resurfaced with an improved display.

The similarity between the Actuality and LightSpace commercialization efforts seems to be that, despite excellent technology, success appears to require a dramatically reduced price point, greater size or still greater image quality. It will be interesting to see if the new LightSpace display and the new swept-volume Voxon Photonics VX1 can lower cost and increase affordances enough to gain a market foothold. Also of interest will be the rise of the Rochester rubidium-cesium excited-gas display, which might achieve display diameters of more than a meter, according to one of its inventors, Curtis Broadbent. Free-space displays have also made forays into the commercial sphere, including Burton Aerial in 2011 and a Kickstarter effort launched in 2016 by Jaime-Ruiz Avila.

Killer app wanted for Volumetric Displays

These early commercialization experiences, and an assessment of the features of current and future volumetric displays, prompt the question: What is the “killer app” for volumetric displays? Does there exist an application that only a volumetric display can adequately accomplish? Or could every potential application be done, and done more cheaply, with another display—such as, for example, a head-mounted display?

Notwithstanding the current efforts of AR/VR juggernauts, we believe that the answer to this question is no in at least some cases: When one wants to look someone else in the eye who is remotely located; when you can’t reasonably put glasses on your intended viewer (such as an enemy combatant, or everyone who might pass by your storefront); or when one set of headwear might conflict with another headset used in medical or military applications.

In these scenarios, the materiality of volumetric displays—their presence in space, and the freedom from restrictions on the viewer’s location—makes them an ideal choice. The case for these displays is also strengthened if the imagery is sparse, viewed at interactive distances, or created in concert with other technologies, like holography, with complementary affordances.

The 3-D displays most typically imagined in our popular depictions of the future, in books and in films such as Star Wars and Paycheck, tend to most resemble free-space volumetric displays—in particular, OTDs. These displays have the potential to provide both excellent color and fine detail. However, it is too early to say if this technology will provide a feasible platform for 3-D display, as OTDs still have some significant technical challenges to surmount.

If angular control is achieved, then viewer-customized imagery should not be too far behind.

First, the OTD demonstrations thus far have involved trapping, illuminating and scanning a single particle, and it remains to be shown that several particles can be trapped and illuminated simultaneously in a reliable and robust fashion. If this can be accomplished, however, it’s interesting to envision the new possibilities that a colorful, detailed free-space platform might provide. For example, one might be able to obtain large autostereoscopic 3-D images from small devices—mobile-technology analogs of Princess Leia’s image in Star Wars.

If OTDs could be made to scatter selectively in preferred directions (an even greater challenge than multiple-particle manipulation), it might even be possible to see the first free-space images with self-occlusion. The same directional control could also be used to create an effect that hasn’t previously been much discussed, even in science fiction—that of a viewer-dependent physical image. That is, one could project a volumetric image that would be customized for each individual viewer. If angular control is achieved, then viewer-customized imagery should not be too far behind.

In an era of renewed interest and new possibilities for volumetric displays, it is more important than ever to understand and appreciate their unique place among 3-D technologies—and the technological and commercial breakthroughs that could come in the near future.

How does it compare to Virtual Reality and Augmented Reality?

The biggest difference is the fact that you don’t need to wear a headset. Our technology also enables a unique shared social experience, where people gather around and interact with genuine face to face communication.


References and Resources

  • https://voxon.co/technology-behind-voxon-3d-volumetric-display/
  • B. Blundell and A. Schwartz. Volumetric Three-Dimensional Display Systems (Wiley-IEEE Press, 1999).
  • H. Maeda et al. “All-around display for video avatar in real world,” Proc. 2nd IEEE/ACM Intl. Symp. Mixed Augm. Real. (IEEE Computer Society, 2003).
  • O.S. Cossairt et al. “Occlusion-capable multiview volumetric three-dimensional display,” Appl. Opt. 46, 1244 (2007).
  • T. Yendo et al. “The Seelinder: Cylindrical 3-D display viewable from 360 degrees,” J. Vis. Commun. Img. Rep. 21, 586 (2010).
  • D.E. Smalley et al. “A photophoretic-trap volumetric display,” Nature 553, 486 (2018).

FAQ

What is Optical-trap displays? Optical trap displays (OTD) are an emerging display technology with the ability to create full-color images in air.

Visual Inertial Odometry – definition

Visual Inertial Odometry or VIO is estimating the 3D pose (translation + orientation) of a moving camera relative to its starting position, using visual features. It’s combining visual and inertial measurements. Alternative of technique VIO is Simultaneous localization and mapping (SLAM).

ARKit framework uses Visual Inertial Odometry (VIO) to accurately track the world around it.

3D Character Models: Why Are They Important?

The availability of 3-dimensional designs has paved the way for business people to hit business success. Technology has evolved through the years. Nowadays, it is easy to interact with the audience through creating world-class graphics and animations. If you are running an animation-related business, like you’re promoting video games online, it is apt if you are going to look for a legitimate service provider that can help you in designing professional 3D character models. 

Modeling characters that are 3-dimensional is one of the essential principles you can apply for your video gaming business to flourish dramatically. Of course, the target users (potential market) of your business are looking for engaging and interactive video games. This is through this process where you can bring your business to the next level. So, getting the services of a credible animation outsourcing agency is advised for the purpose of attaining your goals and objectives. 

3D character models are actually tools that modern technology is able to produce. For your business to succeed, you have to showcase your offers. Character modeling has a lot of benefits so long as it is 3D in form. For sure, your business organization can go to the next level. You can hit competitive advantage which is the most important goal you have to achieve. When you are strongly competitive, it means you are going to make your business prosperous.

3D modeling is a process that can enhance videos and pictures. The potential customers want to see picturesque results. There is what we call “magic in 3-dimensional character modeling.” Hence, you have to consider 3D character models if you want your business to really grow and succeed. Push beyond what you expect. This is through this process where you can hit your business objectives.

Using a 3D game character design has been seen as popular these days. As a matter of fact, there has been an increase in the number of people who want to become 3D designers. Why? Because this career is lucrative. 

Why do you need 3D character models? 

The answers to this question are below. 

They are so realistic.

Of course, you want to have a realistic video game design, don’t you? Considering 3D modeling is a good shot for your business to shine and prosper. Showing your design in a realistic fashion is one of the best ways to gain more business opportunities. You have to remember that the video game business is a competitive one. Meaning, there are a lot of companies trying to be on top. Your company is just one of so many animation companies that want to hit success through selling video games. 

To produce realistic Character 3D, all you need is a professional 3-dimensional designer. You need one who can finalize the output based on the needs and clamor of the target users. Be reminded that there are important aspects that should be assessed in order to produce realistic designs.

This is due to this fact why you are advised here to look for a trusted and credible 3D design agency. An agency that is capable of producing photorealistic 3D prototypes. Doing this is a surefire way for your brand to go to the next level.

They have great features.

Another reason why you need a 3D character modeling artist is you can create 3-dimensional character models which have great features. The features of the 3-dimensional designs should be able to captivate and capture the interest of the potential market. Keep in mind that you should always consider numbers when you do any form of business. The bottom line is, you need to assess the number of people to be attracted by your 3D designs. Those designs that are inferior in terms of features and quality should be disregarded. Only converting designs must be included in your 3D project. 

Using 3D modeling software is one of the top solutions you can take to ensure that you can have the right design for the audience. Note that the potential users of your video game are expecting nothing but a highly engaging video game. They want to play a video game that is user-focused, which means a game that is considering the value of UX designs. The implication is that you need to hire an agency that also employs UX designers. This is quite necessary to ensure that you can hit ultimate business success. 

3D models’ quality is impressive. 

Having an astounding output with respect to 3-dimensional models is vital as far as hitting dramatic growth is concerned. The most interesting fact you should know is that you can realize this goal when you have the best 3D animation company on your side. Character modeling is never easy. That is why you have to entrust the entire process to a legitimate service provider. This is through this way where you can have the best results ever.

The synergy of 2D and 3D principles is very important to maximize the endpoint or results. You are investing money because you want to gain more along the way. When 3D modeling is combined with 2D character designing, the output will be superb. Video game designers can attest to this fact. In terms of creative workflow, the quality is unmatched. So, you have to consider having 3D character models designed by world-class 3-dimensional designers. For sure, you can have the results that you ever wanted.

Conclusion

It is about time for you to decide what is best for your business organization. Your video game business will be profitable only if you have the best 3D (as well as 2D) designers. There are a lot of choices in terms of hiring a company today. Choose one that has the tools, resources, and well-equipped designers. Invest in 3D modeling because this is a winning solution. Don’t let your business suffer from extreme trials and challenges. Video game business is profit-making but there is a need for you to focus on the quality of your video game products.

Exit mobile version