• @Rodeo@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      12
      edit-2
      9 months ago

      We already achieved photorealistic rendering a decade ago, and we can do it in real time now. Graphics aren’t going to get much better any more. This is why 1) a wider variety of art styles has become popular, and 2) people clamor about VR being the “next step”.

      • @Reddit_Is_Trash@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        39 months ago

        Lighting still has a ways to go. We got very good at faking lighting to look super realistic, but there’s always improvements to be made.

        To me, the best part about raytracing is that it doesn’t rely on what’s being rendered, you can see realistic reflections of what’s behind you

        • @Rodeo@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          29 months ago

          No, we literally have photorealistic rendering. It might not look real at all times but the math is true to the real world physics. That’s literally what physically based rendering is.

          The limitations in real time rendering are hardware limitations now, not software. But for regular applications, PBR literally simulates individual photons. It doesn’t have a ways to go. It is already true to life and physically accurate.

          But of course, even the best tools in the world can be misused by a bad artist.

    • @Marketsupreme@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      29 months ago

      Difference is we can all tell there’s a difference in graphics and can laugh about it. In 40 years who knows. Graphics already look so good now there’s only so much further they can go

      • ℛ𝒶𝓋ℯ𝓃
        link
        fedilink
        39 months ago

        I think “full-dive” VR (think the matrix or ready player one) in 40 years might be possible with the right breakthroughs in neuroscience. I hope I live to see the day, that tech will change the way we live big time…