3 added 1 character in body
source | link

The idea of phsicallyphysically based rendering is to reach a closer approximation of how light behaves in the real world and use this model to generate a 2d2D impression of a 3d3D scene. This is basically what we are doing since the invention of 3d3D graphics, just with more simplified models of optics. So yes, PBR is mostly a buzzword.

A perfect approximation of real-world physics of light would require to simulate every single photon accurately (and don't forget about the wave/particle duality of photons which is required to accurately simulate some optical phenomenons you encounter in real-life). That's the only way to create a truly photorealistic impression of any scene possible in real-life. But doing this in real-time would greatly exceed the abilities of todays computers by several orders of magnitude. That means you will always need to take some shortcuts and simplifications to get a reasonable compromise between image quality and rendering performance. How to make this compromise is up to each rendering pipeline.

The idea of phsically based rendering is to reach a closer approximation of how light behaves in the real world and use this model to generate a 2d impression of a 3d scene. This is basically what we are doing since the invention of 3d graphics, just with more simplified models of optics. So yes, PBR is mostly a buzzword.

A perfect approximation of real-world physics of light would require to simulate every single photon accurately (and don't forget about the wave/particle duality of photons which is required to accurately simulate some optical phenomenons you encounter in real-life). That's the only way to create a truly photorealistic impression of any scene possible in real-life. But doing this in real-time would greatly exceed the abilities of todays computers by several orders of magnitude. That means you will always need to take some shortcuts and simplifications to get a reasonable compromise between image quality and rendering performance. How to make this compromise is up to each rendering pipeline.

The idea of physically based rendering is to reach a closer approximation of how light behaves in the real world and use this model to generate a 2D impression of a 3D scene. This is basically what we are doing since the invention of 3D graphics, just with more simplified models of optics. So yes, PBR is mostly a buzzword.

A perfect approximation of real-world physics of light would require to simulate every single photon accurately (and don't forget about the wave/particle duality of photons which is required to accurately simulate some optical phenomenons you encounter in real-life). That's the only way to create a truly photorealistic impression of any scene possible in real-life. But doing this in real-time would greatly exceed the abilities of todays computers by several orders of magnitude. That means you will always need to take some shortcuts and simplifications to get a reasonable compromise between image quality and rendering performance. How to make this compromise is up to each rendering pipeline.

2 added 18 characters in body
source | link

The idea of phsically based rendering is to reach a closer approximation of how light behaves in the real world and use this model to generate a 2d impression of a 3d scene. This is basically what we are doing since the invention of 3d graphics, just with more simplified models of optics. So yes, PBR is mostly a buzzword.

A perfect approximation of real-world physics of light would require to simulate every single photon accurately (and don't forget about the wave/particle duality of photons which is required to accurately simulate some optical phenomenons you encounter in real-life). That's the only way to create a truly photorealistic impression of any givenany scene possible in real-life. But doing this in real-time would greatly exceed the abilities of todays computers by several orders of magnitude. That means you will always need to take some shortcuts and simplifications to get a reasonable compromise between image quality and rendering performance. How to make this compromise is up to each graphic enginerendering pipeline.

The idea of phsically based rendering is to reach a closer approximation of how light behaves in the real world and use this model to generate a 2d impression of a 3d scene. This is basically what we are doing since the invention of 3d graphics, just with more simplified models of optics. So yes, PBR is mostly a buzzword.

A perfect approximation of real-world physics of light would require to simulate every single photon accurately (and don't forget about the wave/particle duality of photons which is required to accurately simulate some optical phenomenons you encounter in real-life). That's the only way to create a truly photorealistic impression of any given scene. But doing this in real-time would greatly exceed the abilities of todays computers by several orders of magnitude. That means you will always need to take some shortcuts and simplifications to get a reasonable compromise between image quality and rendering performance. How to make this compromise is up to each graphic engine.

The idea of phsically based rendering is to reach a closer approximation of how light behaves in the real world and use this model to generate a 2d impression of a 3d scene. This is basically what we are doing since the invention of 3d graphics, just with more simplified models of optics. So yes, PBR is mostly a buzzword.

A perfect approximation of real-world physics of light would require to simulate every single photon accurately (and don't forget about the wave/particle duality of photons which is required to accurately simulate some optical phenomenons you encounter in real-life). That's the only way to create a truly photorealistic impression of any scene possible in real-life. But doing this in real-time would greatly exceed the abilities of todays computers by several orders of magnitude. That means you will always need to take some shortcuts and simplifications to get a reasonable compromise between image quality and rendering performance. How to make this compromise is up to each rendering pipeline.

1
source | link

The idea of phsically based rendering is to reach a closer approximation of how light behaves in the real world and use this model to generate a 2d impression of a 3d scene. This is basically what we are doing since the invention of 3d graphics, just with more simplified models of optics. So yes, PBR is mostly a buzzword.

A perfect approximation of real-world physics of light would require to simulate every single photon accurately (and don't forget about the wave/particle duality of photons which is required to accurately simulate some optical phenomenons you encounter in real-life). That's the only way to create a truly photorealistic impression of any given scene. But doing this in real-time would greatly exceed the abilities of todays computers by several orders of magnitude. That means you will always need to take some shortcuts and simplifications to get a reasonable compromise between image quality and rendering performance. How to make this compromise is up to each graphic engine.