Unreal Engine 5 And Reality.. Can You Spot The Difference?
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 24 июн 2020
- *NEW Buy software directly at PredCaliber.com! Win 10 Pro x64 Retail Key now only $12,50! www.predcaliber.com/software
We have seen already what UE5 can do, and also the fantastic Quixel high resolution textures that UE5 can handle pretty well in this game engine. These high resolution textures are already used by artists in various 3d modelling programs. Can you see the difference between a render and a real life picture? Check it out in this video!
All credits go to the Original authors!
Join our Discord!
/ discord 
Игры
**NEW* Buy software directly at PredCaliber.com! Win 10 Pro x64 Retail Key now only $12,50! www.predcaliber.com/software
We have seen already what UE5 can do, and also the fantastic Quixel high resolution textures that UE5 can handle pretty well in this game engine. These high resolution textures are already used by artists in various 3d modelling programs. Can you see the difference between a render and a real life picture? Check it out in this video!
All credits go to the Original authors!
Join our Discord!
discord.gg/KzwxFkj
What is the name of that song
Ok time out....WHY do we not have video realistic games now in 2020? Is it because humans are so hard to make look real?
@@joshnic6639 rendering a single professional image can take days for your PC to render a single scene depending on the complexity and your hardware. Now try to do 60 frames per second with thousands of physics inputs.
Are you sure those rooms are real pictures, you know companies use renders for there rooms, theres no dirt or anything.
there are some moments where you can instantly subconsciously identify fake: if details are super loose or super precise like really smooth non-glossy surfaces and shadows or subsurface scattering with very distinct edges or extremely accurate reflections. all that stuff that give out a computer's precision. the only scenario where render can trick your mind is a non-close-up scenes with tons of small details stacked close to each other: grass plains, dense trees or super granular asphalt surface.
For the most part the only reason I could tell some of the real pictures were real was because they were too blurry! Unreal renders literally look better than photography
i find the quixel stuff looks to smooth some kind of painted sometimes.
Yeah they look perfect shape, without any crack
It was the reflections for me they were too perfect, having background in photography it was a lot easier than I expected but a few definitely got me
Yeah, you get some graininess and fields out of focal point.
That was my method as well. It's rare that a digital artist remembers to add imperfections at the level of render, as in, imperfections contextual to photography or human error.
The image at 3:47 really threw me for this reason. The flash lighting and reflection in the back window, the way the blanket is ruffled, the slight out of focus, the not quite right composition/angle. Whoever made this should get massive props, I was completely fooled.
Damn bro... now I’m convinced that we’re an unreal engine 6 rendering
Technically speaking there’s no way the universe can computer generated as it would have to break the laws of physics that is of course if laws of physics are present in world which is simulating us
@@themesongs2783 *i don't think this comment was supposed to be taken seriously*
@@themesongs2783 The laws of physics as you know it would only be the laws of the simulation.
Unreal engine 7 = dimension above reality?
@@IlIllI0098 it is 13.8 billon years for us not for simulation because you can increase the rate of moving of time in simulation
I did not fail that much, but I have to admit that there are many pictures that I guessed that were render not because looking artificial, but because the composition of the scene, just too clean or ordered, or a background that is too beautiful to be true.
Does it mean games are going to look this impresive?
@@albertodelrio5966 in low settings they're not
@@dinobuenaflor581 in low setting it would look like when you're not wearing glasses
@@albertodelrio5966 it means they could look that impressive, but its up to the developer in how much effort they put into optimizing the game to perform well vs the quality of the rendering. MGS5 on the Fox Engine is an extremely well optimized game, for example, and Fallout 4, on the Creation Engine, is not, at all. This is why when you look at and play MGS5, it consistently runs fps while still looking stunning, while Fallout 4 can constantly crash and bug out even though all the textures in the game look 10 years old. The only reason why this is is because Bethesda put a fraction of the work into Fallout compared to Konami with Metal Gear, and by re-using dated assets from the creation engine, Bethesda can pump out games faster. Quality vs quantity. The unreal engine is simply a platform for the developer to start from, how incredible the game they create from it depends on how incredible they want it to be.
@@albertodelrio5966 in the future, definitely
3:46 I was so convinced that this was a real photo. It’s even shot as if it was a photo from an iPhone. You can see the “camera flash” in the reflection of the window. Multiple light sources, depth of field, contact shadows. Fooled me.
I mean, he doesn't include sources, so how do we know whether it's actually a photo or not?
I'm pretty certain this is a 3D photo scan of a room that person owns. Which greatly helps with the realism, and is kind of cheating from an artistic perspective. In my opinion.
It’s CUZZ it’s so shabby, I mean look at the walls and lights
Same lol
@@sutton4791 Cheating? All games will have this integration you sound like a fool.
Hmm, we've come a long way since Pong.
@@s_and6040 I played pong on atari
Do you really think so?
Someone should make pong in unreal engine 5
@@lastword8783 got it
@@nealsteinbeck9017 no he’s just saying that to try and trick you
Show me a realtime river, or crashing waves against rocks on the sea and I'll tell you wether its real or not.
Not today hahaha
That has yet to be done.
Even better real-time simulated explosions
whether
Yea static models are easier to render and they can just use ray tracing for realistic shadow and lighting. I need to see some dynamic stuff then I will be impressed. Like the one shown in PS5 demo.
3:48 is the one that truly got me, amazing attention to detail.
That's the first one I missed, too.
yup
Yeah that was just incredible.
It even has a flash in the reflection
True
Real looks like renders, renders look like real. I sucked at this test.
Is mostly luck, don,t worry, at 720p resolución is hard to distinguish, I guess that in 4k it would be a lot easier
I failed way too much.
Well you represent huge majority of people that watched this video. I got 3-4 wrong but if the DAMNED pictures weren't 480p I would guess all of em
@@purenatur3 I doubt
There are still some imperfections and too clean 3D scenes, but I failed on some pictures, so we are close to reality.
I don't think that's due to the engine itself, though. It's mainly due to the people who modeled those scenes and made them a little too clean, but even then they still look great.
Honestly i think some of the pictures are renders or at least edited, they look way to perfect and unrealistic in the materialsz
Okay buddy, witcher 4 would be realy epic game based on this.
Witcher doesn't use Unreal Engine
LOL,"Really Epic Game".
@@krystof7059 And I hope they'll never switch. Too many games using Unreal these days. We need some competition and variety.
@@krystof7059 They dont have to use UE4 to use Quixel.
CapnTates what’s wrong with that?
Blender Guru once said that 75% of an IKEA catalogue are indeed renders
Yeah, those two interior shots that look "too good", where he said they're photos - I think they're renders if he got them from some catalog.
5 years later : real life vs unreal engine vs unity
Real life 100%
Do you all still believe "Real Life" is really real? °-°
@@616Metalhead616 Are you Real?
@@kapilborah6647 How do you think i can answer this question?
I'm searching for the "truth" since my youth... ^^
Since i am 15 years old i have the feeling that everything repeats... now I'm 30 years and still have so many deja vus and forebodings which get stronger and stronger. ^^
@@kapilborah6647 I am here, i do have a physical body but, am i real?
I dunno., maybe not, maybe yes. ^^
Watching this, I unironically said to myself "This is unreal.".
Looks incredible.
Lmaoooo
i've been a hobbyist on 3d for about 20+ years. and I was confident that I would distinguish fake for real. But as you said. surprisingly many errors. Freaky how far we have come and where it will lead eventually. :) thanks for the vid.
same boat exactly
Finaly!
Honestly, i feel genuinly excited to see what will come soon. I hope there soon will be open world designs with those concepts!
yes. but then you should have the best components in your pc. a pic rendering is not compareable with a game scene.
I don’t think u understand the amount of work that has to be done, these renders take hours, maybe a day or two, of course a image is gonna look more realistic than a live game, I highly doubt that, soon, open worlds will be THIS detailed
@@kunai8566 Yes, but at least i think a few steps further than today general standard would not be totaly unrealistic. Older games often used pre rendered scenes for things like parts of background scenarios, etc.
@@kunai8566 I think if photonic computing can be accomplished we'll have these sooner than you think
@@kunai8566 dont be surprised.
This just proves how much better real life looks with our own eyes compared to a photo.
Lmao I was like "haha its like meme but it's actualy obvious which is real and which isn't"...
I was so wrong... I failed so many times that I just couldn't tell, I was just guessing which is real :/
Thats insane tech
The dead giveaway was the clouds. The cloud tech just hasn’t been upgraded enough. still can tell it’s a skybox.
Can we get the sources for the renders? I would really like to check some of them out!
All of then are from the Quixel FB Group, or quixel artists FB group. it’s hard to find the original authors or at least links to their media pages if they have any. But there is where you will find awesome work!
Wow these renders are incredible!
I got that surreal feeling when you don't know what's real and what's not; it's kinda awesome how far tech has come
I immediately had tears. The ESO music in the background!
I've seen some fairly photorealistic scenes in UE4 before (in real time). We should be able to see similar stuff on next gen consoles by this point. Obviously not on a ps4 but definitely next gen consoles.
ps5
If you can put that kind of graphics into VR and also have characters look good and move smooth as butter, then you can really enjoy this technology to the max.
I feel that there still is a bit of work regarding the shadows as well, as for me that was a huge factor figuring out which is which.
Sorry, but i do not have VR to copy the real world, that would be a waste of the VR potential.
@@Hoto74 yup real world is shit
My criteria was if the horizon looked too sharp and clean, it was probably a render. Also, some renders looked better than real life. I could sort tell by the textures in the renders too. They have shadows and all but still sort of look flat. It’s more noticeable on brick textures.
I want a space exploration game like No Man's Sky, but with the photoreal look of quixel and UE5.
I got 3 wrong, the one that appeared to be in an attic truly surprised. It looked incredibly real. The rest were just on the edge of the uncanny valley.
Am I right to assume that this level of detail will unlikely be seen in games in the foreseeable future despite the capability?
I’m no expert but who knows, I mean did you check out the UE5 ps5 demo? Some of that shit looks as realistic and detailed as this running of a ps5
you would be wrong seeing the unreal engine demos running on the series x proves to me were already nearly there.
Some of these renders blew my mind. I could not tell. Even the real ones could be simulated. I would have been most impressed if the mountains were rendered.
4:12 is actually really easy to guess because on the wood tiles that are holding up the table plate you can actually see the same texture being used on two tiles just flipped upside down.
It's impressive I had a hard time making the difference, but I was still guessing right most of the time. We're not quite there yet.
The clouds were a major give away. It's one of the few things we have yet to successfully simulate or imitate without getting severe performance hits.
The best imitation seems to be from some clever shaders but they are still not close enough.
Also, coarse wood textures seem to look off. At least from what some of these renders presented...
Yep, clouds and sky in general don't look right in any render
I feel that the real pictures tend to have "better" saturation than the rendered ones.
the way i tell render apart from reality is that in render you dont have stains or misc dirt renders are perfectly clean which feels weird to the eye
I thought it would be indistinguishable but there's just that one slight difference that makes render's unable to compare to real life images.
we should start playing gta VI irl then.....
You can "play" it already then
America play it already
Some of the indoor photos were very hard to distinguish, but most of the outdoor ones are pretty obvious, it's so hard to recreate the imperfections in nature.
The level of detail in in real life photos along with sfumato really blends life together wonderfully. If unreal finds a way to blend geometry with fog, and if they revamp their 3d scans to take in even more detail we can truly see a reawakening.
How I found out at 1:50 is that the board under the couch is not straight, that's rare when attaching the planks in the wall.
Now all they need to do is find a way to rasterize in real time at decent framerates!
Im gonna freeze myself, and wake up when unreal engine 7 comes out
good bye
Damn sorry to tell you too late that in the future they will skip unreal 7 and jump straight to unreal 8.
Bro can't you tell? We already been living in Unreal Engine 7. We just have to wait for the simulation to catch up with real life
I mean... You can go outside and experience true beauty right now...
@@YourPalHDee nah fam im gonna die
@@YourPalHDee Yep and we do that everyday. Soon we will be able to do it in virtual worlds as well.
one of the ways you can tell its not a real picture is by the plants. if you look close enough at the leaves (especially 4:52) they dont look quite right, i dont know if its just these specific plant models but the light doesnt seem to be properly interacting with the leaf textures. i know we have plastic/wax/cloth plants for decorative use but they dont look like fake plant textures either
@3:28 WOOOOOW! 🤩🤩🤩 That person nailed the perspective and DOF!
As impressive as this is, character models and animations are not gonna be on par with this quality making it clearly obvious that they dont match (your brain will tolerate this less than 2D sprites).
Even before Unreal engine 3 came out (right as unreal tournament 3 was just showing the first screenshots), an EPIC representative (I dont remember who) was interviewed and asked about when can we expect photo realism in games.
Im going off memory so dont quote me on this but he said something along the lines of "Just facial muscle animations would take 20 CPU cores to run properly".
This is why The last of us 1 (recorded facial animations for cutscenes) looks great even with weaker graphics while even the most advanced ones look weird (again, real time outside cutscenes).
But yeah... I am looking forward to this.
Or maybe just create fps with metal zombies, just saying
This in Vr is gonna be the real thing
For an even more interesting comparison real 4k or 8k pictures so that you can't see the blurriness. As someone else said, it's the photo quality that tells you that it's a real picture and also the quixel renders are too perfect, they need a lot more variety in some of those shots, especially nature.
Will this engine be implemented in new TwinMotion?
Looks great :)
There will be time when virtual reality looks so real, that you don't want live in real life any more.
I don't know if that would good for the progression of humanity
Moo Cow almost everything we’ve done throughout the years has not been good for the progression of humanity but we still do it anyway😂
All of our science and tech is converging on one thing: VR Sex
Jane Moon 🤫
never wanted to live in real life in the first place
Awesome stuff, now we should concentrate on Physics!
It has been ignored for far too long.
Hi Brother.
Can you tell me how to import green screen camera tracking into unreal sequencer via maya3d.
It’s very very helpful to me.
The pictures with a view of the sky were easy for me. Rendered skies almost always lack depth and come across looking like wallpaper. The indoor scenes were a little more difficult for me unless there was something like an obvious weird light source or errors in perspective.
It's neat to see how far CGI has come since I first got into computers back in the mid-'90s.
Errors in perspective? How? It's calculated from 3D, so there can't be any errors in perspective. Light could be weird, ok. But that's mostly only because properties from materials or the light itself aren't set probably to fit the real thing. There you may can recognise.
On s'y trompe mais elles sont toutes bien photoshoppées quand même, c'est leur gros point commun.
with UE 5, reality looks uglier than fiction
How did you render these on UE 5?
Well as a photographer I got most of them right .
Real pictures look quite different while the render has rich contrast etc ..some sotta cinematic look
I am kind of doubting 3:47 is a render. Could we get sources for these pictures?
Okay but you should make a distinction between real-time renders and offline renders.
cool concept for a vid, cheers for sharing!
OMG!.. this is wonderful!!.. just wanna start to doing my own game.. but first things first... where do I turn on my computer?.
Can still tell most of the time. The problem with comparing photo's is that people photoshop the hell out of stuff to the point that it looks TOO perfect, which is also the thing that gives away the quixel renders. Its when they look TOO clean and TOO perfect that you can tell it probably isn't real.
Also, its usually much easier to tell the difference in a video comparison rather than photo comparison, so it would be interesting to see how video renders can stand up to the real deal too.
2:40 you can only tell it's a render because there are no reflections in the glass cabinets closest to the camera. Also the flowers lack contrast.
from where is the first song?? sounds really familiar to me.
What is the game footage shown at the beginning?
The renders that pass are the ones in which the shot is carefully set up to obscure tells. This probably says something about the skills of the artists and technicians setting up the Quixel renders!
Some of these tells include:
1) Seams on bad composites. Some of the outlines are very obvious.
2) Imposter cutouts in the background, ie. things that should have depth cues but are flat.
3a) Natural (not digital) film grain. Grains in actual film processing have fibers with direction. They aren't single pixels.
3b) Characteristic path tracing grain; it has a "sandy" appearance and lacks the the directional grains of actual film. The Quixel renders tell immediately with things like flat white walls.
3c) Highly overexposed areas are a common way to obscure lighting tells above (or just avoid needing to bother with showing a part of the scene).
Oh there's a 3a part 2: Just remembered one of the photos also shows a defocusing/vignette that is more refined than what state of the art rendering tends to show. It works in conjunction with the film grain and sets this apart from renders.
Song starting at 1:09 made me nostalgic for ESO, listening to it outside of the game felt very different.
What's the photo of the house in the background? Is that a real place?
3:48
This one blew my mind. I was so sure it was a real picture but damn..
Interesting, the give away in all the exteriors is the background/distance. Seems like we just don't have areal perspective down yet. There's something blue and blurry about the far distance in a real photo that just doesn't look right in the renders. Interiors, though--I guessed about half of them wrong.
Im really curious how many glitches i will have the ik system
It's all nice these videos, but when do the first games appear with UE5 for PC?
I could tell almost all of them apart being a CGI artist myself. But there were 2 pictures that I couldn't and was really blown away by the quality!
Can anyone please tell me what is the name of the game at the beginning ?
Amazing! The ones I was able to spot easily were the rendered ones that are too good to be real. And this is a phenomenon game/movie producers would have to be aware of in the future: realism and best available features are not the same. And are becoming more and more separate.
I can definitely tell when it's outside with the volumetric clouds, but had a harder time on some interiors
I was able to tell between the 2 options with probably 65% of those renders. I think the ones that contained foliage/plant life were easier to pick out, especially closer to camera. Other than that, the technology has come a long way indeed! Looking forward to seeing what they'll bring to the table next
i got 2 wrong - the hammock chair and the bunk bed. the latter i got a bit cocky and saw the flash on the window which was a nice touch which i didnt check properly
4:22 are you sure it's CG? can you give a link to the original publication of this work?
I’m a photographer and I spot the difference pretty easily, the renders tend to be too smooth. While the real pixels were either blurry or out of focus a little bit. Also real pictures had washed out colors in greens and blacks. The renders were very saturated. Also some lighting errors in the renders were able to be seen.
Thank you for your precious advices !!! Would you like to check "The book of the dead", from unity'channel youtube for me please ???
I could see if it was real or not from the sky, in the render the clouds were too, idk, fancy (?)
I got a few of them wrong and it was because the render looked too neat / too put together and in some cases sharper.
But otherwise, they were indistinguishable.
it's an amazing achievement from the Unreal team and I feel that within 4-5 years with these graphics and with VR improvements, we could have games that are so immersive that people actually start confusing their life with the adventure they had in the game. Meaning people might actually start believing that what they played in a game and what they're playing in real life are both the same and they can choose which 'life' they want to live.
What's the system requirements?
These renders are unbelievably convincing, which might have to do with the amount of small details and imperfections they add to make it seem realistic.
But you can not forget this is a static render that is taken in a very specific position. Im going to be really impressed if an engine could redner something dynamically in real time that looks this convincing
After the first picture I cried and screamed “I don’t even know anymore”
So, well. Image in 3:39 wasn't made in UE5 but in Blender and Cycles render engine.
How far we have come. I remember back when was a kid and I used to think Playstation 1 graphics looked like real life!
What are the machine specs running this demo ? What are optimum pc specs for running UT engine 5 ?
rtx2060 or rx5600 ...
ps5 specs
the gpu can produce 10teraflop(almost as fast as rtx2070ti-2080 non TI)
the cpu is ryzen 7 3700x but with less L3 cache
at 4:10 - where was this picture taken ?
I'm new to game engines and am busy learning UE5. I thought it would be easy to spot the rendered pictures, but I got at least a third of them wrong. I can't believe that one of the elephants on the African savanna is a render! It's basically perfect.
After a few pictures you can devide them easily, the quixel one's always have something abstract in them .. from the looks tho, amazing
On the ones where I was able to tell the difference it was pretty much always due to some artistic choice that was made with the scene, not any fault of the rendering engine (i.e., lack of atmospheric effects, light placement, etc..)
3:46-4:10 was the only part in the teat where I was wrong. The render looks real because of the flash relfection in the window, and the framing or composition of the picture just scream render. Its atmosphere looks artifical but it surprisingly wasn’t.
To differentiate real images from UE 5 render, there is usually a simple method, you only have to focus on areas that have living things like plants but also things like the stuffed bunny that is usually lit in the render bottle or looks like plastic.
But the renders reveal some nois in the light calculation.
What is not shown here because it is a photo to render comparison is true moves image where the factor of living objects and lighting is even more noticeable. Nevertheless, the render images are impressive as far as the future is concerned. Real images also reveal themselves through the way they are made and the choice of detail, which is usually not as random as one might think.
The best way to see it is a single tree in the morning gray.
The slight blurring but also the placement of the sun and tree are deliberately chosen.
But some pictures are only so old that they pop out. ^^
These look fantastic. I got more correct than not, but it was only the tiny little details that tipped me off like the ceiling looking a little too smooth, or the shadows in the rug in the bedroom not quite interacting with the floor in a natural way. Some of those nature ones were impossible to tell though!
What's the game's name please?
I can't listen to the video & it isn't noticed in the subtittles or comments....
Rendered pictures look too perfect and too sharp. But the thing is that some "real" pictures went through photoshop and look like a rendered picture. That sometimes make it difficult to spot the difference. Still it's amazing what is possible to do nowadays. Games/movies will look amazing.
I feel like in renders and photography people tend to go for crisp contrasty lighting situations instead of working with more subtle soft scenes that we actually see with our eyes. I was more likely to say that a picture looked like a render because it looked like it had a filter on, than a render looked like a picture. I think people forget that reality can be extremely subtle
What is the name of the game showed at the starting of the video in which the girl is the main character??
This is just insane! I could barely tell the difference. But what is crazy is the progression. We can almost know for certain that in a relatively short period of time, no one would be able to tell the difference!
Quixel megascan assets are real life pictures so isn't that just basically a comparison between real life pictures and real life picture composites?
In a way, you are right. But on the other hand, you can use those composites in a game (or movie or any other virtual environment crafted by man), so it's fair, I guess.