[Pigking/CrazyDad] Comics

[Jhony Cash (Trader)]

It seems that PigKing is currently sacrificing quality on the altar of productivity, and the shift to the rectangular format is the primary culprit in this decline. In the world of Daz Studio (Iray), render time isn't just about image size; it’s about the complexity of light. In the original 1:1 square format, the camera was tight on the character, allowing the program to calculate light in a restricted area. This meant the render reached a clean, noise-free state much faster. Now, in the rectangular format, the Iray engine has to calculate light bounces across an entire background. With a demanding weekly deadline, they likely set a time limit for each render, and in a wide landscape, that time simply isn't enough to achieve the same level of sharpness, resulting in washed-out or blurry images.

Furthermore, hardware must match ambition. If their RTX GPUs haven't kept pace with the switch to wide-screen compositions, the problem becomes exponential. To render a landscape with the same pixel density as those iconic close-ups, they would need a farm of high-end cards like the RTX 4090 or 5090. If they are using older hardware to process much heavier scenes, the only way to meet the weekly deadline is to lower the sample quality. This explains why the visual fidelity has plummeted by 50%—they are prioritizing the delivery of a chapter over the perfection of each frame.

There is also a false sense of modernity in the 16:9 format. Many studios believe it’s an evolution because it looks cinematic, but technically, without professional render farms, the 1:1 format is far more efficient. The square format allowed PigKing to deliver elite-level art with standard hardware. The current rectangular format, however, demands elite hardware just to deliver mediocre results.

Ultimately, showcasing a scene in landscape is an appeal for modernity to provide a cinematic feel; however, what this specific audience truly seeks within the context of erotic stories is visual connection. Comparing recent work to the older 1:1 stories, the highly sexy visual appeal of characters like Cinthya and Dr. Brandie was fantastic. Back then, the lack of more explicit sex scenes was perfectly compensated for by brilliantly executed erotic scenes of these stunning characters, featuring skin textures that were almost photographic. Fans would much rather have an impeccable, sharp portrait than a dark, panoramic scene where the main product—the character's beauty—is lost in the background.

 

[Jhony Cash (Trader)]

A lighting test in the morning. It might not look good in some scenes, but in some stories it could turn out cool.View attachment 2406588

---

Teddy, the composition is beautiful and the scenes are very well-detailed; this wide image really brings a cinematic feel. However, the character, who should be the main focus, is ending up with an "AI look" or looking like a simplified 2D drawing. It is a strange contrast: the scenery shines, but the soul of the image is lost.
This happens because, in Daz Studio (Iray), the rectangular format requires an absurd amount of light calculation. To meet the deadline of one delivery per week, the computer ends up "flattening" the skin textures to save time. The result is the loss of Subsurface Scattering—that light that passes through the skin and makes it look real—leaving Dr. Brandie and Cinthya with a plasticized look and no depth. If the hardware isn't top-of-the-line (like an RTX 4090), the renderer applies noise reduction filters that erase pores and details, creating that generic illustration appearance.
Showcasing a scene in landscape is an appeal for modernity to provide a cinematic feel; however, what the audience truly wants in the context of erotic stories—especially when comparing them to the old 1:1 format stories—is that highly sexy visual appeal that was fantastic.
The lack of more explicit sex scenes in the past was completely compensated for by brilliantly executed erotic scenes, featuring stunning characters and nearly photographic skin textures. In the 1:1 format, every pixel was dedicated to their beauty; in the rectangular format, that beauty "melts" and is diluted by the scenery. In my opinion, PigKing should return to its roots. It is better to have an impeccable square portrait with sharp blue eyes and real skin than a wide screen where what truly matters stays in the background.

 

[GHITA]

View attachment 2407768View attachment 2407769View attachment 2407770It seems that PigKing is currently sacrificing quality on the altar of productivity, and the shift to the rectangular format is the primary culprit in this decline. In the world of Daz Studio (Iray), render time isn't just about image size; it’s about the complexity of light. In the original 1:1 square format, the camera was tight on the character, allowing the program to calculate light in a restricted area. This meant the render reached a clean, noise-free state much faster. Now, in the rectangular format, the Iray engine has to calculate light bounces across an entire background. With a demanding weekly deadline, they likely set a time limit for each render, and in a wide landscape, that time simply isn't enough to achieve the same level of sharpness, resulting in washed-out or blurry images.

Furthermore, hardware must match ambition. If their RTX GPUs haven't kept pace with the switch to wide-screen compositions, the problem becomes exponential. To render a landscape with the same pixel density as those iconic close-ups, they would need a farm of high-end cards like the RTX 4090 or 5090. If they are using older hardware to process much heavier scenes, the only way to meet the weekly deadline is to lower the sample quality. This explains why the visual fidelity has plummeted by 50%—they are prioritizing the delivery of a chapter over the perfection of each frame.

There is also a false sense of modernity in the 16:9 format. Many studios believe it’s an evolution because it looks cinematic, but technically, without professional render farms, the 1:1 format is far more efficient. The square format allowed PigKing to deliver elite-level art with standard hardware. The current rectangular format, however, demands elite hardware just to deliver mediocre results.

Ultimately, showcasing a scene in landscape is an appeal for modernity to provide a cinematic feel; however, what this specific audience truly seeks within the context of erotic stories is visual connection. Comparing recent work to the older 1:1 stories, the highly sexy visual appeal of characters like Cinthya and Dr. Brandie was fantastic. Back then, the lack of more explicit sex scenes was perfectly compensated for by brilliantly executed erotic scenes of these stunning characters, featuring skin textures that were almost photographic. Fans would much rather have an impeccable, sharp portrait than a dark, panoramic scene where the main product—the character's beauty—is lost in the background.

Your technical knowledge leaves me speechless, and I mean it.

 

[Jhony Cash (Trader)]

Regardless of the issues involving the 1:1 and 16:9 formats, I noticed a real effort from Juanito Brown to improve the penetration scenes, which are essential for this type of publication. Regardless of the plot in Father in Law at Home Part 68, the rendering—despite hardware limitations—delivered a solid result focused on detail.

A crucial detail I observed was the nature physics: as shown in the photo, the underwater environment must feature an intentional blur (Depth of Field). This is necessary because of the crucial differences between environments: water is much denser than air, which causes light scattering and a loss of contrast. For the separation between environments to look realistic, the surface must remain sharp, while the submerged part needs that blur to simulate liquid density and depth. While the body details can stay sharp to maintain the focus on the erotica, the rest of the submerged environment needs this distortion to separate the liquid medium from the atmosphere above. This physical realism is excellent.

Overall, I really enjoyed JB's work. Congratulations! I can see the effort and dedication, which shows respect for those who admire the artist's work. I hope to see this same technical improvement in Big Black Cock, which is a magnificent piece of work.

 

[GHITA]

View attachment 2408640View attachment 2408642View attachment 2408644Regardless of the issues involving the 1:1 and 16:9 formats, I noticed a real effort from Juanito Brown to improve the penetration scenes, which are essential for this type of publication. Regardless of the plot in Father in Law at Home Part 68, the rendering—despite hardware limitations—delivered a solid result focused on detail.

A crucial detail I observed was the nature physics: as shown in the photo, the underwater environment must feature an intentional blur (Depth of Field). This is necessary because of the crucial differences between environments: water is much denser than air, which causes light scattering and a loss of contrast. For the separation between environments to look realistic, the surface must remain sharp, while the submerged part needs that blur to simulate liquid density and depth. While the body details can stay sharp to maintain the focus on the erotica, the rest of the submerged environment needs this distortion to separate the liquid medium from the atmosphere above. This physical realism is excellent.

Overall, I really enjoyed JB's work. Congratulations! I can see the effort and dedication, which shows respect for those who admire the artist's work. I hope to see this same technical improvement in Big Black Cock, which is a magnificent piece of work.

@Juanito Brown Oficial has talent and audacity... I've always really liked his work, and if I'm sometimes critical, it's also for that reason.

 

[Rian]

I seriously don't understand the business choices of Pigking content creators.
Are these new "what to do, Suky tu, The limit" are more popular and profitable than old fan favourite ones like family sins, mom's help, dr brandie, margarethe, forbidden desire etc???

 

[GHITA]

@Juanito Brown Oficial 's latest creation... enjoy ! By the way, it seems that neither JB or Teddy are posting their publication "calendars" anymore.

 

[Nippur]

@Juanito Brown Oficial 's latest creation... enjoy ! By the way, it seems that neither JB or Teddy are posting their publication "calendars" anymore.


View attachment 2410644

I have never understood this zaga, but at least in the last chapter the character of Kayla the black woman was appealing as a positive note in a forgettable christmas chapter.

 

[Jhony Cash (Trader)]

Regarding the final render quality, we need to have an open discussion about the technical feasibility of the 16:9 format. If PigKing and its renderers do not have a workstation or a GPU cluster (such as the RTX 4090/5090 series) prepared for the high-level performance that the Iray engine demands for wide scenes, it is necessary to question whether all this effort is worth delivering a result that falls below the studio's true potential.

This is not about plugins; although they are up to date, the issue is raw processing power. It's distressing to see JB's immense effort to deliver the best possible work; his dedication to immersing the reader in the plot is admirable. I am not questioning the erotic imagery or the framing—they are good and serve their purpose. The problem isn't talent; it’s the hardware. I want to clarify if I previously used the word "mediocre"; I did so as a critique of the final finish because, after analyzing this in my spare time, I’ve reached a clear conclusion: the results would be 50% superior with the same equipment if the approach remained in the 1:1 standard.

Rendering in 16:9 with professional quality requires a sampling density that standard consumer hardware simply cannot deliver within a weekly cycle. What we see is hardware incompatible with the intended sophistication: noisy images, flattened textures, and a lack of convergence. JB spends precious time on limited machinery, resulting in a visually fragile output compared to what he is truly capable of.

Just look at the gap in VRAM and CUDA Cores. An entry-level GPU (like an RTX 3060) has about 12GB of VRAM, which allows for a decent render in 1:1. However, for elite 16:9, an RTX 4090 with 24GB of VRAM and 16,000 CUDA Cores is a basic necessity. Without it, Iray makes "invisible cuts," simplifying light and reducing texture precision to avoid crashing the memory. It’s like trying to run a marathon with weights on your feet. If PigKing wants to maintain an elite standard, investing in a Multi-GPU setup (RTX 4090/5090) is the only technical path—or a strategic return to the 1:1 format to ensure the visual robustness that established the studio’s reputation.

 

[GHITA]

@Jhony Cash (Trader) ... okay but Yet when you look for example at an LF 73 or an NI 12, the image resolution, the skin texture, or the fur volume are perfect... and yet we're clearly in 16:9 ????

 

[Jhony Cash (Trader)]

@Jhony Cash (Trader) ... okay but Yet when you look for example at an LF 73 or an NI 12, the image resolution, the skin texture, or the fur volume are perfect... and yet we're clearly in 16:9 ????

To claim that the resolution in LF 73 or NI 12 is perfect just because it's in 16:9 is to misunderstand how the Iray engine actually operates. There is a massive difference between a 'clean' image and a 'detailed' one.

1. The Illusion of Post-Production:While plugins are up to date and provide a superficial sense of quality, a closer look reveals that the true exuberance is gone. These studios use sharpening filters and AI upscaling to mask the fact that the raw render never fully converged. In the 1:1 format, Cinthya’s beauty was organic; in the current 16:9, she looks like a 'porcelain doll' with no pores, where the skin texture has been smoothed out by Denoisers to hide the noise.
2. The Failure of Night Scenes:The clearest indicator of hardware limitations is how dark scenes are handled. In recent chapters, characters are left completely in the dark; you can't see anything. Why? Because rendering low light accurately in 16:9 requires thousands of extra samples for Iray to calculate light bounces. Lacking the hardware (RTX 4090/5090) to process this in a week, they simply crush the blacks. In the old 1:1, even in the dark, you could see the skin's subsurface scattering and micro-occlusion in the eyes. Today, it’s just a black blur.
3. The Isabella Case and Visual Decay:Isabella is the perfect example: she was created in 16:9 and therefore never had the visual impact that Cinthya or Dr. Brandie had during their prime. She has no 'quality benchmark.' Today’s Cinthya doesn't even come close to the 1:1 version. There has been at least a 50% drop in visual radiance. In the square format, every pixel was dedicated to expression and photographic texture; in the rectangular format, hardware is wasted rendering walls and furniture while the main character's detail 'melts' away.
4. Technical Conclusion:Don't be fooled by 'cinematic' framing. Hair volume and smooth textures are easy to fake with post-processing. What is difficult—and what has been lost—is physical skin fidelity under light, something only 1:1 allows with the current hardware. If PigKing wants 16:9, they need real firepower; otherwise, they will keep delivering a 'generic beauty' that doesn't do justice to the legacy of their main characters."

 

[GHITA]

To claim that the resolution in LF 73 or NI 12 is perfect just because it's in 16:9 is to misunderstand how the Iray engine actually operates. There is a massive difference between a 'clean' image and a 'detailed' one.

1. The Illusion of Post-Production:While plugins are up to date and provide a superficial sense of quality, a closer look reveals that the true exuberance is gone. These studios use sharpening filters and AI upscaling to mask the fact that the raw render never fully converged. In the 1:1 format, Cinthya’s beauty was organic; in the current 16:9, she looks like a 'porcelain doll' with no pores, where the skin texture has been smoothed out by Denoisers to hide the noise.
2. The Failure of Night Scenes:The clearest indicator of hardware limitations is how dark scenes are handled. In recent chapters, characters are left completely in the dark; you can't see anything. Why? Because rendering low light accurately in 16:9 requires thousands of extra samples for Iray to calculate light bounces. Lacking the hardware (RTX 4090/5090) to process this in a week, they simply crush the blacks. In the old 1:1, even in the dark, you could see the skin's subsurface scattering and micro-occlusion in the eyes. Today, it’s just a black blur.
3. The Isabella Case and Visual Decay:Isabella is the perfect example: she was created in 16:9 and therefore never had the visual impact that Cinthya or Dr. Brandie had during their prime. She has no 'quality benchmark.' Today’s Cinthya doesn't even come close to the 1:1 version. There has been at least a 50% drop in visual radiance. In the square format, every pixel was dedicated to expression and photographic texture; in the rectangular format, hardware is wasted rendering walls and furniture while the main character's detail 'melts' away.
4. Technical Conclusion:Don't be fooled by 'cinematic' framing. Hair volume and smooth textures are easy to fake with post-processing. What is difficult—and what has been lost—is physical skin fidelity under light, something only 1:1 allows with the current hardware. If PigKing wants 16:9, they need real firepower; otherwise, they will keep delivering a 'generic beauty' that doesn't do justice to the legacy of their main characters."

Understand

 

[Jhony Cash (Trader)]

 

[Jhony Cash (Trader)]

The deep attachment and ongoing discussions we see today are motivated precisely by the legacy of the 1:1 format, which delivered total and organic immersion. In the original standard, the composition was focused; the tight framing allowed the rendering engine to dedicate every processing resource to anatomy and facial expressions. No one questioned the quality of the sex scenes or penetration because the close-up focus guaranteed a pixel density and sharpness that compensated for any technical limitations.

The proof that the format is the issue lies in the transition that occurred around LF43. At that moment, the decline in visual fidelity began to be masked by the 'novelty' of cinematic framing, but the essence was lost. I am not claiming that 1:1 was perfect 100% of the time—occasionally, to meet deadlines, we saw Cinthya with a 'rubber doll' or plasticized skin look due to a lack of light convergence. However, in the vast majority of chapters, the quality was elite, and it was this technical consistency that built PigKing’s global reputation.

My analysis is rooted in hardware efficiency: returning to the 1:1 format is not a step backward, but a strategic rescue. Technically, it allows for:

1. Recovery of Subsurface Scattering (SSS): Restoring the transparency and realism to the skin of Cinthya and Dr. Brandie, eliminating the generic AI look.
2. Sample Rate Optimization: With a smaller render area, current hardware can reach full convergence (zero noise) in less time, ensuring absolute sharpness without the need for aggressive post-production filters.
3. Increased Patron Conversion: High-fidelity visual beauty and erotic appeal are what sustain this business model. Keeping the majority of supporters satisfied with superior aesthetics has a direct, positive impact on community growth.

In short, PigKing must decide between the illusion of a technically deficient '16:9 cinema' or returning to the excellence of the 1:1 format, where the beauty of the characters—the true core product—becomes magnificent and unbeatable once again."

 

[Jhony Cash (Trader)]

 

[Jhony Cash (Trader)]

X-ray effect

 

[Jhony Cash (Trader)]

Magnificent rendering work, with skin pores clearly visible and highly detailed hair, without that artificial porcelain doll look.

 

[Jhony Cash (Trader)]

File on MEGA

mega.nz

 

[Jhony Cash (Trader)]

Extended.

1.19 MB file on MEGA

mega.nz

 

[mymanrohit53]

Extended.

1.19 MB file on MEGA

mega.nz

How did you do this?