Experiments / 20 Oct 2026 · 67 min read
Fable 5.1 in Blender: when Max looked worse than Extra
Max looked substantially worse than Extra on some tasks. Across thirteen Blender briefs, Fable also felt less consistent to me than the Opus batch.

I gave Fable 5.1 thirteen Blender briefs at five recorded settings: Low, Mid, High, Extra and Max. The tasks cover reference reconstruction, procedural assets, mechanisms, simulation, character work and photorealistic production. The archive contains 65 first-version deliveries, plus ten later material revisions for the commercial and cabin.
What surprised me most was how much worse Max looked than Extra on some tasks. The tree is the clearest example: Extra builds a coherent little scene, while Max turns the trunk into a fan of thick wooden tubes. Going up a setting made that result substantially worse.
The jump from Extra to Max could make the image worse
The tree makes the regression especially obvious. Extra’s trunk, roots, canopy and lighting form a readable scene. Max adds a dense crown above a set of thick tubular branches that meet at almost the same height. The branch structure is a major failure against the supplied reference, and the leafless process image shows it before the foliage hides the upper joints.
The temple and cabin show a related trade-off. Max adds substantial architecture or foreground detail, while Extra has a more cohesive atmosphere in the reviewed views. On those images, extra construction does not translate into a more convincing scene.
Test setup and comparability
The production reports identify Blender 5.2.2 LTS and describe Python-generated scenes. Mid began with cloud CPU work and later used the Mac GPU. Other runs also overlap builds and background renders. Their clock durations therefore do not form a controlled speed comparison.
Low, Mid, High, Extra and Max are the archived folder labels. The original backend requests were not independently verified. Mid is the original folder label for the middle setting.
Production notes describe helpers reused across tasks, and this was not a set of randomized repeated trials. Additional iterations, accumulated session context and changing render conditions limit attribution to the effort setting alone.
What the independent inspection checked
All 65 selected v1 scenes opened in a separate Blender process, with automatic file scripts disabled and without saving over the originals. The resource inspection found no unresolved external image paths in those scenes. It did not establish complete font, linked-library or simulation-cache portability.
All 65 archived task prompts match the master briefs byte for byte. The selected v1 video files decoded at the expected frame rates and lengths. The visual review covers the delivered stills and video samples taken once per second across each full clip, including v2. Commercial stills were opened individually; other images were checked in labelled overviews. This was not a full-resolution check of every image or an every-frame check for flicker and contact errors. Twenty targeted checks cover roof width, blossom opening, headset explosion and preservation of the original attic camera. Other controls, complete collision behavior, physics handoffs and deformation across every pose remain outside the completed checks.
Scene design, reference matching and correction
Task 1 — Tree and swing: recreating a supplied image
The reference fixes the broad oak silhouette, thick trunk, exposed roots, swing placement and irregular meadow base. The opposite camera tests whether the recreation has real depth. Adding leaves is only useful if the composition still matches.
Original prompt — Task 1
TREE AND SWING — REFERENCE RECREATION Use the attached tree-swing-reference.png as the visual source of truth. Recreate it as an editable three-dimensional Blender scene. Match the full oak-tree silhouette, spreading canopy, thick branching trunk, exposed roots and the wooden swing suspended to the right by two ropes. Reproduce the irregular raised meadow base, curving stepping-stone path, weathered fence, flowerpot, mossy rocks, grass and small white/yellow flowers. Keep swing attachment points plausible and the seat clear of the trunk and ground. Match the warm afternoon lighting, beige studio background, elevated three-quarter camera, framing and balance of the reference. Include the entire canopy and terrain with a clear margin. Preserve believable bark, rope, leaf, wood, stone and earth materials. Aim for the reference's detailed, crafted 3D appearance. Match broad foliage clusters and flower distribution rather than every individual leaf. Procedural scattering and instancing are encouraged. Build real depth and geometry; do not project the reference onto objects or use it as a background. Infer unseen sides conservatively. Animation is not required. DELIVERABLES - tree-swing.blend - A 1600 x 1600 PNG render matching the reference camera. - A second PNG from the opposite three-quarter angle to demonstrate full 3D construction. - README as described below. GENERAL REQUIREMENTS Work in Blender and deliver an actual editable 3D scene, not just instructions or concept art. You may use Python to build the scene. Use your own geometry and procedural materials; do not download finished models or use generated images as substitutes for geometry. Keep objects, materials, collections and controls meaningfully named. Pack any required resources and include any simulation caches beside the file using relative paths. State the Blender version used. Inspect rendered output and fix obvious problems before delivering. Include a short README with how to open/play/use the result, the main controls and any incomplete requirements. Report limitations honestly. Prioritize a coherent finished result over excessive hidden detail.
Start with Extra’s trunk and exposed roots. The branching supports a broad crown, while the swing has room beside it. Now look at Max without the leaves: several thick branches split at almost the same height and keep much the same width. They make a fan of wooden tubes.
Extra is still stylised, with a curling side branch and repeated grass, but its larger shape holds together. Max needs the branching rebuilt. Covering the junctions with more leaves cannot change where those branches divide. This is the clearest case of Max going backwards from Extra.
Low keeps broad foliage blobs, Mid bunches them into cauliflower-like clusters, and High grows a peaked crown. Those changes still miss the broad oak silhouette fixed by the reference.
Task 8 — Sakura temple: composing an environment
This brief gives creative freedom over layout and light while requiring a Buddhist temple hall, an architectural entrance gate, a walkable path and a coherent courtyard. Main, entrance and overhead views are separate deliverables, so the scene has to work beyond a single camera.
Original prompt — Task 8
SAKURA TEMPLE — ENVIRONMENT DESIGN WITH CREATIVE FREEDOM Create an original stylized Japanese Buddhist temple courtyard in Blender. This test evaluates your environment design, composition, materials and lighting. You have creative freedom over layout, architectural details, season-related storytelling, camera placement and time of day, within the constraints below. SCOPE Build a compact environment approximately 20 x 20 m, with a temple hall around 7 x 6 m as the main architectural feature. Include a roofed wooden entrance gate, a coherent walkable stone path leading toward the hall, two to four flowering sakura trees, at least two stone lanterns and a small planted or mossy garden area. Give the temple a raised wooden platform, visible steps, timber structural elements and a layered tiled roof with curved eaves. The entrance gate should be an architectural temple gate rather than a freestanding Shinto torii. This is an original fictional place, not a reconstruction of a real temple. ART DIRECTION Use a handcrafted stylized 3D animated-film appearance: appealing simplified forms, enough modeled detail to reward closer viewing, subtle surface variation and a harmonious palette. Sakura blossoms should provide soft pink accents against wood, stone and greenery. Choose a lighting setup that supports a clear mood and makes the main architecture readable. Avoid flat unlit colors, excessive bloom and excessive depth of field. CREATIVE FREEDOM Decide the courtyard layout, whether it is level or terraced, the precise architectural silhouette, arrangement of trees, weather and time of day. You may add a few purposeful supporting elements, such as a stone basin, wooden bench, fallen petals or a small stream, but do not turn the scene into a crowded prop collection. Give the viewer a clear visual route from entrance toward the temple and a distinct focal point. No characters, signage or text are required. Do not copy an existing film scene. TECHNICAL REQUIREMENTS Build actual three-dimensional architecture and vegetation. Repeated tiles, blossoms and foliage may use procedural instancing. Use coherent scale, plausible load-bearing connections, continuous stairs and paths, and convincing contact with the ground. Avoid floating lanterns, trees clipping through roofs and roofs with open accidental gaps. Simplify distant context so most effort goes into the courtyard. Organize terrain, architecture, foliage, props, lights and cameras in separate collections. PRESENTATION Create one carefully composed main camera view showing the courtyard's visual story, a second view from near the entrance, and an elevated overview that exposes the layout. All three should be intentional rendered views of the same scene. Animation is not required. Additional animation must not replace the still-image deliverables or distract from environment quality. DELIVERABLES - sakura-temple.blend. - Three 1920 x 1080 PNGs: main composition, entrance view and elevated overview. - README.txt explaining your chosen mood, layout and main design decisions in a short paragraph, plus technical notes and limitations. GENERAL REQUIREMENTS Create the actual editable Blender project, not only a plan or code listing. Python automation is allowed. Build your own geometry and procedural materials; do not download finished models or substitute generated images for 3D geometry. Use meaningful names and organized collections. Pack required resources, and provide any baked caches using relative paths. State the Blender version and any required add-ons in README.txt. Do not assume paid or separately installed tools are available. Inspect the rendered result and the saved project. Fix obvious defects before delivery. Include a short README.txt describing how to open and use the file, controls, implementation choices, checks performed and honest limitations. Do not claim that an export or simulation was validated unless it was actually checked. Prioritize a complete coherent result over unnecessary detail.
Low establishes the courtyard but fills it with large polygonal blossom clusters and simple construction. Mid adds stairs and timber detail. High has finer blossoms and a readable facade, although its light is very even. Extra produces stronger depth through warm light, shadows and foreground framing; the lantern takes up a large portion of the main view. Max has the most substantial temple silhouette and a clear layered roof, with a cooler, more even presentation. These are different compositions, and neither the number of roof parts nor the number of blossoms settles which image works best.
Low's pink blobs and toy-like base miss the setting. High hides the temple behind foliage and piles pink forms on the steps. Extra has warmer, more coherent staging, but a foreground lantern blocks part of the building. Max crops the architecture and flattens the light. Extra wins this comparison without becoming faultless.
Task 11 — Attic: improving someone else’s scene
The task starts with an unfinished astronomer’s workspace. The model must inspect the file, diagnose problems and improve the actual scene. Main_Camera must keep its position, rotation and focal length, making before/after comparisons meaningful.
Original prompt — Task 11
ATTIC ASTRONOMER WORKSPACE - IMPROVEMENT BRIEF You receive two files: - flawed-attic-starter.blend: an editable Blender scene (created in Blender 5.2, Cycles, metric units) - flawed-attic-before.png: a 1600 x 1000 render from the file's saved camera "Main_Camera" The scene is an unfinished draft. Your job is to inspect it and turn it into a convincing, polished result. INTENDED RESULT A cozy small attic workspace belonging to a hobby astronomer, at blue hour. The room is about 4 x 3 m with a ceiling sloping from 2.8 m to 1.6 m and a circular window. Beneath the window stands a wooden desk with a chair, a small brass telescope on a tabletop tripod, an articulated desk lamp, books and a ceramic mug. A bookshelf, a potted plant and a rug complete the room. Through the window a simple twilight sky with distant hill silhouettes is visible. The intended atmosphere is warm lamplight against cool evening light, with readable materials, believable construction and an inviting composition. The scene should hold up both in the final render and when someone opens the file and works with it. WHAT TO DO 1. Inspect the provided .blend file itself, not only the before-render. 2. Decide what keeps the draft from the intended result and improve it directly in the file. Prioritise and choose methods on your own judgement. 3. Keep the file practical: separate, editable objects with meaningful names; self-contained procedural materials (no downloaded assets, external images or add-on dependencies); sensible collections; reasonable render time. 4. Keep the existing object "Main_Camera" at its current position, rotation and lens so the before/after comparison stays valid. If you think a different framing works better, add it as a second camera instead of changing Main_Camera. DELIVERABLES - flawed-attic-improved.blend - the improved, editable scene - flawed-attic-after.png - 1600 x 1000 render from the original Main_Camera, for direct comparison with flawed-attic-before.png - optional: flawed-attic-after-alt-camera.png - 1600 x 1000 render from your additional camera, if you created one - a short change log: what you found, what you changed, what you deliberately left as is, and anything you could not verify Render the after-image from the saved .blend you deliver, so the image and the file match.
The independent check confirms that all five Fable edits preserve Main_Camera’s transform and lens. The renders differ substantially in mood: Low is bright and readable, Mid concentrates more light on the desk, and High strengthens the twilight and stars while leaving dark areas. Extra is the coolest, darkest interpretation, with reduced detail contrast. Max balances the desk and window more evenly and adds a wall graphic. Preserving the camera confirms one requirement. It does not prove that every planted scene defect was recognized or fixed.
Low and Mid put the chair in front of the desk and make the floor strongly striped. High leaves a harsh hot spot, while Extra stays dark and cool. Max balances desk and window better. The room itself was supplied, so that improvement belongs to arrangement and lighting rather than newly built assets.
Reusable procedural assets
Task 2 — Roof generator: reusable geometry
One Geometry Nodes asset must create all roof examples through exposed parameters. The brief asks for actual overlapping tiles, partial boundary tiles, ridge caps and sensible chimney clearances. Reusability requires a live response to controls, not separately rebuilt display models.
Original prompt — Task 2
REUSABLE PROCEDURAL ROOFTOP — GEOMETRY NODES Build an editable reusable Geometry Nodes asset in Blender that generates a pitched gable roof suitable for a stylized countryside cottage. The same node group must generate every example by changing exposed parameters; do not manually rebuild example roofs. GEOMETRY Include two roof slopes, overlapping rows of terracotta tiles, ridge caps, roof-edge trim, configurable eaves and optional chimneys. Tiles must be actual geometry or geometry instances rather than only a texture. Correctly orient tiles on each slope, support partial tiles at boundaries and cover the ridge without obvious holes. Some deliberate tile overlap is expected. Fit each chimney to the roof surface and omit or trim tiles where its shaft passes through. Add a small flashing collar around each chimney base. EXPOSE THESE LABELED CONTROLS - Building Width: 3–12 m, perpendicular to ridge. - Building Length: 3–16 m, parallel to ridge. - Roof Pitch: 20–55 degrees. - Eave Overhang: 0.15–0.60 m. - Tile Width: 0.18–0.40 m. - Tile Length: 0.28–0.55 m. - Weathering: 0–1, affecting restrained tile color variation and small surface irregularity without breaking roof coverage. - Chimney Count: integer 0–3. - Random Seed: integer, reproducibly controlling variation and valid chimney placement. - Tile Material and Trim Material inputs. Document units and any necessary input clamping. Use safe internal tile overlap. Prevent chimney overlap by distributing them along valid roof locations, and clamp their size if necessary on small roofs. REUSABILITY Changing width, length or tile size must recalculate row and column counts and edge treatment. Preserve believable tile dimensions instead of stretching a fixed roof mesh. Changing pitch must correctly update tile orientation, ridge and chimney intersections. The seed must reproduce the same result for identical settings. Use instancing where suitable for performance. Keep the node group organized into labeled frames and mark the reusable object as an asset. DEMONSTRATE THREE PRESETS 1. Small cottage: width 4 m, length 5 m, pitch 45 degrees, overhang 0.30 m, tile width 0.24 m, tile length 0.36 m, weathering 0.25, 1 chimney, seed 11. 2. Long farmhouse: width 7 m, length 12 m, pitch 30 degrees, overhang 0.45 m, tile width 0.30 m, tile length 0.45 m, weathering 0.65, 3 chimneys, seed 22. 3. Broad clean roof: width 10 m, length 8 m, pitch 25 degrees, overhang 0.25 m, tile width 0.36 m, tile length 0.50 m, weathering 0.05, 0 chimneys, seed 33. Mount examples on simple neutral building volumes for presentation. Arrange them so all three roofs can be inspected in one studio render, with consistent scale and lighting. VALIDATION Check all three presets and a small/steep and large/shallow combination within the specified ranges. Verify roof coverage, ridge alignment, stable chimney placement and deterministic seeds. State any parameter combinations that do not work instead of hiding them. DELIVERABLES - rooftop-generator.blend containing the reusable asset and three live procedural example objects sharing the same node group. - A 1920 x 1080 overview PNG and one roof-detail PNG. - README explaining controls, how to reuse the asset and any limitations. GENERAL REQUIREMENTS Work in Blender and deliver an actual editable 3D scene, not just instructions or concept art. You may use Python to build the scene. Use your own geometry and procedural materials; do not download finished models or use generated images as substitutes for geometry. Keep objects, materials, collections and controls meaningfully named. Pack any required resources and include any simulation caches beside the file using relative paths. State the Blender version used. Inspect rendered output and fix obvious problems before delivering. Include a short README with how to open/play/use the result, the main controls and any incomplete requirements. Report limitations honestly. Prioritize a coherent finished result over excessive hidden detail.
Follow High’s tile edges around the chimney. They lift into sharp lips, leaving deep repeated slots. In Max, the curved rows are easier to read, but the flashing ends in a broad jagged edge over those curves.
The flashing should make the change from chimney to roof believable. Here it often reads as a separate plate resting over the tiling. More orderly repetition is an improvement, but these close views show where the reusable asset still needs construction work.
At all five settings, changing Building Width changed the evaluated geometry, and restoring it restored the sampled result. Only that width control was varied; the test does not certify every pitch, chimney count or boundary combination.
Task 9 — Galaxy: procedural structure and visual coherence
The galaxy needs a readable core, spiral arms, dust lanes, reproducible controls and a camera arc revealing disc thickness. The brief explicitly calls it an artistic visualization rather than a scientific gravitational simulation.
Original prompt — Task 9
PROCEDURAL SPIRAL GALAXY — ANIMATED 3D VISUALIZATION Create an impressive editable spiral-galaxy visualization in Blender, with a 12-second animation at 24 fps (frames 1–288). This is a procedural visual simulation with artistically compressed time and scale, NOT a scientific gravitational N-body benchmark. Clearly state this distinction in the README. VISUAL TARGET Build a luminous central bulge, four sweeping spiral arms, a thin stellar disk with finite thickness, darker dusty lanes and a restrained halo of scattered stars. Use warm ivory/gold near the core, cooler white/blue concentrations in the arms and subtle pink nebula accents. Keep individual stars subordinate to the galactic structure. The center should be bright without clipping into a featureless white blob. The scene is set against dark space with sparse distant background stars. PROCEDURAL STRUCTURE Use Geometry Nodes, a scripted generator, or a combination. Generate at least 20,000 efficiently represented stellar points/instances rather than thousands of separately managed mesh objects. Provide density falloff with radius, finite disk thickness, random scatter around the spiral arms and a reproducible random seed. Include dust that actually affects the rendered appearance using suitable geometry/materials or a manageable volume. A flat galaxy texture, image plane, background painting or pre-rendered movie is not acceptable. EXPOSE CLEARLY LABELED CONTROLS - Random Seed. - Star Count (usable range at least 20,000–100,000). - Galaxy Radius in artistic scene units. - Arm Count (2–6). - Arm Winding/Tightness. - Disk Thickness. - Core Size and Core Brightness. - Dust Amount. - Rotation Speed. Describe units, intended ranges and how to regenerate if the setup uses a script. At minimum, a user must be able to change seed, arm count and radius without editing source code. Other controls may live in one clearly identified settings panel or node group. ANIMATION Create subtle differential rotation: inner and outer stellar populations should not all rotate as one rigid object. Use a radius-dependent angular speed with a smooth bounded value near the core. Keep the total motion restrained enough that recognizable spiral structure survives the short demonstration; explain that this is an artistic approximation. Avoid discontinuities, frame-to-frame random reseeding and flickering point distribution. The camera begins at an elevated oblique angle with the whole galaxy visible, then makes a smooth modest arc and lowers toward a shallower angle so the disk thickness becomes evident. Finish on a strong wide composition. Keep the galaxy within the frame, with no cuts or sudden jumps. Retain enough depth to reveal that this is genuinely a 3D scene. TECHNICAL AND QUALITY CHECKS Use efficient instancing/point rendering and controlled emission. Inspect several rendered frames for noise, flicker, blown highlights and disappearing stars. Verify that identical seeds produce identical geometry. Demonstrate a second seed and a two-arm configuration in additional still renders, then restore the main four-arm setup in the delivered scene. Save any required animation caches. Do not describe aesthetic orbit motion as physically validated astrophysics. DELIVERABLES - procedural-galaxy.blend with editable generator, controls, animation and camera. - A 1920 x 1080 main hero PNG. - Two additional PNGs demonstrating a second seed and a two-arm configuration. - A complete 12-second animation preview at minimum 1280 x 720, MP4 or numbered PNG sequence. - README.txt explaining controls, generation method, artistic motion model, performance choices and limitations. GENERAL REQUIREMENTS Create the actual editable Blender project, not only a plan or code listing. Python automation is allowed. Build your own geometry and procedural materials; do not download finished models or substitute generated images for 3D geometry. Use meaningful names and organized collections. Pack required resources, and provide any baked caches using relative paths. State the Blender version and any required add-ons in README.txt. Do not assume paid or separately installed tools are available. Inspect the rendered result and the saved project. Fix obvious defects before delivery. Include a short README.txt describing how to open and use the file, controls, implementation choices, checks performed and honest limitations. Do not claim that an export or simulation was validated unless it was actually checked. Prioritize a complete coherent result over unnecessary detail.
Low produces a restrained recognizable spiral. Mid makes the arms clearer but clips the bright core into a broad white patch. High is the visible regression: large opaque grey and pink discs cover the stellar structure, and the two-arm still keeps the same problem. Extra restores clear arms, though its bright core and regular ring-like patterns feel graphic. Max offers the most coherent warm core, cooler arms and finite disc in this Fable set. The animation samples show the changing camera angle; they do not establish scientific accuracy or independently validate every regeneration control.
High's opaque gray discs stay in view as the galaxy rotates. Mid is flat and Extra reads more like a white spiral graphic. Max restores a readable core, arms and disc. Max is a clear improvement over High.
Animated mechanisms and presentation
Task 3 — Pocket planetarium: a staged mechanical reveal
The pocket device must open, deploy its mechanism and present an illuminated planetary display in a twelve-second sequence. The reveal, optics, control behavior and camera framing all contribute to the result.
Original prompt — Task 3
POCKET PLANETARIUM — PRODUCT ANIMATION Create an original miniature folding planetarium in Blender and present it in a polished 12-second product animation at 24 fps (frames 1–288). DESIGN The closed device is approximately 12 cm across: a rounded hexagonal midnight-blue metal housing with restrained brushed-brass trim, a visible lid seam and one small power button. It rests on a dark matte tabletop. Make the mechanism understandable: a hinged lid opens backward, three short support feet unfold from separate lower recesses, and a compact projector lens rises vertically from the center. All moving parts remain mechanically attached with visible hinges or guides. Leave clearance for the complete movement; the lid must not obstruct the lens or the display. Above the lens, create a fictional luminous miniature solar-system display about 30 cm wide: one warm glowing central star, four distinct planets and thin orbital paths. Give one outer planet rings. This floating display is an intentional science-fiction visual effect, not a claim of a physically possible projector or an accurate astronomical simulation. Keep the device itself mechanically coherent. Orbital periods and planet sizes can be artistically compressed; avoid collisions. Planets must be 3D objects visible from changing camera angles. ANIMATION Frames 1–48: establish the closed device, then open the lid and unfold its support feet with controlled ease-in/ease-out motion. Frames 49–96: raise the lens, illuminate the button and bring the star and orbital display into view gradually. Frames 97–240: planets orbit at distinct speeds while the camera makes a restrained 35-degree arc around the product. Include gentle axial rotation and subtle emissive detail without overwhelming glare. Frames 241–288: settle on a clean hero composition with the entire device and solar system visible; orbital motion continues. LOOK Premium imaginative industrial design, navy enamel, brushed brass, dark glass and restrained cyan/amber light. Use a warm key light, cool edge light and a dark blue studio background. Reflections should describe the surfaces clearly. No branding or text overlays. Avoid gratuitous gears, pipes or floating mechanical parts. TECHNICAL REQUIREMENTS Use a clear parent/constraint hierarchy and editable animation. Keep hinges at actual pivot points. Expose a master display-intensity control and a master orbit-speed control. Model and animate real geometry; do not use a flat video or image for the solar system. DELIVERABLES - pocket-planetarium.blend with animation, camera, lights and materials. - A 1920 x 1080 hero PNG. - The complete 12-second preview at a minimum of 1280 x 720, as MP4 or a numbered PNG sequence. - README as described below. GENERAL REQUIREMENTS Work in Blender and deliver an actual editable 3D scene, not just instructions or concept art. You may use Python to build the scene. Use your own geometry and procedural materials; do not download finished models or use generated images as substitutes for geometry. Keep objects, materials, collections and controls meaningfully named. Pack any required resources and include any simulation caches beside the file using relative paths. State the Blender version used. Inspect rendered output and fix obvious problems before delivering. Include a short README with how to open/play/use the result, the main controls and any incomplete requirements. Report limitations honestly. Prioritize a coherent finished result over excessive hidden detail.
Watch Mid’s lid before looking at the planets. Around 1–1.5 seconds, the blue lid drops through the top of the base as it opens. Only its upper portion remains above the surface, with the gold hinge pieces moving with it. That motion visibly breaks the lid’s fit to the base.
High gives a much clearer separation between lid and base in the same part of its opening. Mid also loses its oversized orbits beyond the frame later on. Extra and Max have their own lid crops. The complete device has to stay readable while its parts move; the attractive fully open still cannot show whether that happened.
Task 5 — Blossom lamp: opening geometry and material finish
The lamp combines moving petals, mechanical linkage, a usable opening control and a convincing light source. The open and closed states must both form a deliberate product design.
Original prompt — Task 5
MECHANICAL BLOSSOM LAMP — PRODUCT ANIMATION Create an original functional-looking tabletop blossom lamp in Blender and a polished 12-second product animation at 24 fps (frames 1–288). DESIGN The lamp is approximately 35 cm tall with a stable circular weighted base, a short curved stem and a flower-shaped head. Use six broad rounded metal petals around a fixed frosted-glass central light. Petal exteriors are deep muted green enamel; interiors are warm brushed brass. Base and stem are dark satin metal. Include a discreet power cord exiting the rear of the base and a small physical switch on top of the base. Each petal is attached at its lower end to a visible hinge around the central hub. All six petals open outward through approximately 55 degrees from their closed position, revealing the luminous glass center. Give each petal a short visible linkage connecting it to a shared actuator collar sliding along the stem axis near the head. Coordinate collar, linkage and hinge motion so rods remain attached throughout. Design spacing so petals never intersect one another, the bulb or the stem. Closed petals form a loose protective bud around the glass with small intentional gaps; do not force impossible interlocking geometry. ANIMATION Frames 1–48: show the closed unlit lamp, with a gentle camera approach. Frames 49–72: the switch moves and the central light begins to warm up. Frames 73–168: the actuator collar moves and the six petals open smoothly together; the central light increases gradually. Frames 169–240: hold the open blossom while the camera arcs about 30 degrees to reveal the mechanism and interior surfaces. Frames 241–288: finish on a steady hero composition, fully open and warmly illuminated. LOOK Elegant botanical product design with believable manufacture, subtle bevels and restrained surface variation. Warm ivory studio surroundings, soft shadows and readable metal reflections. Let the lamp cast actual light onto nearby surfaces. No overexposure, text overlays or decorative mechanisms without a function. TECHNICAL REQUIREMENTS Use editable geometry and an organized rig. Expose one clearly named Bloom control that drives petal opening and the actuator linkage, plus a separate Light Intensity control. Place all hinge pivots correctly. Keyframed mechanical motion is appropriate; a physics simulation is not required. DELIVERABLES - blossom-lamp.blend with complete animation. - Two 1920 x 1080 PNGs showing the closed and fully open lamp. - The complete 12-second preview at a minimum of 1280 x 720, as MP4 or numbered PNG sequence. - README as described below. GENERAL REQUIREMENTS Work in Blender and deliver an actual editable 3D scene, not just instructions or concept art. You may use Python to build the scene. Use your own geometry and procedural materials; do not download finished models or use generated images as substitutes for geometry. Keep objects, materials, collections and controls meaningfully named. Pack any required resources and include any simulation caches beside the file using relative paths. State the Blender version used. Inspect rendered output and fix obvious problems before delivering. Include a short README with how to open/play/use the result, the main controls and any incomplete requirements. Report limitations honestly. Prioritize a coherent finished result over excessive hidden detail.
All five main opening controls produced five distinct sampled geometry states. The videos also show the petals opening. Low uses thick green petals and a rougher overall form. Mid is slimmer but pale against its background. High makes the linkage and material separation clearer, with tight framing in the open pose. Extra has a coherent cream, green and gold design with an appealing closed silhouette. Max gives a particularly readable rod mechanism. This test confirms a geometric response to the opening control; it does not independently measure emitted light or certify that every linkage stays collision-free between the sampled values.
Low's petals look swollen, and its base leaves the frame late in the animation. High cuts off the closed head and much of the stem during opening. Extra and Max make the movement easier to follow. That's a useful improvement, without proving the linkage could be built.
Task 10 — VR headset: separation and reassembly
The headset brief requires distinct internally coherent components, readable separation and a return to the same assembled design. Parts need plausible places in the enclosure. It is a fictional concept, without a claim of validated optics or electronics.
Original prompt — Task 10
VR HEADSET — EXPLODED VIEW AND REASSEMBLY Create an original fictional standalone VR headset in Blender and present it in a polished 15-second exploded-view product animation at 24 fps, frames 1–360. Build the actual editable 3D scene and animation, not just a concept image or instructions. DESIGN Design a premium compact headset approximately 20 cm wide, 11 cm tall and 12 cm deep, excluding its straps. Use a warm-white matte polymer outer shell, charcoal fabric facial cushion and head straps, dark optical glass and restrained electric-blue accents. Include two front tracking-camera windows, a small side power button, a charging port and a top ventilation grille. No logos or text are required. This is an original concept with a simplified, internally coherent architecture. Do not claim it reproduces a real commercial headset or has a validated optical/electronic design. Avoid gratuitous decorative components: every visible part must have an understandable place in the assembly. ASSEMBLY — MODEL THESE AS DISTINCT COMPONENTS From the user's face toward the outer front of the headset: 1. A removable fabric-covered facial cushion with a nose cutout and its supporting gasket frame. 2. A rear eyepiece housing with two eye openings and a matching nose clearance. 3. Two separate convex optical lenses held in opaque lens barrels, one per eye. 4. Two separate display modules, each aligned behind its corresponding lens along the viewing axis. 5. A rigid inner chassis with fitted seats supporting the lens and display modules. 6. A main circuit board with simplified but modeled chips, connectors and mounting holes, positioned above the optical channels so it does not block either display. 7. A compact heat spreader and vented cooling module above the circuit board. 8. A small battery module in a defined lower compartment, clear of the optical paths. 9. Two small camera modules aligned with the front tracking windows. 10. A removable front cover with the matching camera windows and ventilation features. 11. Left and right strap brackets, a rear fabric strap and a top strap, with clear physical attachment points. 12. At least four visible mounting screws with matching holes or bosses. Model shell thickness, seams, mounting features and enough internal detail to make the exploded view informative. All components must fit inside the assembled enclosure. Avoid boards passing through optics, batteries occupying the same space as displays, or screws with nowhere to fasten. Use rounded edges and plausible manufacture. Electronic traces can be procedural textures; major components must be geometry. Coordinate convention: local X is left/right, local Y runs from the wearer's face toward the front cover, and local Z is up. Keep the lenses and displays paired correctly. Maintain the same parts, shapes and materials throughout the animation. EXPLOSION DESIGN Use a main separation axis along local Y to reveal the front-to-back stack. Move the upper electronics and cooling assembly upward, the battery downward, and the strap assembly slightly backward and outward to prevent visual overlap. Withdraw mounting screws along their fastening axes before separating the shells. Use deliberate spacing and a modest stagger so viewers can follow the construction. The exploded state must remain understandable: preserve lens/display alignment, avoid arbitrary rotations, and keep each component near its assembly axis. Rigid parts must not stretch, shrink, disappear or pass through one another. For straps, preserve believable shape using separate attachment groups or a controlled deformation; do not pull a rigid strap mesh through the shell. Do not show cables tethering widely separated parts implausibly. You may omit internal wiring entirely as an explicit conceptual simplification. If you include wiring, show believable disconnection and avoid stretched connections. Document the choice. ANIMATION — 15 SECONDS, 24 FPS Frames 1–48: assembled hero shot, with a restrained camera arc showing the shell, cushion and straps. Frames 49–168: withdraw screws, release the cover and cushion, then separate the internal subassemblies in an intelligible sequence. All parts remain visible. Frames 169–240: hold the fully exploded state while the camera arcs about 25 degrees, revealing the optical stack and upper/lower electronics. Leave enough space between components to see their shapes. Frames 241–336: reverse the process in a physically sensible order, seating internal parts before covers and screws. Return every part precisely to its assembled position. Frames 337–360: settle on a clean assembled hero composition. No camera cuts that hide transitions. Use controlled ease-in/ease-out motion. End in the same assembly configuration as the start. This is a mechanical presentation animation; rigid-body simulation is not required. RIG AND EDITABILITY - Organize the scene into clearly named component/subassembly collections. - Preserve local component transforms using parent empties or an equivalent organized hierarchy. - Provide one clearly named Explosion control from 0 (assembled) to 1 (fully exploded), driving the component offsets and their staggered timing. Keyframe this control for opening and reassembly. Keep camera motion separate. - The Explosion control must work at intermediate values and in reverse without requiring a simulation cache or manual repositioning. - Provide an assembled camera and an exploded inspection camera in addition to the animated camera if useful. LOOK AND LIGHTING Use a dark blue-gray studio background, soft broad key light and subtle edge lighting. Maintain readable contrast between white shells, black fabric, glass lenses and internal electronics. Make transparent optics visible through controlled reflections without turning them into opaque chrome. Use restrained bloom and keep the entire assembly in focus. Avoid labels, arrows and text overlays; component identity should come from geometry and placement. VALIDATION Inspect Explosion at 0, 0.25, 0.5, 0.75 and 1. Check fit in the assembled state, intersecting parts during separation, optical alignment and composition in the exploded state. Confirm that all moving components return to their original transforms at the end. Inspect rendered frames from assembled, transitional and exploded states. Fix obvious clipping and accidental floating parts before delivery. DELIVERABLES - vr-headset-exploded-view.blend with complete geometry, materials, controls, animation, lights and cameras. - Two 1920 x 1080 PNG renders: assembled hero and fully exploded view. - The full 15-second animation preview at minimum 1280 x 720, as MP4 or a numbered PNG sequence. - README.txt with the Blender version, instructions for the Explosion control, a component inventory, conceptual simplifications, checks performed and any known limitations. GENERAL REQUIREMENTS Python automation is allowed. Build your own geometry and procedural materials; do not download a finished headset or use a reference image as a flat substitute for the model. Keep assets self-contained and pack any required external resources. Do not require paid add-ons. Save an editable file that opens and renders. Report incomplete requirements honestly. Prioritize coherent assembly, clear motion and strong presentation over invisible microscopic detail.
Every main explosion control produced five different sampled geometry states. The video samples show separation and reassembly. Low’s enclosure and straps are very box-like. Mid’s front cover dominates the animation and hides much of the internal movement, even though its exploded still is more informative. High makes the cushion, lenses and internal layers readable. Extra improves the rounded product form and straps but leaves an overbright front. Max combines a coherent enclosure with clear exploded layers. The inspection establishes control response and a visible sequence; it does not establish complete internal fit or collision-free assembly.
Low and High let straps or small upper parts leave the frame during the explosion. Mid's front shield hides the internal layers that the view should reveal. Extra keeps conspicuous gaps when assembled, and Max's top strap has twisted, free-looking ends. The control responds, but each presentation still has something to fix.
Physics simulations and cached motion
Task 4 — Clothesline: cloth motion and a portable cache
Three real cloth simulations must respond to one changing wind field over an eight-second presentation range. Readable pinning, different fabric weights, garments with openings and portable baked caches matter more than decorative scenery.
Original prompt — Task 4
WINDY COTTAGE CLOTHESLINE — CLOTH SIMULATION Use the attached clothesline-reference.png for the scene composition, materials, palette and atmosphere. Create an original warm countryside terrace scene in Blender and an 8-second cloth-simulation animation at 24 fps (192 delivered frames). SCENE Build the stone terrace, two wooden posts with visible supports, one continuous gently sagging clothesline, a low stone parapet, a partial rustic cottage at the left and a wicker laundry basket in the foreground. Add restrained potted plants and flowers. Simplified three-dimensional hills, trees and mountains can form the distant background. Match the airy warm daylight and pastoral animated-film atmosphere. Keep the camera almost still and all three hanging items clearly visible throughout. CLOTH Hang three separate items from left to right: an ivory rectangular bedsheet, a dusty-blue short-sleeved shirt and a terracotta long skirt. Use two clearly visible clothespins per item. Pin the sheet at its top corners, the shirt near its shoulders, and the skirt at two waistband locations. Model the shirt and skirt as garments with actual openings and joined fabric surfaces, not flat silhouette cutouts. Attachments must remain aligned with the clothesline. Use Blender's actual cloth simulation on all three hanging items. The bedsheet should billow broadly, the lighter shirt should flutter in smaller folds, and the heavier skirt should have slower, weightier motion. Use appropriate mesh resolution and distinct physically motivated cloth settings. Provide enough clearance above the floor and between items. Enable suitable self-collision and collisions with nearby solid objects. No visible mesh explosions, persistent interpenetration or detached pin points. WIND AND TIMING Use a shared wind force field with mild turbulence so all items respond to the same environment without moving identically. Begin after a settling period. During delivered seconds 0–2 use a light breeze, seconds 2–5 a gradual stronger gust, and seconds 5–8 ease back to the original breeze. Bake the simulation including pre-roll; identify the exact 192-frame presentation range in the README. A perfect loop is not required. The rope may remain static with modeled sag; simulating it is optional. Do not replace cloth motion with shape keys or a looping displacement modifier. VISUAL PRIORITY Keep fabric folds, readable pinning, realistic interaction and stable motion as the priority. The reference is a composition target, not a requirement to reproduce the exact instantaneous folds. Use actual lighting and materials with subtle fabric translucency. Avoid heavy depth of field that conceals simulation quality. DELIVERABLES - clothesline.blend and all required baked cache files with portable relative paths. - A 1920 x 1080 hero PNG from the simulation. - The complete 8-second preview at a minimum of 1280 x 720, as MP4 or numbered PNG sequence. - README documenting simulation settings, cache location, pre-roll and playback range. GENERAL REQUIREMENTS Work in Blender and deliver an actual editable 3D scene, not just instructions or concept art. You may use Python to build the scene. Use your own geometry and procedural materials; do not download finished models or use generated images as substitutes for geometry. Keep objects, materials, collections and controls meaningfully named. Pack any required resources and include any simulation caches beside the file using relative paths. State the Blender version used. Inspect rendered output and fix obvious problems before delivering. Include a short README with how to open/play/use the result, the main controls and any incomplete requirements. Report limitations honestly. Prioritize a coherent finished result over excessive hidden detail.
Extra’s stone terrace has more surface work, but the large sheet remains almost flat while the smaller garments move. Mid’s blue shirt goes the other way: it bunches into an awkward collapsed shape. Both problems become much clearer when the fabric is large enough to inspect.
Max adds folds, yet the garment tops still look pinched. The test asks different pieces of cloth to respond to the same wind. A more textured wall or an extra fold in a still does not establish that the whole gust feels convincing.
All five files contain three cloth modifiers marked as baked. High and Max also keep cache paths far outside the task archive. Their clips play, but the portability of the saved simulations is still an open check.
Task 6 — Robot: a handoff from animation to physics
The arm must pick up a cube, carry it to a ramp and release it into actual rigid-body physics before the final resting state. The important transition is the handoff: the cube must not teleport or simply follow a keyed path into the tray.
Original prompt — Task 6
ROBOT PICK-AND-PLACE — MECHANICAL ANIMATION AND PHYSICS Create a polished tabletop robotics demonstration in Blender: an articulated robot picks up a cube, carries it to a ramp, releases it, and the cube slides down the ramp into a catch tray. Deliver a 12-second animation at 24 fps, frames 1–288. DESIGN AND SCALE Use metric units. The workbench is approximately 1.8 x 1.0 m. The robot has a fixed base, rotating shoulder assembly, upper arm, forearm, wrist and a parallel two-finger gripper. Use visible pivot housings and believable joint connections. Design the arm's reach and joint limits to suit the task. The cube is 0.10 m per side with slightly beveled edges. The ramp is approximately 0.55 m long and slopes downward by about 25 degrees, with low side rails. A shallow catch tray with a padded-looking interior sits at its lower end. Place the initial cube on a raised pickup block, the ramp start within robot reach, and the tray clearly visible. Give the scene an original compact industrial-lab look: light warm-gray robot shells, dark joints, restrained blue details, and an orange cube. Use studio lighting, readable shadows and a three-quarter camera that shows the entire interaction. No logos or explanatory overlays are required. ANIMATION Frames 1–36: establish the setup; robot approaches the cube with its gripper open. Frames 37–72: align the fingers on opposite sides and close them around the cube without visibly crushing or penetrating it. Frames 73–144: lift and carry the cube in an arc to the upper end of the ramp, avoiding all obstacles. Frames 145–168: lower it just above the ramp, open the gripper, and release it with a clean handoff to physics no later than frame 168. Frames 169–240: the cube moves under gravity, slides/tumbles down the ramp, collides with the tray and settles. The arm withdraws clear of the motion. Frames 241–288: hold the completed state with the cube resting in the tray. TECHNICAL REQUIREMENTS - Build an editable armature or articulated hierarchy with proper joint pivots. Include a usable wrist target and gripper-open control; use IK where appropriate. - Robot motion may be keyframed. For reliable pickup, constraining or animating the cube while held is allowed and must be documented. Do not claim that this is simulated frictional gripping. - After release, the cube must be an active rigid body driven by actual Blender rigid-body physics. Ramp, rails, table and catch tray need appropriate passive collision geometry. Do not keyframe the cube's post-release journey. - Set the release transform consistently so it does not jump, teleport or acquire an arbitrary velocity at handoff. - Use suitable collision shapes, margins, solver quality, friction and restitution at the chosen real-world scale. Bake/cache the physics. - Keep the arm, fingers and cube free of obvious intersections. Hide no failures with camera cuts or off-screen transitions. VALIDATION Play the whole sequence from its start and inspect approach, grip, release, ramp contact and final resting state. Verify that the saved file plus included cache reproduces the motion. Explain the exact release frame and how the handoff was implemented. Document whether the cube was constraint-driven or animated while held. DELIVERABLES - robot-physics.blend and any required cache files. - One 1920 x 1080 hero PNG. - A complete 12-second preview at minimum 1280 x 720, MP4 or numbered PNG sequence. - README.txt. GENERAL REQUIREMENTS Create the actual editable Blender project, not only a plan or code listing. Python automation is allowed. Build your own geometry and procedural materials; do not download finished models or substitute generated images for 3D geometry. Use meaningful names and organized collections. Pack required resources, and provide any baked caches using relative paths. State the Blender version and any required add-ons in README.txt. Do not assume paid or separately installed tools are available. Inspect the rendered result and the saved project. Fix obvious defects before delivery. Include a short README.txt describing how to open and use the file, controls, implementation choices, checks performed and honest limitations. Do not claim that an export or simulation was validated unless it was actually checked. Prioritize a complete coherent result over unnecessary detail.
All five saved scenes contain rigid-body objects. The sampled videos show approach, pickup, transport and a cube in the catch tray at the end. Low uses a very simple technical setup; Mid’s bright rendering weakens material separation. High gives the clearest contrast between the white arm, blue ramp and orange cube. Extra and Max also make the overall sequence readable. This review did not independently replay the saved caches and inspect the release transform at every frame. A successful rendered ending therefore remains separate from verification of the complete physics handoff and cache portability.
Mid has changing black patches on the tray rim and table leg in the sampled animation. Extra crops the upper arm late in the clip; Max keeps the receiving tray cut off at the right. The cube arrives, but the presentation still needs work. These frames don't establish what caused the black patches.
Character modeling, rigging and deformation
Task 7 — VTuber: a skeleton is only the beginning
The brief asks for a complete adult anime character with weighted clothing, hair, articulated fingers, independent blinks, mouth shapes and a twelve-second demo. A skeleton or a changing mouth alone cannot satisfy the required deformation and character quality.
Original prompt — Task 7
GLITCH ORCHARD VTUBER — CHARACTER MODEL, RIG AND ANIMATION Create an original adult anime woman as a full-body 3D VTuber character in Blender. You must MODEL, RIG AND ANIMATE her. A static character, a turntable without character motion, or an unweighted skeleton is not sufficient. The character should look expressive, friendly and slightly mischievous: a host for creative AI experiments. EXACT CHARACTER DESIGN Age appearance: clearly adult, approximately mid-20s. Height: approximately 1.65 m, with stylized anime proportions around 6.5 heads tall. Slim-to-average build, natural relaxed posture, modest practical clothing. Warm light-beige skin, softly rounded face, small nose, defined but subtle lips, large expressive eyes and clean dark upper eyelashes. Palette: white #FFFFFF as the dominant clothing color; neon pink #FF2D95 and electric blue #246BFF as saturated accents; ink #171725 for dark areas. Enter these as sRGB material colors with correct conversion if using code. Lighting may change their rendered appearance. Skin, mouth and metal fasteners may use appropriate natural supporting colors. Do not introduce additional dominant accent colors. Hair: ink-colored shoulder-length bob with a clean rounded silhouette, layered ends, side-swept bangs and two longer face-framing locks. On the CHARACTER'S LEFT, add one broad neon-pink front streak running from roots to tip. On the CHARACTER'S RIGHT, add a slimmer electric-blue streak. All left/right directions are the character's own anatomical sides, not the viewer's. Add a small original pink plum-shaped hair clip with a blue leaf above her left temple, using simple modeled shapes rather than relying on an external logo file. Keep eyebrows and eyes visible. Eyes: character's left iris is neon pink; right iris is electric blue. Both have dark pupils, clear highlights and a restrained anime gradient. Create actual eyelid geometry or deformable eyelid surfaces that can fully close over the eyes. Outfit: a waist-length white bomber jacket, worn open over an ink-colored high-neck top. Jacket has a slightly raised collar, ink cuffs and hem, a pink stripe on the left sleeve and a blue stripe on the right sleeve. Add two slim offset pink/blue bars on the left chest as a subtle glitch motif. Use fitted ink high-waisted shorts reaching mid-thigh, opaque ink tights, and white ankle boots with dark soles. The left boot has a pink accent tab; the right boot has a blue accent tab. Hands are bare and each has five individually articulated fingers. Keep the silhouette readable and avoid loose decorations that make tracking difficult. No text or lettering. MODEL AND MATERIALS Build a complete 3D body and outfit with clean, deformation-friendly geometry, suitable edge flow around shoulders, elbows, knees, hips, fingers, mouth and eyes. Clothing may use separate meshes with enough clearance for animation. Build modeled hair clumps with readable layers and dedicated motion bones. Use a consistent attractive cel-shaded/anime look with controlled highlights; do not flatten the character into image planes. Model basic inner-mouth geometry, upper/lower teeth and tongue so open-mouth expressions do not reveal a hollow head. Avoid hidden geometry poking through clothing. BODY RIG — REQUIRED - Weighted humanoid skeleton: root, hips, spine, chest, neck, head, clavicles, upper/lower arms, hands, upper/lower legs, feet and toes. - Individual finger chains with curl controls. - Usable arm and leg IK controls with pole targets, plus a gaze target. - Separate controls or bones for bob hair and the two front locks; optional spring motion may be baked for delivery. - Meaningful bone/control names, sensible hierarchy, clean neutral A-pose and resettable control transforms. - Skin weights must deform the actual character, clothing and hair appropriately. Do not merely parent rigid limbs to bones. FACE RIG — REQUIRED Provide independent left/right blinks, eyebrows, eye aim, jaw opening and mouth shapes. Include clearly named shape keys or equivalent independent facial controls for Neutral, Happy, Angry, Sad, Surprised, Blink_L, Blink_R, A, I, U, E and O. Combine mouth shapes, eye movement and expression without catastrophic clipping. Keep the neutral base mesh usable and symmetric where the design is symmetric. A smile must not depend only on rotating the whole head. DEMO ANIMATION — REQUIRED Create 12 seconds at 24 fps (frames 1–288), demonstrating the completed character rig: Frames 1–48: relaxed standing idle with subtle breathing, a natural blink and eye contact with camera. Frames 49–120: raise her right arm and wave twice, with a readable shoulder/elbow arc and slight finger movement; smile while waving. Frames 121–192: lower the arm and turn her head about 20 degrees left and right while gaze remains controlled. Transition from curious/surprised expression to a warm smile. Add restrained hair follow-through without hair crossing the face. Frames 193–264: animate A, I, U, E and O mouth shapes in a clearly visible short sequence, with subtle head movement and another blink. This is a silent viseme demonstration, not claimed audio synchronization. Frames 265–288: return to a friendly neutral pose. Include a full-body render camera and an additional face close-up camera. Keep movement anatomically plausible and feet planted. Do not conceal broken hands or deformations by cropping them out. VALIDATION Inspect elbows, shoulders, wrists, finger bends, hips and knees in representative poses, and inspect blinks and open-mouth shapes up close. Verify that clothes remain outside the skin, eyelids close and eyes stay in their sockets. Return the rig to its neutral pose successfully. Provide a short checklist of implemented rig and expression controls. DELIVERABLES - glitch-orchard-vtuber.blend containing the complete model, body/face rig, materials, demo action and cameras. - A 1920 x 1080 full-body beauty PNG and a separate face close-up PNG. - Front, side and back neutral-pose renders, which may be combined into one character sheet. - A full 12-second animation preview at minimum 1280 x 720 and an additional face-close-up preview of the same action. - README.txt with rig instructions, expression/viseme mapping and known limitations. A runtime-specific VTuber export is optional, not a substitute for the required Blender deliverables. If you provide VRM or another export, name the format/version and validate it by re-importing or loading it. Do not claim live tracking or application compatibility from a working Blender rig alone. GENERAL REQUIREMENTS Create the actual editable Blender project, not only a plan or code listing. Python automation is allowed. Build your own geometry and procedural materials; do not download finished models or substitute generated images for 3D geometry. Use meaningful names and organized collections. Pack required resources, and provide any baked caches using relative paths. State the Blender version and any required add-ons in README.txt. Do not assume paid or separately installed tools are available. Inspect the rendered result and the saved project. Fix obvious defects before delivery. Include a short README.txt describing how to open and use the file, controls, implementation choices, checks performed and honest limitations. Do not claim that an export or simulation was validated unless it was actually checked. Prioritize a complete coherent result over unnecessary detail.
Low’s raised arm exposes a large deformation error: the forearm stretches into a long triangular spike. High’s face has a different failure. As the face moves, the whites of the eyes move while the irises stay in place. The parts slide out of alignment instead of moving together.
A neutral pose could hide both. In Max, the front hair stays in place while the face moves. Its flat irises and jagged small mouth make the expressions hard to read. These characters are far from ready to use as VTubers: ordinary face and body movement still exposes parts that do not move together.
Photorealistic production and later revisions
Task 12 — Energy drink: directing a photorealistic commercial
This is a finished silent fifteen-second advertisement with five specified shots, exact readable packaging, cold surface detail, plausible fruit, ice and liquid, and a stable final packshot. Silence is explicitly allowed. A geometric splash is also allowed if honestly described.
Original prompt — Task 12
GLITCH ORCHARD ENERGY — PHOTOREALISTIC PRODUCT COMMERCIAL Create an original fictional energy-drink brand extension called GLITCH ORCHARD ENERGY and produce a finished 15-second photorealistic commercial in Blender at 24 fps, frames 1–360. This must feel like a deliberately directed beverage advertisement: strong product identity, appetizing tactile details, controlled pacing and a memorable final packshot. It is not merely a rotating can or an exploded view. PRODUCT AND PACKAGING Model a slim 330 ml aluminum can approximately 14.5 cm tall and 5.8 cm in diameter. Include a believable rolled top rim, recessed lid, scored opening, ring pull, base concavity and fine manufacturing bevels. Keep the can sealed throughout the spot. Flavor concept: PLUM + YUZU. The label is predominantly satin white with an ink #171725 wordmark, a bold offset neon-pink #FF2D95 band and a narrower electric-blue #246BFF band. Preserve white as the dominant label area; use the saturated colors as deliberate accents. Add an original small plum-shaped emblem with a leaf and a restrained offset glitch slice. No existing external logo asset is required. Required readable label text, exactly: GLITCH ORCHARD ENERGY PLUM + YUZU 330 ml Use an original clean geometric sans-serif layout, with GLITCH ORCHARD largest, ENERGY secondary and the flavor smaller. Build the typography as a high-resolution label texture or suitable surface geometry, correctly wrapped without mirrored text, broken kerning or a visible front seam. Use a font available in the environment and pack it where permitted. No nutrition panel or claims about health, performance, caffeine content or sugar content are required. This is fictional packaging. ART DIRECTION Premium, crisp, cold and energetic. Photorealistic aluminum, satin printed ink, tiny condensation beads and subtle brushed metal on the lid. Combine a dark-ink studio environment with large white reflection cards, a restrained pink light on one side and blue light on the other. The label must remain predominantly neutral white and legible, rather than washed entirely in colored light. Use fresh purple plums, one cut plum with visible flesh and pit, and a cut yellow yuzu as flavor cues. Model plausible fruit shapes and materials. Include a few clear ice pieces on the ground for the final shot, with slight meltwater and natural surface imperfections. Avoid turning the set into a pile of ingredients. All hero props must be three-dimensional. COMMERCIAL SHOT LIST Frames 1–60, 2.5 seconds: extreme macro reveal of the cold can surface. A soft reflection sweeps across condensation and a portion of the colored label. Shallow depth of field is appropriate, but at least part of the surface must be tack sharp. Frames 61–132, 3 seconds: close shot of the lid, rim and ring pull, moving down toward the wordmark. A clean camera move and traveling highlight reveal the manufactured detail. Keep the can sealed. Frames 133–228, 4 seconds: hero action shot. The can turns slowly in a controlled studio suspension while a small amber beverage splash arcs behind and around its lower half. Fruit elements can move in a restrained choreographed arc with sensible trajectories. Keep the front wordmark readable for a meaningful portion of the shot. No objects may pass through the can. Frames 229–300, 3 seconds: cut to the can already standing upright on a dark, subtly reflective plinth with fruit and a few ice pieces at its base. Camera gently pushes toward the product; condensation catches the rim light. Do not imply a physical landing unless you actually animate it plausibly. Frames 301–360, 2.5 seconds: stable final packshot with the whole can visible, readable packaging and ample negative space. Overlay exact copy: 'GLITCH ORCHARD ENERGY' and, below it, 'A little unexpected.' End with a composed frame, not a fade that obscures the product. SIMULATION AND MOTION The commercial is judged on photorealism and directing, not fluid-solver choice. The splash may be a real baked liquid simulation or convincingly animated three-dimensional liquid geometry. State which method you used. Give liquid appropriate thickness, irregular edges, droplets and reflections/refraction. Do not use a flat stock splash or claim a procedural mesh is a fluid simulation. Condensation may use instanced geometry; vary bead sizes and density and avoid oversized uniform spheres. Keep rigid can geometry undeformed. Use intentional camera cuts, smooth motion and appropriate motion blur without smearing the typography. LIGHTING AND RENDERING Use physically based materials, suitable transmission/refraction and sufficient sampling for stable glass, liquid, condensation and metal. Control highlights and color management. The spot should have consistent exposure and grading across cuts. Preserve surface detail; no excessive bloom, artificial outlines, painterly shading or obvious low-poly edges. Realistic camera optics should support the product rather than conceal defects. AUDIO Deliver a polished silent visual commercial; audio is not required and its absence must not be treated as unfinished. Do not add unlicensed music. If optional original audio is added, also deliver the silent version. VALIDATION Inspect label readability, macro surface quality, every shot boundary, splash intersections, moving reflections and the final packshot. Check that condensation and liquid do not flicker between frames and the can remains the same design in every shot. DELIVERABLES - energy-drink-commercial.blend with editable product, set, materials, camera shots, animation and final text treatment. Use timeline camera markers or an equivalent reproducible shot setup. - A complete edited 15-second 1920 x 1080 commercial as MP4. If encoding is unavailable, provide the full numbered PNG sequence and assembly instructions. - A 1920 x 1080 final packshot PNG and one macro-detail PNG. - Required fluid caches, if a simulation was used. - README.txt with shot ranges, render instructions, splash method and limitations. GENERAL REQUIREMENTS Create the actual editable Blender scene and requested renders, not only a plan or script. Python automation is allowed. Use meaningful names and collections, real-world scale and a reproducible rendering setup. Build the main subject geometry yourself; no downloaded finished scenes or hero models. Licensed material textures and HDRIs are allowed if available: document their sources and licenses, pack permitted dependencies, and provide a procedural fallback if access is unavailable. Do not replace scene geometry with a generated image, projected photograph or finished background plate. Procedural textures and instanced geometry are encouraged. State the Blender version and render engine. Pack external resources and include necessary caches with relative paths. Inspect saved files and rendered results, fixing obvious errors before delivery. Document controls, how to reproduce outputs, sources, checks and remaining limitations in README.txt. Do not claim deliverables or validation that you did not complete.
In High’s macro, the letters stand away from the metal and project past the can’s sides. This is why ORCHARD overflows the cylinder in the packshot: the wordmark reads as separate raised objects. Beside it, Mid’s front plum loses its rounded lower outline in a broad straight cutoff at the table.
The condensation is worth separating from the text. Several droplets read as glass studs or dark spots sitting over the print. Modeled droplets can work, but these shapes compete with the packaging instead of simply making the can look cold.
Max keeps its brand name inside the can more successfully. Its fruit still appears buried in the table: the lower profile is straight in both versions. V2 adds texture and reflection around that same contact. The scene gets shinier while the placement error stays.
Every commercial setting and revision
Low v1: The reflection cards are visible as huge white rectangles behind the product. The white end copy crosses the white card and loses contrast. The plums look like glossy purple balls, the pale cut fruit lacks convincing flesh detail, and foreground props are cut off. The label itself stays on the can here; this is not the floating-letter failure seen at High. The close-up has a narrow band of legible lettering, a mostly blank white surface and soft droplets with visible angular outlines. It shows condensation objects, but does not sell a crisp, cold product surface.
Low v2: The final background is darker, so the end copy is easier to read. The can is now badly washed out: its shoulder and rolled edges look wrinkled and almost white, and the label loses contrast. The smooth spherical fruit and awkward foreground crop remain. A bright vertical strip is still visible at the far right. The revised drops have stronger glassy highlights, but most of the macro is still soft and very pale. The shot does not gain a convincing metal or printed-label finish merely because the highlights changed.
Mid v1: The main wordmark is oversized around the cylinder: the front reads only part of GLITCH ORCHARD. The front-left plum has a broad, straight lower cutoff at the tabletop rather than a rounded contact. It visibly reads as sunk into the surface. The yellow fruit is a smooth, almost featureless dome. Dense dark condensation speckles dirty the label and compete with the product name. This delivered macro is severely out of focus across the image. It is effectively a pink-and-white blur; neither fine droplets nor label print can be judged properly from it.
Mid v2: The new wood tabletop and textured background leave the same sunk-looking front plum, incomplete front-facing wordmark and plain yellow dome. The can’s top rim has picked up a brown, wood-like finish. Changing the set materials has not repaired the object placement or packaging layout. The delivered macro now shows the upper can rather than the previous pink-band composition. It exposes the brown, wood-like rolled rim and dense dark droplet pattern. The wordmark still runs around the sides and out of view. This file is a different camera moment, so it is not a like-for-like sharpness improvement over the v1 macro.
High v1: ORCHARD extends beyond both sides of the can into empty space. These read as separate raised letters, not a printed label wrapped onto the cylinder. The plums have conspicuous polygon facets and a shiny plastic finish. The foreground ice dominates the lower frame; the end copy is soft too. This is a packaging construction failure, not just awkward letter spacing. The side macro makes the failure unmistakable: extruded letters stand away from the body and project beyond its silhouette. Several condensation beads look like large faceted studs. Shallow focus does not hide the floating type.
High v2: The stage and metal surface change, but ORCHARD still sticks out beyond both sides, the plums remain faceted and the foreground ice remains oversized in the composition. The revision leaves the main packaging error untouched. The macro still shows the same stand-off letters and angular beads. There is no visible repair to the label’s fit to the can.
Extra v1: The composition is more orderly than Low or Mid, but the can is small and very pale. The front brand name is partly lost around the side, and the white ENERGY panel has weak contrast. Fruit flesh is smooth and pale, whole plums look like polished props, and meltwater reads as harsh flat patches around the ice. Better arrangement has not produced a premium product image. The metal shoulder is very bright and broadly blurred. The rolled rim, lid and droplets lack a clear, detailed focus area. This is a weak close-up for an advertisement whose brief asks the surface to hold up at macro scale.
Extra v2: The dark, more reflective plinth changes the set finish, but the pale can, weak label contrast, simplified fruit and hard-edged melt patches remain. The busier reflections do not repair the product itself. The macro retains the bright white rim and soft shoulder. The droplets and surface have changed, but the shot still lacks crisp product detail.
Max v1: The brand is more legible and stays within the can silhouette in this view. But the front plum half and right citrus half have straight lower cutoffs where they meet the table: their rounded bodies appear buried in it. The citrus face is a flat radial graphic, and the plum flesh and pit look like smooth modeled discs. The black oval meltwater patches read as flat inserts. A cleaner layout still contains basic placement and material faults. The macro shows a narrow selection of droplets against a large pink band. Much of it is soft, with brand and flavour text cut at the frame edges. It does not demonstrate a uniformly sharp condensation or print finish.
Max v2: The reflective stone-like table makes the fruit and can reflections stronger. It also makes the unchanged straight fruit cutoffs easy to see. The same simplified fruit interiors and flat meltwater patches remain. More reflection has not corrected placement. The pink label surface gains fine texture, while the macro keeps the same soft focus and cropped text. Added surface grain does not resolve those framing and focus problems.
High’s projecting letters persist in the animation; Mid’s front plum and Max’s cut fruit keep their buried-looking lower profiles. These commercials miss the requested photorealism through packaging, placement, focus and material failures that remain after v2.
Task 13 — Forest cabin: the architectural photograph test
The target is a real-looking woodland photograph after rain, with credible construction, natural vegetation, restrained weathering and three consistent camera views. A stylized diorama is explicitly outside the requested look.
Original prompt — Task 13
CABIN IN THE WOODS — PHOTOREALISTIC ENVIRONMENT Create an original photorealistic woodland cabin scene in Blender. The target is a convincing architectural photograph taken in a real forest, with credible construction, natural vegetation, restrained weathering and carefully observed light. Do not produce a stylized diorama, cartoon forest or fantasy illustration. SETTING AND MOOD A small timber cabin sits in a quiet mixed conifer-and-birch forest just after light rain in early autumn. It is late afternoon under a broken overcast sky: soft cool ambient light, a faint warm break in the clouds, and gentle warm interior light visible through the windows. The environment should feel inhabited and peaceful, with small signs of use but no people, animals, vehicles or text. CABIN Build a plausible single-storey cabin approximately 6 x 8 m, with a pitched dark standing-seam metal roof, a modest covered wooden porch and three steps leading from a worn path. Use vertical timber siding, proper corner trims, a front door, two generously sized glazed windows, gutters, a downpipe and a modest chimney with believable flashing. Support the porch and cabin on a visible, sensible stone or concrete foundation. Roof, porch posts, steps and walls must connect coherently. Give the walls and roof thickness, windows actual frames and glass, and doors proper depth. Model roof seams and major boards rather than representing every feature with a flat texture. Weathering should follow exposure and gravity: slight darkening near the base, restrained streaking beneath runoff points and more wear on the steps. Avoid randomly spreading identical dirt over every surface. Include enough actual interior geometry to make the windows convincing: a small table, chair, warm pendant light and simple wall/floor surfaces. No complete furnished interior is required. Avoid glowing opaque window planes and reflections that imply an impossible interior. FOREST AND GROUND Build a scene footprint of roughly 30 x 30 m around the cabin, with enough layered background vegetation to avoid exposing the set boundary. Use an irregular terrain surface, a narrow compacted-earth path, moss, grasses, fallen leaves, twigs, a few stones and exposed roots. Include at least three visibly distinct tree forms with varied size, age, rotation and branching. Use denser background instancing where appropriate. Avoid a uniform grid, repeated identical silhouettes or trees emerging from the porch. Ground should be damp with a few small shallow puddles in natural depressions. Vary roughness and wetness; do not make the entire forest a polished mirror. Blend soil, leaf litter, roots and moss at plausible scales. Give tree bark and wood grain directionally correct textures. Scatter small plants according to light, paths and available space rather than evenly everywhere. STORY DETAILS Add a small stack of split firewood beneath the porch cover, a simple outdoor chair and muddy wear near the entrance. Keep the composition restrained. These details should suggest use without distracting from the architecture. CAMERA AND COMPOSITION Main photograph: eye height about 1.5–1.7 m, a natural 35–50 mm full-frame-equivalent field of view, three-quarter view of the cabin, with the path guiding the eye toward the entrance. Use foreground vegetation sparingly for depth while keeping the cabin recognizable. Keep verticals largely vertical and avoid extreme wide-angle distortion. Let the forest frame the building rather than conceal it. Second photograph: closer porch-side angle showing siding, wet steps, window glass and realistic construction detail. Third photograph: a wider environmental view showing how the same cabin sits in the surrounding forest. Use the same weather, material state and time of day in all three images. LIGHT AND MATERIALS Use realistic indirect light and restrained volumetric atmosphere only if it improves depth. Fog must not hide unfinished geometry or flatten the whole image. Balance warm interior light against cool outdoor light without neon-orange windows. Preserve realistic timber, metal, stone and foliage response. Use subtle imperfections, correct texture scale and enough geometry for convincing silhouettes and contact shadows. Avoid excessive bloom, heavy vignette, crunchy sharpening and overly shallow depth of field. TECHNICAL REQUIREMENTS Use efficient instances for vegetation while maintaining variation. Organize cabin, interior, trees, understory, ground, props, lights and cameras in separate collections. Keep the scene navigable and editable. Photorealism must come from geometry, materials, lighting and composition; no photo backdrop or camera-projected finished forest. Animation is not required. VALIDATION Inspect at full image resolution: ground contact, roof/wall/porch joins, glass and interior visibility, texture scale, repeated vegetation patterns, shadow noise and obvious intersections. Verify that the scene works from all three required camera positions and not only one flattering view. Fix accidental set boundaries visible in camera. DELIVERABLES - cabin-in-the-woods.blend with complete editable environment, cameras and lighting. - Three 2560 x 1440 PNG renders: main architectural view, porch/material detail and wider environmental view. - README.txt with render settings, scene organization, material/resource sources, performance choices, checks performed and limitations. GENERAL REQUIREMENTS Create the actual editable Blender scene and requested renders, not only a plan or script. Python automation is allowed. Use meaningful names and collections, real-world scale and a reproducible rendering setup. Build the main subject geometry yourself; no downloaded finished scenes or hero models. Licensed material textures and HDRIs are allowed if available: document their sources and licenses, pack permitted dependencies, and provide a procedural fallback if access is unavailable. Do not replace scene geometry with a generated image, projected photograph or finished background plate. Procedural textures and instanced geometry are encouraged. State the Blender version and render engine. Pack external resources and include necessary caches with relative paths. Inspect saved files and rendered results, fixing obvious errors before delivery. Document controls, how to reproduce outputs, sources, checks and remaining limitations in README.txt. Do not claim deliverables or validation that you did not complete.
Extra’s warm light gives the cabin a clearer place within the forest. Max adds a busy foreground, but its darker wall of trees crowds the building. Keep those whole compositions in view when comparing the atmosphere; the porch camera answers a different question.
Extra’s main view has a warm woodland atmosphere. Its porch camera makes the repeated log ends and sharp foliage shapes much easier to see. Max adds more around the cabin, but its close view still has very regular boards and a tightly repeated stack of firewood.
The repeated geometry is separate from the mood of the image. Extra’s warmer staging can be more appealing while its logs still look faceted. V2 changes surfaces and light without rebuilding those shapes, so the closer camera remains useful after the material pass.
Low and Mid keep a much more toy-like forest, and High exposes repeated thin needle shapes. Extra’s v2 adds surface detail while making the light cooler and the porch darker. Its faceted logs and repeated foliage survive the revision.
What this Fable Blender review found
| Area | Finding in this batch |
|---|---|
| Extra → Max | A substantial visual regression on the tree; Extra also has stronger atmosphere in the reviewed temple and cabin images. |
| Procedural controls | All five roof-width tests changed geometry and restored it successfully. |
| Mechanisms | Every sampled lamp-opening and headset-explosion control responds. |
| Character work | Armatures and face keys exist, but visible deformation and design problems remain. |
| Photorealism | The commercials retain basic packaging, fruit-placement and focus failures, including after the material revisions; the cabins retain conspicuously artificial geometry. |
| Cost and usage | Billed charges and measured token totals are unknown; no efficiency winner is assigned. |
This is an AI-assisted, unblinded review. No aggregate quality score has been assigned to this Fable batch.
Repairs made during production**
Some problems are easier to trace. Low pitched the cabin roof the wrong way. High lost the material assignment on its needles. Extra’s splash profile wasn’t scaled, making it far too large. The saved files show those corrections.
The commercial lighting and edit needed corrections. Mid lowered an overly bright HDRI in the revised commercial. Extra changed the cut keys and shutter timing to deal with smearing between shots. Max put its haze inside a box to avoid a black render.
The workflow review was added later, after differences in the models’ use of visual feedback emerged during the Blender tests. From the next run onward, every model and setting will log the images viewed, the changes made and the final visual check.
What changed in v2?
All five settings now have later commercial and cabin revisions. Each revision sits below its matching original. Their READMEs describe added licensed textures, HDRIs and material or render changes, with differing scope between runs. These are extra production passes, not a controlled texture-only experiment. The still comparisons show why material improvements have limits. The lower-setting cabins retain their simplified trees and building shapes. More surface information can improve wood and ground while leaving the scene’s silhouette and density unchanged. The commercial stills retain issues with fruit geometry, condensation, typography or composition. The v2 media are shown separately and do not replace v1 in the baseline comparison.
The v2 renders were included in the visual review. Their Blender files have not received the same independent opening audit as v1.
Why token use is missing for some runs
Measured task token totals and billed charges are unknown at every Fable setting. The reports use context-budget estimates or allocations between overlapping tasks. Max’s report gives approximately 1.52 million tokens across sessions, explicitly as a context-counter estimate rather than billing telemetry. It cannot support a per-task efficiency comparison.
What I would change for the next run
For a cleaner comparison, I would keep the build and render environment fixed, record exact model and effort evidence, and capture usage and elapsed-time boundaries for each task at the source. Repeated isolated runs would make setting comparisons more meaningful than one evolving session.
The next acceptance pass should replay the saved cloth and robot simulations with their packaged caches, inspect the VTuber’s deformations and test the remaining procedural controls. Those checks should extend the result record before a common aggregate score is assigned.
Quick answers about this Fable Blender test
Which setting looked strongest?
Extra is clearly preferable to Max on the tree, where Max has a substantial branch-construction failure. Extra also has stronger atmosphere in the reviewed temple and cabin images. Max is stronger in the galaxy and headset presentation. Those reversals are the point: moving up a setting did not produce consistently better work.
Did the scenes contain working controls?
The roof-width, blossom-opening and headset-explosion controls changed evaluated geometry at all five settings. Every attic edit preserved the starting camera. These are targeted checks, not certification of every control or every intermediate state.
Were the characters and photorealistic scenes ready to use?
Production readiness was not established. The VTubers have visible modeling and deformation problems. The commercial and cabin retain artificial-looking details despite stronger higher-setting outputs.
Is the highest setting more cost-efficient?
The archive does not support that conclusion. Fable’s figures are context-budget estimates rather than measured task usage, and render environments and time boundaries differ. Billed costs remain unknown.



















































































































































