Arid Red Cliffs - Scene available for download!

Started by Tangled-Universe, April 07, 2013, 03:05:49 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

Dune

QuoteI sense a trend lately towards less reading
Sorry about that. The less time I have, the faster I read, and don't get it all in, apparently  ::)

TheBadger

QuotePerhaps this scene is a nice goody to share on my website CGScenery.com?

Your going to make me cry.
It has been eaten.

Tangled-Universe

Still haven't had time to post-process those 2 renders...tonight I'll have some time, finally :)

I'm curious for your opinions on both versions, so please stay tuned!

Quote from: Dune on April 09, 2013, 11:46:06 AM
QuoteI sense a trend lately towards less reading
Sorry about that. The less time I have, the faster I read, and don't get it all in, apparently  ::)

Ghehe, don't worry Ulco, despite it was in response to you it is really meant in general!

Quote from: TheBadger on April 09, 2013, 12:08:24 PM
QuotePerhaps this scene is a nice goody to share on my website CGScenery.com?

Your going to make me cry.

Yeah it isn't that super-complicated and doesn't contain many of my often used secrets (if I still have them).

Cheers,
Martin

Tangled-Universe

Ok here they are...

Two different kind of solutions for the artefacts.
Well, actually one wasn't a solution, but rather a fix of an error I made with setting up the scene.
I forgot an extra compute terrain after my strata shaders and that caused some mis-matches in coordinates for the intersect underlying.
This can result in those stretched artefacts as well as that the displacement can be too low/high in some places, causing the debris lying higher than the rock.

The other solution was to change the intersect underlying mode to favour depression.

Anyway, fixed now and the results are quite different.
I like the "2_fav_dep" one better, but I also like some gritty aspects from the other.

I'll see if I can get something in between?

Cheers,
Martin

Jo Kariboo

Very nice ! I prefer "2_fav_dep". :)

choronr

Agree, I also favor the second image. Fantastic vertical and horizontal erosion.

Oshyan

Agreed, fav_deep looks more realistic and subtle. Still needs some roughing up on some of the horizontal surfaces perhaps, but overall it's a beautiful look.

- Oshyan

Dune

2-fav is favorite, just the right amount of debris and great erosion. 'Too bad' it's a WM and not TG terrain, but that's nitpicking  ;)

AP

If you can, find a way if possible to build up the rocks more at the bases then anything, like talus were the larger rocks would fall and build up on one another. The upper vertical cliffs should be finer loose dirt and less, more scattered stone. At least i would think it would look like this because the cliff looks dry and steep enough for that type of noticeable thermal erosion.

mhaze

Agree 2_fav_dep is my favourite the horizontal rocks are just right now.

Tangled-Universe

Thanks all :)

Quote from: Dune on April 11, 2013, 02:24:07 AM
2-fav is favorite, just the right amount of debris and great erosion. 'Too bad' it's a WM and not TG terrain, but that's nitpicking  ;)

Haha yes but I so agree with you. I like WM2 very much, but on the other side I'm a TG purist as well :)

Quote from: ChrisC on April 11, 2013, 02:26:52 AM
If you can, find a way if possible to build up the rocks more at the bases then anything, like talus were the larger rocks would fall and build up on one another. The upper vertical cliffs should be finer loose dirt and less, more scattered stone. At least i would think it would look like this because the cliff looks dry and steep enough for that type of noticeable thermal erosion.

Thanks for that nice observation Chris.
I think I understand what you mean, but if you like and have time could you maybe post a link to a reference?
I suppose with upper vertical cliffs you mean upper = higher altitude? Or vertical slope?
At the moment all 4 stone layers have the same restrictions.
What I can do is add a 5th layer of larger stones and have those deposit on flatter slopes at lower altitudes and then for the other 4 layers have them deposit on more vertical slopes as size decreases.

Quote from: mhaze on April 11, 2013, 02:52:02 AM
Agree 2_fav_dep is my favourite the horizontal rocks are just right now.

Thanks Mick. It's funny though that I haven't touched the horizontal rocks here. So perhaps what you meant had to do with the artefacts while I was thinking it had to do with my strata settings.

Actually, it doesn't matter, because I did change the strata settings yesterday according to your suggestion.
I added an extra redirect shader which displaces upwards to distort the strata here and there.
The coverage is quite low for this effect, just here and there, but it's pretty nice I think!

AP

Yes, the vertical slope.

In the higher elevation slopes i would build up sediment flows having fine dirt and smaller stones but more limited in the amount of stones. However, i have to add that this is not always the case, the stone amount and size will vary. Sometimes, the sediment has very little stones at all and all you have are fine dirt comprised alluvial fans.

http://lookingatthewest.files.wordpress.com/2012/05/20120517-2217.jpg

http://www.earthonlinemedia.com/ebooks/tpe_3e/mass_movement_weathering/talus_DDS21_HLC0007.jpg

http://cdn.c.photoshelter.com/img-get/I00009txVVhPIThk/s/870/870/SGWeaver-20100701-21823.jpg

http://www.arcticphoto.co.uk/Pix/EG/02/EG.5020-50_P.JPG

http://en.academic.ru/pictures/enwiki/84/TalusConesIsfjorden.jpg

AP

Other then those details, the image is very real to me. The details and lighting are very well layed out

Tangled-Universe

Thanks for the links Chris, much appreciated :)

In the meantime I did render a 4k version of this in about 14 hours, here it is.
This one has some redirect on Y to distort the strata here and there. It's quite subtle and low in coverage.

Chris, I haven't integrated your suggestions, but will do that in my next version.

AP

No worries, take your time.  ;)