Nearly at the Top

[pixelpusher636]

Aside from assembling this all together, I'm afraid I can take no credit whatsoever.

Credit to the amazing assets go to:
Bushes - Dune
Voronoi Cliff - WAS
Flock of Birds - Hannes

Thanks for viewing.

[Dune]

Nice composition. Powerful render. What struck me though is the 'sandyness' of the rock. Too evenly grainy, I'd say. I would assume that rocks worn that smooth overall would be smoother. Perhaps some local indentations, where erosion did get a chance, with some very local accumulation of small particles in those dents would be fitting.
What would also be interesting is to add a very small scale local erosion on this (Daniil's plugin) to see what happens.
Or scratches made by ice age movement of hunderds of meters of heavy ice and rocks...

[Hannes]

Really great!!!! Looks very natural. I agree with Ulco about the rock surface, and I think, a little DOF would be a nice addition, since the camera lens seems to be quite close to the surface.

[pixelpusher636]

Thanks guys! I agree with the both of you. I'd thought about adding a little DOF after a few test renders and put it off to just get a decent render. The DOF settings are probably intuitive to most people, it eludes me and I usually have to spend a lot of time fiddling. Is their a trick? I.m going to see if I get lucky and get results quickly with it today, sometimes this happens.

The graininess on the rock was a failed attempt to add some subtle texture. Turns out it wasn't so subtle. I had tried a series of failed attempts to mask to rises crevices etc. and I was unsuccessful.  I will attach, maybe I have the nodes setup incorrectly. In the meantime I think will just remove it and give Daniil's erosion a go and see if I can get some interesting results that way.

I appreciate the feedback gentlemen.

[WAS]

Crevices probably won't be obtainable without compute terrain, and a surface layer. At least procedurally.

But you can go in and pipe out components you need. Like largest ovtave voronoi with Use Normal A conditional. This will outpout the largest voronoi map mixed. You can then use a colour adjust and lift white point to like 20 (depending on your normal amplitude; 20 is based on default amplitude of the shader) and adjust until you get a nice map. Then you have a rises mask, then invert for crevices. You can do this with the other maps as well, like Use Normal B

Bringing Gamma Down in your colour adjust can help with a smoother transition zone. See second image. WP at 15, Gamma at 0.25.

[pixelpusher636]

Crevices probably won't be obtainable without compute terrain, and a surface layer. At least procedurally.

But you can go in and pipe out components you need. Like largest ovtave voronoi with Use Normal A conditional. This will outpout the largest voronoi map mixed. You can then use a colour adjust and lift white point to like 20 (depending on your normal amplitude; 20 is based on default amplitude of the shader) and adjust until you get a nice map. Then you have a rises mask, then invert for crevices. You can do this with the other maps as well, like Use Normal B

Bringing Gamma Down in your colour adjust can help with a smoother transition zone. See second image. WP at 15, Gamma at 0.25.

Thanks for your input WAS! This will be very helpful indeed!

[pixelpusher636]

No luck getting erosion to do what I wanted but some success with some DOF.

[Hannes]

The DOF looks good!

[blattacker]

I'd thought about adding a little DOF after a few test renders and put it off to just get a decent render. The DOF settings are probably intuitive to most people, it eludes me and I usually have to spend a lot of time fiddling. Is their a trick? I.m going to see if I get lucky and get results quickly with it today, sometimes this happens.

 I don't necessarily find the DoF settings intuitive, but you can use a website like DOF simulator to set up the shot and visualize the depth of field (though it is, admittedly, geared more towards portraits than anything else). Anything inside the gray box around the subject will be in focus for the selected distance and focal length, and everything outside that box will be out of focus.

[pixelpusher636]

I'd thought about adding a little DOF after a few test renders and put it off to just get a decent render. The DOF settings are probably intuitive to most people, it eludes me and I usually have to spend a lot of time fiddling. Is their a trick? I.m going to see if I get lucky and get results quickly with it today, sometimes this happens.

 I don't necessarily find the DoF settings intuitive, but you can use a website like DOF simulator to set up the shot and visualize the depth of field (though it is, admittedly, geared more towards portraits than anything else). Anything inside the gray box around the subject will be in focus for the selected distance and focal length, and everything outside that box will be out of focus.

Thanks for the link Blattacker! After spending some time with these controls yesterday I started to get a much better feel for the effect. Still not especially intuitive but your link might help further in taking out some trial and error. 

[Dune]

I think there is some sort of formula that states to what extension things are 'sharp' with a certain distance and aperture set. Sudden thought; purchase a second-hand lens, that has the dials, and you can read distances   But there should be something online.
I wish there was a way within TG to show not only the distance (with the red overlay) but also the extent of sharpness. Crop renders is what I do.

[blattacker]

I think there is some sort of formula that states to what extension things are 'sharp' with a certain distance and aperture set. Sudden thought; purchase a second-hand lens, that has the dials, and you can read distances   But there should be something online.
I wish there was a way within TG to show not only the distance (with the red overlay) but also the extent of sharpness. Crop renders is what I do.

There absolutely is a formula to determine depth of field, but it's about as clear as mud ahaha! It's

Code Select Expand

(2 * [distance to focus object]^2 * [f-number] * [circle of confusion]) / [focal length]^2
which is why I prefer things that let you visualize it instead (especially since I'm not entirely clear on what a "circle of confusion" is). What is this red overlay, though?

[Dune]

This here. But it just gives the distance you set in camera. Perhaps a nice feature addition would be to do something like a distance shader based on aperture and distance set with a blurry zone to check what's (more or less) sharp. It should be possible to incorporate that formula into TG.
I understand this formula more or less, but not the 'circle of confusion'.

[blattacker]

Oh, that is not at all what I thought that button did! I saw "DoF Preview" and assumed it'd be trying to preview the DoF blur in the 3D preview! That's really good to know!

[pixelpusher636]

This here. But it just gives the distance you set in camera. Perhaps a nice feature addition would be to do something like a distance shader based on aperture and distance set with a blurry zone to check what's (more or less) sharp. It should be possible to incorporate that formula into TG.
I understand this formula more or less, but not the 'circle of confusion'.

Right there with you Dune. I'm slightly confused about the circle of confusion as well. I like your idea.