For this one I used a World Machine 2 terrain as a base.
In TG2 I only added mild redirect shader displacements, 2 strata shaders and fake stones + about a half a dozen of surface layers.
Rendered with detail 0.8, AA8 with Catmull-Rom, GI 3/6/4, 64 atmo samples and of course soft shadows.
For postwork I went for something almost surreal and more artsy.
Cheers,
Martin
amazing terrain work TU :)
absolutely stunning
and did i mention its amazing? ;) ;D
Is there a hole in your terrain at about 4:00 o'clock ? I'm seeing a square blue shape. Hope it's not my eyes.......................................... :o
Yes there are some artefacts, but I think I've fixed them by now...new render is on its way (somewhere tomorrow)
CRAZY! Never mind the little issues. The render is unbelievably real!
Outstanding terrain and details.
thats really a lot of detail, very well done!
Cheers guys :)
I've rendered a new version with an extra compute terrain somewhere in the network which fixed the artefacts, but will have some effect on the rock-structures.
Now I'm rendering another version with a different type of intersect underlying which also fixes the issues, but will also affect the original look.
I think I'll post both to compare.
I hope I can remember how I did the postwork in Photoshop ;D
Cheers,
Martin
Excellent render but I find the rock layers too linear, strangely mechanical or constructed. Looking forward to seeing the updates.
Thanks Mick,
I like the linearity, in most places. I agree that in some spots it tends to look off.
I'll see what I can do about it. Have to think about how.
Thanks for your suggestion!
Cheers,
Martin
awaiting the update with baited breath!
:)
These look awesome!! 8)
Really nice, detailed work. What size settings are you using to export from World Machine? Looking forward to the next image.
excellent WM integration. Nice one Martin
Indeed, some spots look very stretched, and there's a spot where the debris lies higher than the base rock (by the looks of it, anyway).
I sense a trend lately towards less reading ;)
http://www.planetside.co.uk/forums/index.php/topic,15911.msg155061.html#msg155061
http://www.planetside.co.uk/forums/index.php/topic,15911.msg155104.html#msg155104
Both renders fixed the issue succesfully, but I can't get the same result with post-processing as the first image.
Hopefully I can post it soon. Need to document those steps in the future :-/
@Zaxxon: if I'm not mistaken this is a 4096px WM terrain, could be 2048 too, but since the erosion maps are 150MB BMP's I think it's a 4096 terrain.
I'll check.
Perhaps this scene is a nice goody to share on my website CGScenery.com? :)
Cheers,
Martin
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 ::)
QuotePerhaps this scene is a nice goody to share on my website CGScenery.com?
Your going to make me cry.
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
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
Very nice ! I prefer "2_fav_dep". :)
Agree, I also favor the second image. Fantastic vertical and horizontal erosion.
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
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 ;)
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.
Agree 2_fav_dep is my favourite the horizontal rocks are just right now.
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!
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
Other then those details, the image is very real to me. The details and lighting are very well layed out
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.
No worries, take your time. ;)
Strange they looked more subtle - however this latest iteration is just right displacement wise not sure about the colour though but that's personal taste really.
Yeah I agree about the colours, I can't get them right somehow.
I still like the very first image most, colour wise.
I need to take a colour-grading/post-processing course or the like...
A new iteration with smaller stones on steeper slopes and vice versa.
I think this one is nearly finished?
And the final...
Rendered @ 2400x1350 with quite high settings for basically everything. Took 15 hours.
the green parts are a bit strange.
the render is over-contrasted on my monitor, is that on purpose ?
and to finish my critics, the sky's colour is strange on the last one :)
Let's just use one sentence : the first one is definitely my favorite and I love it ;)
...whatever you say, it is a killer terrain... Franck has some points... with the image quite heavily saturated and contrasted; it helps in some ways, but messes up the sky etc...
still an amazing bit of terrain work!
:)
J
Hi Franck!
I noticed the green myself and updated the image with less green and more warmer colours.
So it's not clear yet to me on which you actually commented :)
I actually like the bluish haze in the distance!
Here's the .exr for you to play...it's horribly difficult for me to get right.
Perhaps you can have an attempt with it? ;D
Cheers!
Martin
Quote from: inkydigit on April 18, 2013, 02:42:05 PM
...whatever you say, it is a killer terrain... Franck has some points... with the image quite heavily saturated and contrasted; it helps in some ways, but messes up the sky etc...
still an amazing bit of terrain work!
:)
J
Thanks Jason :) Glad you like it! I'm still planning on sharing this one later.
Franck definitely has some points, as you can see above.
Feel free to grab the .exr and have a go with it.
If you manage to get a nice result then please post it here! :)
Cheers,
Martin
Awesome render/s. The final is the best.
No crit, just wanted to play with the exr.
Hmmm I see I took out to much of the red. this may be a bit better.
This terrain has some gorgeous feathers to it Martin. Wish I could do it. :o :o :o :o :o
Just trying someting !
Thanks guys! :) Keep on going!
Jo, I like #2.jpg! Do you remember how you did it?
Badger, nice stuff in B&W, though in this case B&W is a lot more forgiving :)
Yes but I work with aperture. For the up of the image I make a white and black with brush and I paint it with monochrome. I have in memory with aperture the procedure for all the image. I don't know if it utile for you ?
I don't know? I suppose Aperture uses/offer same functions like exposure/gamma etc.? I should be able to apply that to my Photoshop work flow, *may be* :)
Ok I make a file and I post it.
Thanks Jo.
I'm afraid that file is useless though, since I don't have Aperture and Photoshop doesn't understand it.
With "functions" I meant, for example, that Aperture has a "levels" or "exposure" setting, just like Photoshop.
This way I could go through the same steps in Photoshop as you did in Aperture.
I didn't mean they would have similar file formats. See?
Thanks for the exr Martin...
I often have trouble getting what I want out of them... I have tried many times and the results have sometimes been a bit disappointing!
I often just tweak the tif file instead... :(
Colour and contrast etc is a personal thing too, I guess... Some people like 'super HDR' style images...
You can run the image through all number of actions/presets and find lots of different/nice/interesting effects... depends on your mood!
I did try some quick tone compression in a demo of photomatix pro, the results were pretty nice... I am sure you could replicate this in photoshop... I will have another look tomorrow.
cheers
Jason
:)
Hi Martin I make screen capture of all of adjustment of the "image 2" in Aperture.
The adjustment of screen capture PNG n. 1 to 6 it for the totality of the image and n.7 (black and white plus monochrome it's for only the top of the image). I added a jpg as example for the top of the image which I cut out with the brush.
No BW, did not even desaturate :)
I'll leave you lot to sort out the colour - it's such a personal thing ;) The rocks are great some of the best I've seen.
you are right Mick... I could not get anything I liked...
the atmo and surface layer colours are quite difficult for me to change!
I still love the terrain... whilst playing around with the image in photoshop... I thought I spotted Bear Grylls!!! :D
thanks again for sharing the image Martin...
Jason
:)
This month, in theaters tgd file...
[attachimg=1]
As you can see not that special or complicated!
My final attempt at post-processing this one...
This scene is now available at CGScenery.com's Blog section, go have a look and have fun with it! ;D
Cheers,
Martin
This last one looks best i think.
I like this last one as well. And, I like to see that you have a talus at the lower left. If bringing the POV farther back, will we see a valley? Close up as is, the terrain work here is spectacular.
Quote from: TheBadger on April 21, 2013, 08:03:17 PM
This last one looks best i think.
Ghehe, I guess you have only looked at the image and not the actual post? ;)
Quote from: choronr on April 22, 2013, 12:19:48 AM
I like this last one as well. And, I like to see that you have a talus at the lower left. If bringing the POV farther back, will we see a valley? Close up as is, the terrain work here is spectacular.
Thanks Bob, I'm rendering another iteration now which in my opinion has even better defined talus and better seperation of differently sized stones.
I am very interested on how you masked this landscape. Thanks for sharing this.
Thanks Martin! Hopefully soon I'll make a .tgd you and other will want to see too. I am a late bloomer I guess. :P
Bright side of your cliff picture: Pure win!
Dark side of your cliff picture: It could easily kill TG newbie brains like mine (downloaded the .tdg file, opened it, saw the nodes and stuff, screamed like mad, went off my computer to kill a kitten..)! :-[
lol I know that feeling!
It's always harder to understand other tgd's than your own, built up by yourself and maybe just as complicated or even more complicated. Although I must admit, I sometimes have a hard time understanding my own, after a while :-\
I'll take a look as soon as possible ;)
I am very curious about your atmo settings