Recent posts

#31
Terragen Discussion / Re: GAEA 2.0
Last post by gao_jian11 - April 04, 2024, 05:07:29 AM
gaea 2 is still in ALPHA, adjusting parameters sometimes does not respond, some nodes do not have parameters, they will have a lot of improvements.

With the new erosion mode, I remember gaea erosion is the erosion in TG, I wonder if the erosion in terragen will also be updated?
2228.jpg2224.jpg
#32
Image Sharing / Re: Genesee River
Last post by Dune - April 04, 2024, 04:08:08 AM
Cool start. It indeed sounds like a lot of work, but the editability (which is probably not a word) is great. I guess you sculpted the water in ZBrush as well, I may see some 'stamps'. This could be done in TG with a bunch of warped simple shapes, of course, but masking foam in might be easier from a ZB map.
#33
Terragen Discussion / Re: GAEA 2.0
Last post by Tangled-Universe - April 03, 2024, 05:24:26 PM
Quote from: gao_jian11 on April 02, 2024, 09:27:32 PMI have already bought it, and the buyer now has the test version to use, feeling that the new erosion is much faster, but the functionality is still not complete. It should work well with terragen in the future.
This makes me curious, what functionality is not complete you think? Thanks :)
#34
Terragen Discussion / Re: GAEA 2.0
Last post by Stormlord - April 03, 2024, 03:54:22 PM
But did you buy the version 2.0?
They are only offer to pre order an update and will deliver version 1.0 (as they explain on their site)

STORMLORD
#35
Image Sharing / Genesee River
Last post by sboerner - April 03, 2024, 01:29:15 PM
Still very much early days with this project. The scene will show the construction of the Erie Canal aqueduct over the Genesee River at Rochester in 1823. The foreground will be a construction zone. The open meadow in the background (behind the red mill) will become the village of Rochester. So, placement of vegetation and ground details will change quite a bit.

Here is what this view looks like today: https://www.google.com/maps/@43.1546713,-77.6088796,3a,75y,287.58h,82.01t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1stdg-TNxSttQlpP2y8gh12w!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu.

As you can see, the historical landscape had to be built from scratch. Here is the process I came up with:

Using a old survey, I painted a rough 32-bit elevation map in Photoshop. Key elevations only: riverbed, millraces, islands and ridges. Everything was based on a datum in the riverbed. So, if an elevation was 12 feet above the datum, that area was painted with an RGB value of 12.0. (Actually the values were normalized so they would be visible in PS.)

The elevation was imported into Terragen and a vector displacement map rendered. The VDM was imported into ZBrush, where rough transitions were smoothed and some details added: riverbanks, shelving in the riverbed, the rocky ridge on the opposite bank. 

The edited surface was exported as a new VDM from ZBrush and placed in Terragen, where the final displacements and details were added.

It sounds like a lot of work, but it's much faster than using masks and simple shapes, which is how I would have done it before. And it's forgiving. Any problems can be easily fixed in ZBrush and a new VDM exported.

It's very accurate. The levels are right where I need them to be. This is important because all of the structures on either bank must be aligned properly with the river. The aqueduct model, which will extend from the near bank to the rocky ridge on the opposite side -- nearly 800 feet -- must fit perfectly.

I'll let you figure out how the water surface was modeled. There are some errors there that will be fixed as the scene gets finalized, so no need to point those out.  ;)


#36
Image Sharing / Re: Flying Machines
Last post by sboerner - April 03, 2024, 12:57:33 PM
Good use of depth of field. Love the UFO. 
#37
Terragen Discussion / Re: Pixel gaps in rendering
Last post by sboerner - April 03, 2024, 11:03:39 AM
Yes, I did mean to mention that Pokoy's Photoshop test seems pretty conclusive. (Thanks for that.) Enough to convince me to stop using sharpening filters during rendering.

I am puzzled that no one else seems to have run across this. Over the years I've seen it maybe 3-4 times, and always assumed it was just a hiccup during rendering, easily fixed by re-rendering a small patch to cover it up. It must take the right combination of surface material, sun angle, filter, etc.

It would be a nightmare for animation, for sure. But simple enough to avoid.

Edit: The Narrow Cubic test turned out fine, btw. I'm making this my default filter from now on. If by chance the artifacts still turn up, I'll post something here.
#38
Terragen Discussion / Re: Pixel gaps in rendering
Last post by Dune - April 03, 2024, 01:41:42 AM
What pokoy writes seems very plausible. Strange that I never had this occur, and I've been rendering an awful lot since 2009. Mostly Narrow-Cubic, btw. never 16/32bit or exr anyway or tiffs for veggies, never deviated much from defaults anyway. Almost exclusively detail 0.5 and AA6, only changing pixel threshold for clouds. Just my 2 cents.

There's always PS to clone out some small dots, luckily, but for animations you wouldn't want that.
#39
Terragen Discussion / Re: GAEA 2.0
Last post by gao_jian11 - April 02, 2024, 09:27:32 PM
I have already bought it, and the buyer now has the test version to use, feeling that the new erosion is much faster, but the functionality is still not complete. It should work well with terragen in the future.
#40
Terragen Discussion / Re: Pixel gaps in rendering
Last post by sboerner - April 02, 2024, 07:14:45 PM
An update: The machine has been rending constantly for the past three days. It only takes an hour or two for the artifacts to show up, so when they did I killed the rendering, made changes, and tried again.

You may notice that I'm going to be hedging almost all my statements here: probably, likely, seems like, etc. It's all been a game of probabilities; I feel like I've been chasing shadows try to pin this down.

First, I was able to narrow down the problem to a single population. (I think.) It was a low-poly wildflower population that I copied from an old scene. On closer inspection in Blender the model itself turned out to be fine. The roughness was a little low but hardly what I would call reflective. Normals all good, etc. Removing it from the scene eliminated the artifacts for several renderings in a row. I exported it again from SpeedTree, raised the roughness to 0.8, and put it back in the scene. The artifacts returned, but fewer and not every time.

Using Cubic B-Spline, as noted before, seems to help. It's rendering now with Narrow Cubic and so far, so good. I'll try other filters to see what happens.

Turning off Anti-aliasing bloom also seems to help. I did that with the filter set to Mitchell-Netravali and it rendered fine. But I only ran it once.

I don't think it's a memory issue. I've checked with Task Manager mid-render, and there's plenty of RAM available.

I'll send a note to Planetside to see if they've every seen this before. But if changing the filter fixes it, I'm happy. Time to move on.