Took 5 hours to render at this size. Made with 3 metaclouds and two light sources. Surface layers were used (with Use Y for altitude enabled) to limit the cloud shapes. IMO, it's more realistic than the mushroom in this thread ( http://forums.planetside.co.uk/index.php?topic=1998.0 ) and definitely renders faster. The default sun is on and the light sources are extremely bright to emulate the intense light from a nuclear explosion. As a result the camera exposure is turned down enough so the mushroom is visible. I'm posting the TGD in case anyone wants to play with it.
Yep, much more realistic than mine :)
In my defence (and terragens lol). mine was rendered 3 years ago with a much earlier version before the renderer had been optimised (or even threaded).
Good work, will you be developing this further. Could be a cool Terminator style poster.
:)
Richard
I don't know if I'll have time to work on this. One render this quality takes over 5 hours. If I add any more it will take even longer. 5 hours is a pretty long time to wait for a 640x480 render at 0.5 detail, and even worse if halfway through the render you notice something's wrong with it and have to stop, tweak, re-render, rinse, and repeat.
Looks really realistic, just like a photo from the time when bombtesting was a tourist attraction !
Now I thought, as you started comparing it, I show mine too. it´s more a scifi version, I used distance shaders instead of metaclouds.
http://forums.planetside.co.uk/index.php?topic=4398.msg46455#msg46455
Best Regards,
Jan
I like the planet and the first fireball effect, Mahnmut. ;)
Not sure what kind of machine you're rendering on, but on an i7 with 8 threads and using Raytrace Everything, this renders in about 45 minutes at 640x480. Not too bad. I reduced atmosphere samples to 16 but the noise remains about the same due to the raytracing of the atmosphere. You could reduce noise rather well by upping AA to 4 or 5 with raytracing everything, though I'm not sure what the render time would be.
- Oshyan
I can't turn AA up that high as i'm using the free version. I'll try raytracing everything. I was planning on adding detailed displacements to the terrain, though. :(
look what you have done - you've killed us all TBH... :D ;D
looks nice, dark.
I tried rendering with 32 atmo samples on my computer with Ray Trace Everything on and it took 11 1/2 hours! :o
@zaai999
No, it's pretty bright. Download the TGD and change the render camera's exposure to 1. You'll see what I mean.
@TBH, when i said dark, i didn't mean the lighting, i meant the feel of the render.
Here's a brighter version I did (upped the exposure a bit) with raytrace everything on, 16 atmo samples, AA of 4, all other settings the same. Took about 6 hours at this resolution on an i7 with 8 threads. You can see there's a good deal less noise, so not too bad a render time considering that and the higher resolution. Note that there is *less* noise despite having only 16 atmo samples - this is because at AA4 the RTE produces less noisy results. Note that the atmo and cloud samples interact with the AA setting to give you your final render noise level and time, so higher AA will give you less noisy results and longer render time. In general I would suggest leaving atmo samples at 16 in *most* cases when using RTE.
- Oshyan
Quote from: zaai999 on November 04, 2010, 12:59:41 PM
@TBH, when i said dark, i didn't mean the lighting, i meant the feel of the render.
I know. :)
hrrrr... big kaboom!
i love these over-sized firecrackers! (apart from where they are used for war)
Very realistic, it seems like an H-Bomb.
A once from me, this is atom bomb less than kiloton.
http://calimorfvs.deviantart.com/?loggedin=1#/d32fixd
brr, creepy.
I am just listening to my big 500-song-oldie-folder in random order.
And just when I looked at the new version of this image, winamp decided to play Gary Moore, "Hiroshima".
The place where innocence was burned.
Shivering regards,
Jan