I've been doing some rock tests (again), but i can't see the wood for the trees anymore. What do you think?
This is strictly personal taste, but I'm kind of partial to the last image
1, 2 and 6 for me but all of them are good.
Good form experiments with lots of potential I'd say. The last, more finished one looks very nice. With additional subtle small and larger color variations that would be found naturally in most large rock formations it looks like any one of them could work well.
The last is also my favorite, but it has to fit in a desert scene and it's not a typical rock for a desert. I think i have to combine a few rock types with less specularity.
No.1 would be my first choice.
1, 2 and 7 are my favorites. I very much like those, and wonder how many compute normals you had to use, and how fast/slow the files render. I tend to use as little of these time-consuming nodes as possible, but I'm also aware that to make these, you probably need more than 1 compute normal/terrain. Any insight would be most welcome of course ;) but I would well understand if you keep your finds to yourself.
I like them all, but the last one is my favourite. Cool!!!
Quote1, 2 and 7 are my favorites. I very much like those, and wonder how many compute normals you had to use, and how fast/slow the files render. I tend to use as little of these time-consuming nodes as possible, but I'm also aware that to make these, you probably need more than 1 compute normal/terrain. Any insight would be most welcome of course but I would well understand if you keep your finds to yourself.
Render times were reasonable, an average 1,5 hours. However, to speed things up I disabled the atmosphere and changed the background color to blue.
I didn't need a lot of compute normals either, sometimes one and sometimes none at all. The displacement tolerance of the planet was set to two.
My workflow is a little different because I start with a very smooth terrain, thereafter I use very large and bold displacements with roughness set to zero as a base for further texturing. Next smaller textures with more roughness are added, similar to the way you would make a painting or a sculpture. The smaller textures are fed into a transform shader, final position enabled, to prevent stretching.
The advantage is that in this way – at least in my experience – it is possible to get away with extreme displacements without the geometry breaking up so soon and you need less compute normals.
Top to bottom:
Terrain
Perlin noise
Twist and shear
Widen top
Medium scale textures
Strata
Final
Thanks for the generous explanation of your method. Very interesting. :)
You're welcome.
Yes, thanks for your explanation and sequence René. It's funny that I tend to do the same lately, start with a smooth terrain and build up. The overlapping of displacements (folding over of the planet's skin) is a point of trouble, and this way you can avoid a lot of it.
Very good explanation and good result!
All of the rock tests have there unique aspects about there appearance. Any one of them could fit into any realistic or more fantasy environments with additional adjustments. Also, thank you for sharing some of your techniques, very generous of you.
love the color in the very first image best. Like the last render in the OP best.
I had some nice results using this technique. I think these would be harder to achieve otherwise, at least without using blue nodes.
Yes, these mesa are really cool. I thought you'd built them up using huge fake stones on a pillar (something I'm doing right now).
I cheated a little; after dozens of procedural tryouts I decided to use a displacement map made in Photoshop for the terrain. Fake stones might have worked to.
Aha. Painted in the separate RGB channels in a 32-bit tiff?
No, simple black and white. Most of the large displacements are done with textures. For the talus I used a second planet.
So basically a simple vertical/normal displacement, not really vector disp. You could have fun trying to copy this to the G channel of a 32-bit tiff, and then do some additional splashes in the R and B channels, see what comes out in a vector displacement setup.
Second planet for the talus figures, though with some color adjust in the basic mask you can have 2 displacement values and make the talus on one planet. A bit more cumbersome, though.
1 and 7 of the originals are my favorites but they're all great. Thanks also for the method work through in graphic form...
I really like that Mesa.
1-2-6 for me and the mesa are excellent!
I tried that mesa image method a couple of times. I did a vertical adjust on height field operator. Is the proper way to displace vertical? For example, I have the image below in just about every file format possible. In the old days we exported and imported terrain from and into Terragen in lots of ways. Remembering the brighter the white the more height? (I was gonna do a crop circle thing, haha) I now may try to make an object out of it, ha!
I like what you are doing here and it gives me lots to further experiment with. Thank you!
Glad to see you over here in the Forums Rene
is the mesa.jpg a photo or a render?
Quote from: TheBadger on September 06, 2016, 02:30:35 AM
is the mesa.jpg a photo or a render?
It is a render. Thus we wanted him here around too Michael :)
Quote from: TheBadger on September 06, 2016, 02:30:35 AM
is the mesa.jpg a photo or a render?
This is what I call a compliment!!!! ;)
Quote from: luvsmuzik on September 05, 2016, 07:34:43 PM
I tried that mesa image method a couple of times. I did a vertical adjust on height field operator. Is the proper way to displace vertical? For example, I have the image below in just about every file format possible. In the old days we exported and imported terrain from and into Terragen in lots of ways. Remembering the brighter the white the more height? (I was gonna do a crop circle thing, haha) I now may try to make an object out of it, ha!
I like what you are doing here and it gives me lots to further experiment with. Thank you!
Actually I didn't use a heightfield, just a displaced image map shader. :)
Quote from: TheBadger on September 06, 2016, 02:30:35 AM
is the mesa.jpg a photo or a render?
Yes it's part of a larger render i posted a few months ago on Face book. :) Some people liked the overall image, except the clouds that they did not find realistic. Looking at it now i agree. There are also a few other things a noticed that bother me, so at some point i will do a new render.
I hope this makes sense; it takes a lot of effort to write English. :(
Excellent work and composition!
Funny, I thought the original clouds were too red on the bottoms when I saw the image a while ago, but I went on a recent road trip through New Mexico and Arizona and saw clouds very much like that!
- Oshyan
There is hardly any difference on my screen Oshyan. :) https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=973718279377239&set=gm.951779854948038&type=3&theater
The last one for now. Thanks everyone for thinking along and for your input.
I can't open the file René? It looks corrupted.
Mine showing on Mac, not on Windows. Great stuff you have done here and lots of help! Thank you for sharing this.
The final one shows a lot of work, I like it. Good job.
I hope this works!
Yes. Great :)
Very impressive. Details can almost feel the fine dust on the rock walls.
Whoah!!!! Incredible!
Quote from: René on September 07, 2016, 11:43:32 AM
I hope this works!
WOW just WOW....I'm in awe of your rock work Rene
I like the style you got going on here with the nice sharp lines.
There is no difference Rene, I was just saying that the slight red color that is on the bottom of your clouds did not look realistic to me. But then I saw some real clouds with that same effect. ;)
- Oshyan
QuoteThere is no difference Rene, I was just saying that the slight red color that is on the bottom of your clouds did not look realistic to me. But then I saw some real clouds with that same effect.
- Oshyan
OK, haha. So i was right after all. ;)
Im depressed now. 8)
just impressing rock work!
Quote from: TheBadger on September 08, 2016, 06:24:01 AM
Im depressed now. 8)
me too!
:)
killer stuff René... great to see you sharing some insights!
cheers
Jason
:)
Rene, fantastic work man.
Looking at your posts on the Mesa, I would like to know how you sharpened up the corners of the rock. Your original 2D height field has rounded sides yet the final has wonderfully crisp vertical corners and edges.
Glenn
The heightfield was just used for the largest "base" shapes. All the detail comes from procedural displacements in Terragen, which is what allows for overhangs/non-planar features, and is responsible for the sharper features.
- Oshyan
Quote from: Grassynoel on September 10, 2016, 02:20:05 PM
Rene, fantastic work man.
Looking at your posts on the Mesa, I would like to know how you sharpened up the corners of the rock. Your original 2D height field has rounded sides yet the final has wonderfully crisp vertical corners and edges.
Glenn
Try raising the basic shape and then add some huge fake stones (with or without an compute terrain in front); you get some sharp angled outcrops as well.
Quote from: Grassynoel on September 10, 2016, 02:20:05 PM
Rene, fantastic work man.
Looking at your posts on the Mesa, I would like to know how you sharpened up the corners of the rock. Your original 2D height field has rounded sides yet the final has wonderfully crisp vertical corners and edges.
Glenn
It's like Oshyan said; all of the displacements are procedural textures on top of the height field. I used vertically streched Voronoi for the main large displacements. I added a little warp too.
You could of course use (stretched)fake stones too.
Thank you.
Now please tell me everything else you know :)
Like some of the images in your portfolio very much too. Good work.
Quote from: René on September 13, 2016, 07:55:04 AM
It's like Oshyan said; all of the displacements are procedural textures on top of the height field. I used vertically streched Voronoi for the main large displacements. I added a little warp too.
You could of course use (stretched)fake stones too.
Thanks René,
I was playing with all sorts of noises and seeing your stretched voronoi makes a lot of sense. Can't wait to get home and try it out. (Travelling for work and not having TG4 to play with kills me)
G
Rene,
How do you put noise through a voronoi pattern like that? I have been trying for days.
Any clues would be appreciated.
Glenn
Quote from: Grassynoel on September 24, 2016, 03:58:19 AM
Rene,
How do you put noise through a voronoi pattern like that? I have been trying for days.
Any clues would be appreciated.
Glenn
A Voronoi 3D diff scaler(blue node) was used. I found a few clip files on this forum and combined them(without really understanding what i was doing.)
I hope this will put you in the right direction. :)
Quote from: Grassynoel on September 24, 2016, 03:58:19 AM
Rene,
How do you put noise through a voronoi pattern like that? I have been trying for days.
Any clues would be appreciated.
Glenn
The scale input of noises can be a vector, so x,y and z can be different.
My recently posted file on columnar rocks uses the same technique. Though I've been struggling to get the same results as Rene :( Might give an insight into how to do it though.
Quote from: René on September 25, 2016, 03:35:09 AM
Quote from: Grassynoel on September 24, 2016, 03:58:19 AM
Rene,
How do you put noise through a voronoi pattern like that? I have been trying for days.
Any clues would be appreciated.
Glenn
A Voronoi 3D diff scaler(blue node) was used. I found a few clip files on this forum and combined them(without really understanding what i was doing.)
I hope this will put you in the right direction. :)
Thank you so much. VERY useful. I really appreciate the help.
Glenn
QuoteThe scale input of noises can be a vector, so x,y and z can be different.
That is interesting to hear, more opportunities.... thanks mogn.
thanks rene and mogn.