After 229 hours, it is finally done!!! I had to take the quality down to make the file small enough to post here; the full image looks even better. I'll try to find a place to link the other version. Here it is.
Edit: Here we go. http://fc01.deviantart.com/fs19/f/2007/307/d/7/Planet_Surfacing_with_Clouds_by_nvseal.jpg
bravo !
Very nice! The clouds are a little grainy, and the back of the plant looks a little too shadowed (should it really be pure black?) but other than that it looks fantastic.
wonderful job mate, I agree the clouds are a little grainy though, but that could just be the image compression.
Quote from: Will on November 02, 2007, 08:15:50 PM
wonderful job mate, I agree the clouds are a little grainy though, but that could just be the image compression.
Sadly, yes, it is the compression. The full quality jpg is 3 mb though. And old_baggard, I thought the same thing about the utter darkness on the other side of the planet. But then again, I didn't want to render it again o fix it. :P
Fantastic as usual.
Very nice results indeed. With a camera exposing for the lit side of the planet I think the dark side would indeed be basically totally black. What else woud be illuminating it enough to make a difference?
- Oshyan
deiviantart.com handles large (!) files. Good work!
*drools*
Dam, Thats some nice texturing you've got there!
Cant wait to see the full version.
Very nice and, in my opinion, all you need is the clouds to be less sparse in select areas to venture toward absolute realism. I love this so this isn't a major critique. Keep going. I think you have quite a knack at this.
fantastic work! :)
Ooooooh that's nice ;D
I agree with Oshyan about the dark side; with exposure for the bright day side should we even be seeing the stars?
In fact without a grate deal of post-processioning is unlikely that you would see any stars at all. If you look at space shoots say taken form the space shuttle of the earth relative to thew black background of space you typically do not see the background stars due the relative brightness of the earth having a higher relative Lux level than the stars in the background, given the exposure of the camera recording the scene (Set to ensure that the earth, shuttle, crew members etc are not blown out) would mean that in photographic terms that stars are vary difficult to discern in day to day situations, to an astronaut the stars are clearly visible but to the camera they are not.
There is film (Taken I be leave with IR film and not visible light and hence black and white) where you can see the background stars but this type of imagery is shoot using special cameras which from my understanding are not used on every STS flight.
Regards to you.
Cyber-Angel
Old thread I know but I was looking bad and I saw that there is no noticeable banding in the clouds, care to share how you did that?
Well, actually there is some banding in some of the cloud layers. You can't see it here because of the altitude and the camera angle. However, you can get rid of the banding by disabling the acceleration cache at the expense of render time.
That's a really neat looking planet, well done!
Like the big picture size, what were the rendersettings and time?
Martin
The render quality was 0.9 (if I remember correctly). GI 1. AA 5.
How did you make the poles in your planets, they look great.
Holy God! 229 HOURS???!!! Blegh! I give up after about eight or so...
Quote from: Will on November 21, 2007, 06:29:52 PM
How did you make the poles in your planets, they look great.
To make the poles, I checked the "Use Y for Slope Slope Key" box and then changed the selection from "Final Normal" to "Planet/object normal." After that I changed the slope values until I found one I liked then played with the fractal and coverage until I found a good distribution. That's pretty much all there is to it.
Your clouds are very realistic!
It's an excellent result!!! :o
I really don't know if would be possible to get something better, I mean a better distribution of clouds to simulate cyclones or seasons...