A fully procedural scene.3h30 to render. I don't like the shoreline though.
If anyone had a link for a 3D model of a boat, I'd like to put it near the edge of the water...
(http://cjoint.com/data/dEcrKR5spo_Untitled.jpg)
Erwan
That's a fine beach you have there!
Great detail and scale... You do need that boat to get more life into it though.
Over on Terragen.org:
http://www.terragen.org/index.php?action=tpmod;dl=item333
P.S. Nice scene.
Everything looks amazing and I like your shoreline, but I don't know what you want.
Quote from: calico on March 27, 2009, 10:50:21 PM
Everything looks amazing and I like your shoreline, but I don't know what you want.
I don't like the limit between water and sand...too straight!
Erwan
I like the scene very much! :) Do you intend putting in some flora?
This is lovely- makes me want to wade out into that water :)
I like how there's another hill peeking up behind the low clouds...
Quote from: Mr_Lamppost on March 27, 2009, 09:46:43 PM
Over on Terragen.org:
http://www.terragen.org/index.php?action=tpmod;dl=item333
P.S. Nice scene.
Thanks for the link!
(http://cjoint.com/data/dFxupUsfCy_1h24.jpg)
I like the second image very much , but.... wouldn't it be better to have the original beach with the canoe models pushed prow first into the sand and thus anchored rather than aimlessly (and without paddlers) floating about? Just a thought expressed that could/might create more realism in an already close to photographic quality image.
I just found the "Cast shadows" box in the water page... :-[
I need to restart!
Anyway I needed to, since I'd like to change the clouds...
Erwan
This is pretty nice. I love the canoe shadows.
The scene looks great but I have critisisms. The shadows for the canoes are to sharp for me, I feel like under the water they would be rippling and alot softer. Also, i prefered the first coastline. Otherwise i think the clouds look great and the way the mountains fit ferpectly.
EDIT: Would I be able to grab hold of the .tgd for your planet picture, I've been trying my hand at it and i cant get past that plastic look
Canoes are nice, you may want to try adding some disturbence in the water where the canoes are.
Try adding a Paint Shader and using it as a map for your water ripples around the canoes.
Great work :)
First image: shadows of the canoes are not good...
(http://cjoint.com/data/ebvKZkSgZ2_tgout1.jpg)
Second image: I thought checking the "Cast shadows" box in the water shader would help, making the water between the canoe and its shadow darker, but...
(http://cjoint.com/data/ebvGkIpuXC_tgout.jpg)
As you can see, water is not transparent anymore. And we only see the reflection of the canoe, not its sahdow on the underwater sand...
For those who are interested, here is the file:
http://elgastro22.free.fr/Untitled.tgd
Quote from: jackblack on March 29, 2009, 11:33:44 PMTry adding a Paint Shader and using it as a map for your water ripples around the canoes.
What is a "Paint Shader"? That's something I'd like to know...
Erwan
Painted Shader. It's a tool used as a blending shader that allows you to paint on the preview window to position surfaces, populations etc. with precision. Just enter "painted" in the Forum Search and you should find a number of threads talking about it.
Yeah, sorry I didn't make that clearer.
My bad, it's "Painted Shader".
You can basically draw mapping or draw a stencil for other shaders.
Yeah, do a search though, you will find material that can explain it better than I can.
I just made a full size rendering with the "Cast shadows" box in Water checked:
(http://cjoint.com/data/ecmrfM6Nak_Untitled.jpg)
Erwan
The reflections in the water are amazing!
Feel like taking those canoes and and exploring
As some one who has done a fair amount of wilderness canoeing I can safely say that the shadows on the lake bed are possible but will only be seen when the sky is clear and the water clear and still - besides I like the detached shadows they give a sense of depth to the water.
Mick
Pleasant looking scene! I was wondering if it wouldn't be interesting to add some wet sand to the shore. Just slightly darker and restricted by heighth = +1m of waterlevel (for example).
Also, I was wondering if you de-activate cast shadows for the water and add soft-shadows with a diameter of 6 or so, you would probably get nice soft shadows of the canoes on the bottom of the lake.
Martin
Sure, reflections are nice. But I also like a lot refraction! I like the shadows of the boats, but I suppose the water between the boats and their shadows should be darker...
Quote from: Tangled-Universe on March 31, 2009, 02:45:51 PM
Pleasant looking scene! I was wondering if it wouldn't be interesting to add some wet sand to the shore. Just slightly darker and restricted by heighth = +1m of waterlevel (for example).
Also, I was wondering if you de-activate cast shadows for the water and add soft-shadows with a diameter of 6 or so, you would probably get nice soft shadows of the canoes on the bottom of the lake.
Martin
I just added a child layer to the sand. About soft shadows, I don't know how to use them. So I gonna look for a tutorial about them.
Erwan
Oh there's no need for a tutorial for soft-shadows, I'll explain it briefly.
- You can find the soft-shadows setting in the sunlight-node.
- The radius of the soft-shadows determines how soft the edges of the shadows will be.
Also, when light-occluding objects/edges are far away from the surface, lower soft-shadow-radius is needed for soft edges.
Is the object/edge close to the surface, higher soft-shadow radius is needed for the same soft edges.
This all depends heavily on the nature of your scene. So there's no golden rule.
Therefore my guess of a radius of 6 is no more than just a guess :)
- The softshadow samples determine how accurate the soft shadow will be rendered. Too low amount will result in speckled shadows. Too high increases rendertimes.
This is basically it. If you need any help then just let me/us know.
Martin
Quote from: Tangled-Universe on March 31, 2009, 03:25:56 PM
Oh there's no need for a tutorial for soft-shadows, I'll explain it briefly.
- You can find the soft-shadows setting in the sunlight-node.
- The radius of the soft-shadows determines how soft the edges of the shadows will be.
Also, when light-occluding objects/edges are far away from the surface, lower soft-shadow-radius is needed for soft edges.
Is the object/edge close to the surface, higher soft-shadow radius is needed for the same soft edges.
This all depends heavily on the nature of your scene. So there's no golden rule.
Therefore my guess of a radius of 6 is no more than just a guess :)
- The softshadow samples determine how accurate the soft shadow will be rendered. Too low amount will result in speckled shadows. Too high increases rendertimes.
This is basically it. If you need any help then just let me/us know.
Martin
OK, I understand now. But is the number of samples linked to the diameter? The larger the diameter is, more samples are needed?
Anyway I just found that I already activated soft shadows, but only with the default values (diameter 0.5, samples 9)
Erwan
Yes that's correct, very good! ;) :)
There is some logic in TG2 ;D
Here is the new rendering. I added a child layer of wet sand and used soft shadows. Diameter 6 , samples 9. And I disactivated "Cast shadows" for water.
(http://cjoint.com/data/ediQL4dDWL_Untitled.jpg)
Erwan
This looks really nice Erwan.
It seems my guess for 6 as diameter was probably even too low. At least, for the kind of shadows I have in mind.
Maybe you should raise it to 10, but then you would have to increase samples above ~15 to get clean shadows which will eventually increase rendertime.
I'd say: do some cropped testrenders. The wet sand color is exactly what I had in mind, nice!
What bothers me is that when you add wet sand layers like this, there are always parts where it isn't visible (the middle part in your image).
No matter how flat your surface near the water is, there are always broken parts.
I've experienced this myself too, but then also with steep surfaces, like cliffs.
It's a TG-thing, so nothing you can do about.
Martin
Quote from: Tangled-Universe on April 01, 2009, 04:32:30 AMWhat bothers me is that when you add wet sand layers like this, there are always parts where it isn't visible (the middle part in your image).
No matter how flat your surface near the water is, there are always broken parts.
I think a little higher Maximum altitude for the wet sand will help.
I will start a new render, but since the last one already took 6h30 on my labtop, I will do it tonight.
Erwan
Quote from: elegac on April 01, 2009, 05:53:03 AM
Quote from: Tangled-Universe on April 01, 2009, 04:32:30 AMWhat bothers me is that when you add wet sand layers like this, there are always parts where it isn't visible (the middle part in your image).
No matter how flat your surface near the water is, there are always broken parts.
I think a little higher Maximum altitude for the wet sand will help.
I will start a new render, but since the last one already took 6h30 on my labtop, I will do it tonight.
Erwan
Of course, that will help, but it will also increase the "thickness" of the already present wet sand layer. What I mean is that it isn't ditributed evenly and that *you* can't help that. Somehow the waterline isn't accurately calculated. That's what I meant, it's not your fault/mistake.
OK, ok.
Since I won't launch a render before tonight, I'm open to suggestions about changing the atmosphere/clouds or for objets to add. Perhaps plants?
Erwan
going out on a limb here but I feel like the Canoes look a little small. Throws out the scale a bit
New rendering:soft shadows diameter 10, samples 16. 7h to render. About the size of the canoes, I don't know the length/width/height of the model, but it have been scaled to 1/10. Camera is between 1 and 2 meters above the ground.
(http://cjoint.com/data/eestLNb66L_Untitled.jpg)
Erwan
Hmmm...the difference in softshadow-diameter is noticable but not as dramatic as I hoped it would be. Maybe crazy values are necessary, but I think I'd keep it like this. The benefit isn't big enough compared to the increase in rendertime, probably.
So about ideas for trees/bushes and clouds etc: I think it would be cool if the background hills had patchy pieces of tree-populations. In the foreground you could use some bushes, but I won't touch it too much. It's nice and "quiet" and I like that, just my taste.
For the atmosphere: your whole image is now "filled". You have a foreground with grass and sand, then water with canoes and then background hills. Also the atmosphere is filled with clouds which makes the image "busy".
I'd either completely remove all the clouds or make some very thin and small patches of streaky clouds.
Hope you'll like some of these suggestions :)
Martin
just a suggestion try 0.15 for the scale of the boats, not quite double their current size but a little bigger. As i see it, if im standing my height away (1.8m) then im about 3m away from the water. Then again i may just be talking out of my *ahem*
New rendering: clouds removed, canoes resized to 0.15 and a population of "Abies grandis "(with a size from 0.75 to 1.2) from Xfrog added with altitude and slope contraints and coverage of 0.1. 6h30 to render.
(http://cjoint.com/data/egjxbcFnbN_Untitled.jpg)
Erwan
This scene just keeps getting better! The increased scale of the canoes enables you to appreciate what fine models they are, and also the rippled reflection of the canoe on the left is highly realistic. The grass colour is also an improvement. Excellent!
Just changed the coverage of the trees to 1. 8h23 to render.
(http://cjoint.com/data/ehkA1o2SJE_Untitled.jpg)
Erwan
That's a lot better, now it's almost real!!!
Great improvements Erwan!
Without the clouds the lighting seems to be way better and also the scene looks really serene now.
The trees are exactly what I had in mind :)
Agree with dombib about the rippled reflections, very nice!
Not a big change, but I have put the canoe on the right further:
(http://cjoint.com/data/eikinpINee_Untitled.jpg)
Now I'm looking for some plants to put on the foreground.
Erwan
Gentle but effective change. I don't know if you have mentioned this yourself but you can now clearly see that the softshadows look much softer because the distance between the canoe and the bottom of the lake has increased.
For bushes I'd suggest you don't add too much of them, primarily on the left foreground and then decreasing to the right...
It was a long time I didn't change a thing...so here is (again) an update: I added a reflective layer as a child layer of the "Wet Sand" layer:
(http://cjoint.com/data/fzuA6vD8Nv_Lake.jpg)
And more than 18h to render!
I'm also looking for reeds to put on the foreground. And perhaps an horizontal dead tree trunk
Erwan
beautiful!
It has been a few months I didn't change anything in that scene, and since then I better understand how to make goog sand:
Even if it is only a quick rendering (quality 0.7, in 2h30), it is much better now (wet apparence removed for the moment, as it takes a much longer time to render it because of the reflective shader):
(http://cjoint.com/data/injKqr0Lg7_Untitled.jpg)
Next step: improve the fake mud/grass
Erwan
I would add some barely seen fake stones to the sand. Make them just large enough and scattered to break up the surface.
The sand really looks right. Nice.
Working on the soil (or is the english word for "terre" clay? earth? ground) on which I will put the grass:
(http://cjoint.com/data/iovl2L1als_Untitled.jpg)
Erwan
Added fake grass and snow on the foreground mountains:
(http://cjoint.com/data/itmglunjjq_Untitled.jpg)
Erwan
This is a great scene, and it's only getting better. I think, for ultimate realism, you really need some populations of grass objects on the near shore - a shader isn't quite good enough at this distance.
agree with Dominic.
I like the far shore tree population best in this render.
Cheers,
Frank
Walli's Plant pack, grass 01 I think would work very well on the near shore.
this one is fantastic ... I don't like the lower Part (Bottom) of the image !!! Something is missing there...
I agree that the lower third of the image could use some work but the background is coming along really nicely.