WM2 2049 terrain and 3 xfrog shrub pops. Quite happy with the lighting in this one - atmo isn't the most exciting admittedly...
marvelous green surface ! is it powerfractal ? it doesn't look like objects but it really looks good
I like the surface runoff formations. Some stray rocks on the slopes with lateral displacement may give this image some more kick.
Starting to see that old Eoin magic here (and in your other recent one). ;D Both are quite sharp for my eyes though. Sharpen filter? Or just low AA? Maybe a personal preference.
- Oshyan
@Seth - just surface layers, some with displacement/intersect underlying (from memory - dashing out to work now!)
@Oshyan - thanks! But yes, I post-sharpened. I might have gone overboard a little - I might use this terrain for another pic tonight...
(http://smileys.sur-la-toile.com/repository/Respect/P_03BA%7E1.GIF) Very pretty render, very natural, the distribution of the trees and grassy surfaces is really perfect!
I really like how you've kept the grass texture to the valleys. Looks very natural.
very nice..agree with Oshyan re sharpness...
Very nice distribution of your trees. Cool point of view.
Beautiful surface!great scene!
Thanks all.
Here is is, unsharpened. Personally, I think it needs *some* sharpening :)
Looks pretty good either way. Nice place to go exploring!!!
Beautiful mood.. May I ask what trees you were using? They look interesting:)
Again from memory (currently in work) - they from from XFrog's shrubs pack. Hawthorn was one of 'em... I'll edit this later on when I think of some others!
Quote from: EoinArmstrong on June 09, 2009, 12:11:55 PM
Thanks all.
Here is is, unsharpened. Personally, I think it needs *some* sharpening :)
Me too!
Just as a tip, don't sharpen but play with levels and exposure to increase the contrast a bit. That should make you feel better, without having the urge to sharpen ;)
definitely (!) the unsharpened version looks more photo-like. When you sharpen images that have vegetation, it becomes so apparent that the resolution of the image is nowhere near the resolution of the human eye. We are used to a more blurred (distant) vegetation in photos, hence they are more believable, because we're "trained" to compare renders to photos.
Regards,
Frank