Planetside Software Forums

General => Image Sharing => Topic started by: Denis Sirenko on July 26, 2017, 11:40:59 AM

Title: Nebulae
Post by: Denis Sirenko on July 26, 2017, 11:40:59 AM
Hi all!

I decided to create a new topic for nebulae. I plan to publish nebulae here as they are created. And let this be the first. Terragen + Photoshop. Here we have two of several dozen nebulae that will be in the game.

[attachimg=1]
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Kadri on July 26, 2017, 02:14:29 PM

Sweet.
Nebulaes do look easy to make in theory.
But to make a nice one is not always so easy for me.
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: bobbystahr on July 26, 2017, 03:38:51 PM
Sweet indeed, do you have any plans on sharing .tgc(clip) files of these?
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Hannes on July 27, 2017, 05:38:18 AM
Wow, that looks very good! I'd love to see the pure TG output before you edited it in PS.
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Dune on July 27, 2017, 06:28:17 AM
Great. I suppose the nebulae itself is painted in PS, not made within TG.
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Denis Sirenko on July 28, 2017, 10:53:58 AM
Thank you all, I'm glad that something succeeded!

Sweet.
Nebulaes do look easy to make in theory.
But to make a nice one is not always so easy for me.

Yeah, that's definitely so. It would seem that these are just clouds, illuminated by stars. But there are many subtleties on which everything depends. Fortunately, I have the opportunity not to repeat exactly the real nebula. I'm more inclined to some artistry.

...do you have any plans on sharing .tgc(clip) files of these?

Yes, I have such plans. But I need to solve some points. It will not be long.

I'd love to see the pure TG output before you edited it in PS.

[attachimg=1]

[attachimg=2]

I suppose the nebulae itself is painted in PS, not made within TG.

Yes, new colors have been added. But the main colors gave me Terragen. These nebulae gave out 4 shades of color, although they may not be noticeable. But in Photoshop they are easy to amplify. I also added a few other low-visibility nebulae, and I corrected some unfortunate places of morphology a little. In the future, I want to reduce this work to a minimum.
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Dune on July 28, 2017, 01:05:02 PM
They look awesome. What I actually meant was if they were cloudbased (TG) or power fractal based (TG), or actual (flat) maps from PS...
I guess with the new smoothing shader cool cloudshapes and/or mixed with partially smoothed PF's on the BG can be made, and used as nebulae.
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Denis Sirenko on July 31, 2017, 10:38:25 AM
Oh, I see. Well, I did not use anything from Photoshop for generating forms. It's just Cloud layers, Cloud and power fractal shaders and warpers. Yes, I really want to try new smoothing-filters. While there was no time for it.
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Denis Sirenko on July 31, 2017, 10:59:30 AM
One more nebula is ready.
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Dune on July 31, 2017, 11:38:30 AM
I'm impressed even more now. So, do you put your cloud layers way up in the 'galaxy', far from the main planet, or closer by? In the first case you'd probably need very high clouds.
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: bobbystahr on July 31, 2017, 02:43:48 PM
Impressed as well; would love to see a network view and/or a .tgc file to explore...beautiful work Denis
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: inkydigit on July 31, 2017, 02:49:29 PM
Very good results, inspired to try this myself!
:)
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Denis Sirenko on August 11, 2017, 12:03:39 PM
Thanks guys!

Better I'll just put the file, as promised. Briefly: the clouds at an altitude of 10 km, and we look at them from above with 11 kilometers of altitude. The planet itself is turned off. It would be great if you told me how it could be improved.

Very good results, inspired to try this myself! :)

Can't wait to look!
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Denis Sirenko on August 11, 2017, 12:27:39 PM
And one more new nebula! It's called Hulakara-Minkares.
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: sjefen on August 11, 2017, 01:19:30 PM
Beautiful!

- Terje
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Dune on August 11, 2017, 01:43:29 PM
Agreed, really wonderful work, and thanks for the file!
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: bobbystahr on August 11, 2017, 02:01:02 PM
Agreed, really wonderful work, and thanks for the file!

Ditto
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: dorianvan on August 11, 2017, 05:44:50 PM
Wow!
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Kadri on August 11, 2017, 05:53:50 PM

Great and thanks for sharing.
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: luvsmuzik on August 12, 2017, 07:27:25 PM
Awesome! Thanks for sharing!
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Stormlord on August 13, 2017, 09:47:22 AM
Your nebulaes are really AWSOME and very beautiful.
Thanks for sharing your File!

STORMLORD
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Stormlord on August 14, 2017, 08:51:49 PM
A Tribut to Denis Sirenko...
THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR TGC !!!

STORMLORD

Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Denis Sirenko on August 15, 2017, 09:00:22 AM
Thank you everyone, guys! Glad to see a good response.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR TGC !!!

Stormlord, good result. Nice color combination and a beautiful thin blue layer. Although I would customize a little more small details. Also good distribution of small, medium and large stars. It is difficult for me to achieve this. And where did you get these stars? Is it the Terragen?

And here I have another new nebula. It is called Tolibro.
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Denis Sirenko on August 15, 2017, 09:09:05 AM
By the way, Stormlord, try to increase cloud depth. The nebula will become more complicated and interesting. The upper limit is about 1000 km. But the render time rises rapidly. It is desirable that all Cloud layers have one cloud depth, although here you can experiment.
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Hannes on August 15, 2017, 10:11:36 AM
Just wow!! Incredibly good! And thank you for the tgc.
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Stormlord on August 15, 2017, 04:32:27 PM
Quote

Stormlord, good result. Nice color combination and a beautiful thin blue layer. Although I would customize a little more small details. Also good distribution of small, medium and large stars. It is difficult for me to achieve this. And where did you get these stars? Is it the Terragen?


Thank you Dennis for your tip  to increase cloud depth... I'll try that.
Last night I rendered another spectacular nebula, based upon your modified TGC File. It's another one in the same style, but quite a little bit diffenrent.
I the next future I will try to find out some other good colour combinations.

The stars in my picture has been created in 3D Studiomax, not in Terragen. It's a simple Omnilight with a Lensflare effect. So I rendered some different sizes and effects (star, glow, lens-flare, strikes) and created a master star chart for personal use. This Starchart is handmade and can be seen in the Photoshop Screenshot attached. I aslo used another handmade starchart with a tileable star map. I just fill a layer with them and apply them with negative multiplication over the whole picture/nebula rendering. Finally I also have a sharp and big astrophoto only with stars and galaxies. The second picture shows a composite from the rendered orion style nebula and the real astrophoto.

A very good resource to cut out stars or nebulas is ESO. Here you will find good pictures and realy excellent astro photos.
http://www.eso.org/public/images/viewall/

So let me ask you Dennis...How do you make your stars? Do you just paint them?

STORMLORD
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Denis Sirenko on August 17, 2017, 03:00:50 PM
Thanks, Hannes.

I the next future I will try to find out some other good colour combinations.

Try using real Hubble shots, they often contain good combinations. 3-4 good colors can usually be found.

The stars in my picture has been created in 3D Studiomax.  It's a simple Omnilight with a Lensflare effect.

Oh, I know about this opportunity of 3DSMax. But when I tried it, I decided that it would be too long and hardly. I just did not to achieve the result that you got. But then I'll try again.

I aslo used another handmade starchart with a tileable star map.

I do this, too. But i put the layer with stars above via Add blending mode. How do you do Negative multiplication?

A very good resource to cut out stars or nebulas is ESO. Here you will find good pictures and realy excellent astro photos.

Thank you, but I've been here before. In turn, I will advise such a resource with amazing starfields:
https://svs.gsfc.nasa.gov/3442
https://svs.gsfc.nasa.gov/3572

How do you make your stars? Do you just paint them?

No, all my stars are taken from photo. Both separate and tiled star maps.
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Stormlord on August 18, 2017, 11:44:16 AM
@ Dennis....
Before I answer your questions I have one for you Dennis. How do you make these faint small tiny details (the black dust structures) in your picture "Hulakara-Minkares nebula" ? I can't figure that out..., how do you make them? Do you render them in Terragen (so is it just a question of settings) or do you stamp them later on into the rendering via Photoshop? Hmmmhhh....

Well...thank you Dennis for your quick response!
I know Hubble and to get the colors just from HST Galery is a good idea. I used a nice astropicture from ESA of the Orion Nebula M42 which I had in mind in my first attempt to render a nice orion-styled nebula. I just found the colors composition by chance, using the trial and error method. But it worked perfectly, the result looks very convincing...

If you like to render your own stars in3DsMax, I could send you my Max-File. It is made in 3dsMax 2009. If you have the program, you could use my setup to render your own stars in a big resolution and excellent quality. This would provide you also the Alpha Channel, so you will be ready for masking. Just mail me, I can send you my file if you like... :-)

I use the negative multiply method for fading stars into a picture or to overlay a scene. Just lay the stars layer over your rendered space scene (nebula) and apply the negative multiply blending method for your star layer. -> Good for fading stars into an evening sky! I rendered a big Master Star in 3DsMax over a black background. In different smaller sizes I created my master starchart. So I just need to copy them into my scenery with the negative multiplication blending method. In the result, everything which is black becomes transparent and so you just got your star hovering in free space and can put them in the right place. As an example please look at my picture "013 Luz del Mondo" or "004 Morgenrot in Alaska" which you can find here... http://www.dirkkipper.de/Galerie_Terragen/Terragen_01/index.php

Thank you also for the Link with the NASA Starcharts, I already got them. I have created additionally all kind different star maps to use them in my own animations. Also own star maps for special purposes. I created one, based upon the NASA Starcharts only with the bright stars of the constellations for instance. So I'm able to fade over between the milky way and the constellations and their main stars only. I underline them with my favorite music just for viewing and relaxation. They're excellent for a cool power nap. Hehhehehe.... Here is an example (the second video on the right side). Please notice the fading in the video... http://www.dirkkipper.de/Galerie_Video_Tutorial/Video_Tutorial_01/index.html#

I'll attach some pictures for your benefit to make it crystal clear to you Dennis :-)

STORMLORD

Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Stormlord on August 18, 2017, 11:59:18 AM
I am amazed by the nebula tgc file from Dennis and what you can do with it using photoshop!
I rendered a few pictures with different nebulas and tried different blending modes to push the boundaries a little bit further.

Here's one stunning result and how I received it....

STORMLORD
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: luvsmuzik on August 18, 2017, 02:10:49 PM
I am amazed by the nebula tgc file from Dennis and what you can do with it using photoshop!
I rendered a few pictures with different nebulas and tried different blending modes to push the boundaries a little bit further.

Here's one stunning result and how I received it....

STORMLORD

Well Done!
 I have been wondering how one would assign such masks in Terragen to a population of a single star object. There seems to be no way at the moment to assign a single value for each star dot in the mask. (Meaning you might get a cluster instead of a single star)
Rendering your clouds then layering post render would certainly be faster and leaves you with many more options for sure.
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Dune on August 18, 2017, 02:11:11 PM
Negative multiply in PS? Complement color of one layer and multiply? Results are really awesome.
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Denis Sirenko on August 18, 2017, 03:54:46 PM
How do you make these faint small tiny details (the black dust structures) in your picture "Hulakara-Minkares nebula" ? I can't figure that out..., how do you make them? Do you render them in Terragen (so is it just a question of settings) or do you stamp them later on into the rendering via Photoshop? Hmmmhhh....

You guessed it, I make them a separate pass in Terragen, then I impose either the nebula itself or its alpha channel. It is also not bad to create a weak light nebula between the main nebula and the dark nebula. It creates a good air perspective for the main nebula and complicates the structure and appearance. A weak light nebula you can also render separately. I could do all this in one *.tgd scene, but I'm afraid that my computer will just explode. And since I know the photoshop there's just no point in this.

Unfortunately, I do not have time to study everything you wrote today. But I see that very interesting information. As soon as I can, I'll study. Thank you very much!
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Stormlord on August 18, 2017, 04:32:00 PM
I really love it !

STORMLORD
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Denis Sirenko on August 22, 2017, 11:21:11 AM
If you like to render your own stars in3DsMax, I could send you my Max-File. It is made in 3dsMax 2009. If you have the program, you could use my setup to render your own stars in a big resolution and excellent quality. This would provide you also the Alpha Channel, so you will be ready for masking. Just mail me, I can send you my file if you like... :-)

It would be wonderful, I would have studied more carefully. I'm not sure that I will need the alpha channel, since I put the stars through the ADD, but still I can see.

Just lay the stars layer over your rendered space scene (nebula) and apply the negative multiply blending method for your star layer.

I understood. In the picture I saw that you have it called Negativ Multiplizieren. The fact is that in my English-language version of Photoshop this mode is called Screen. But I still usually use Add blending mode.

So I'm able to fade over between the milky way and the constellations and their main stars only. I underline them with my favorite music just for viewing and relaxation.

Unexpected application :)

(Attachment Link)

I like the overall composition and nice colors. And in the upper part there are more small details. It is perfectly.

I have been wondering how one would assign such masks in Terragen to a population of a single star object. There seems to be no way at the moment to assign a single value for each star dot in the mask. (Meaning you might get a cluster instead of a single star)
Rendering your clouds then layering post render would certainly be faster and leaves you with many more options for sure.

I generally did not find a way to make a large number of stars in TG. More precisely, I found one way, and he gave me a pretty good starfield. Here is the result:

[attach=2]

But unfortunately, nothing more can be done in this scene. I can only put these stars on my nebula in Photoshop.

(Attachment Link)

Oh, this is the new life of my nebula! Thank you)

And I saw Orion and other nebulae, its good! Have not you tried adding dark nebulae yet?
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Stormlord on August 22, 2017, 09:03:49 PM
Yes Dennis, I added some dust and dark zones into my latest space scene.
Here it comes... I called it Supernova Remnant and this time I used nice end summer colors (orange-red-brownish).

Some Alpha channels from other nebula renderings are subtracted and one is multiplied in this picture (I masked one alpha channel from a nebula with mask extensis pro to try this method). As before, I added some rendered stars in different colors and sizes and blended it with stars from a real astrophoto...

Theres also one screenshot from Photoshop attached.

As promised I can send you my 3dsmax files, but you must send me your e-mail adress via personal mail.

STORMLORD


Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Denis Sirenko on August 23, 2017, 10:42:23 AM
This is a good nebula. As for me it most difficult and interesting of those that you sent before. Good colors too.

As for the 3DS Max stars. You've already written a letter to me, and I answered it to you. Maybe it got into spam? But I'll write to you in any case.
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Stormlord on August 23, 2017, 10:57:14 PM
This is a good nebula. As for me it most difficult and interesting of those that you sent before. Good colors too.


Well... I just need time to find out all the tricky details and a few more nebulas to combine them in adequate color combinations... höhö...
-> Dust lanes and dark areas are no longer a problem as you can see.

By the way, you got mail Dennis... I just didn't had a look to my mail I was very busy the last days. But Thank You!

STORMLORD

Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Denis Sirenko on August 25, 2017, 12:19:32 PM
Theres also one screenshot from Photoshop attached.

Dirk, try to take into account the fact that the nebula itself is not always transparent to the stars that are behind it. The nebula will become more tangible. That is, you can use the same nebula as a mask, but corrected by the curves.

But some stars are still piercing. This problem was solved by dividing the star field into two or more layers. For example one layer in front of the nebula, the other behind it.
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Stormlord on August 25, 2017, 02:33:07 PM
Theres also one screenshot from Photoshop attached.

Dirk, try to take into account the fact that the nebula itself is not always transparent to the stars that are behind it. The nebula will become more tangible. That is, you can use the same nebula as a mask, but corrected by the curves.

But some stars are still piercing. This problem was solved by dividing the star field into two or more layers. For example one layer in front of the nebula, the other behind it.

Thx Dennis, this i really a good idea for improvement! I tried that out in this image, it looks more realistic and gets more a 3D depth, very good idea!
By the way... I have only an old Pentium 4 Quadcore with 2.66 MHz, rendering is still a pain for me. One big rendering takes around 20 Hours for me.

STORMLORD
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Denis Sirenko on August 29, 2017, 11:21:22 AM
This is a beautiful, complex nebula structure. It's great to see.

By the way... I have only an old Pentium 4 Quadcore with 2.66 MHz, rendering is still a pain for me. One big rendering takes around 20 Hours for me.

I'm constantly experimenting with my network of nodes. And some multilayered nebulae can take more than 100 hours on my Intel Core i5-4440 3.1 GHz (RAM 16GB). And this is without the upper dark nebulae. By experience, I can say that the rendering time depends primarily on the Cloud depth (100 min - 500 max), number of light sources (1 min - 7 max), number of Cloud layers (3 min - 8 max), and probably Cloud density (0,02 min - 5 max). Well, the rendering time depends, of course, on the quality settings. I usually use micropoly detail 1 and AA 5-7 with Defer atmo and Ray-marching quality = 1 (on Quality tab of Cloud layer node).
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Denis Sirenko on August 29, 2017, 11:23:57 AM
Dirk, by the way, and over the nebula, small stars are still needed. Some of them are very bright behind the nebula, and some of them are closer than the nebula itself, but more dim. In general, the number of stars over nebula can vary, but they are, although there are fewer than in open space. I'm not talking about big stars, they're fine.
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Dune on August 30, 2017, 06:58:56 AM
I wonder if such high detail level is necessary with mainly clouds, you could try detail of 0.1 and see if that's faster and as good.
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Denis Sirenko on August 30, 2017, 10:43:12 AM
Dune, I think I've tried everything. I sometimes do not even have such settings, especially if the light source shines through a thin nebula. Here you can see the noise around the star. As far as I remember, this noise depends on both AA and Micropoly detail settings.

[attach=1]

Although, of course, I might be missing something.
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Dune on August 30, 2017, 02:38:29 PM
With these settings it's quite logical you get grain; AA5 is not very high, especially without defer atmo. If you try this with defer atmo on, mp detail 0.1 (my guess that would work) and AA minimum of 6, maybe 8, you probably loose the grain.
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Stormlord on August 31, 2017, 03:00:03 PM
Very cool settings for the nebula, looks a little bit like helix or crab nebula.
Good colors, fine details, excellent setup except the noise.. How many clouds did you put in this scene?

STORMLORD
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Stormlord on August 31, 2017, 04:19:25 PM
Dirk, by the way, and over the nebula, small stars are still needed. Some of them are very bright behind the nebula, and some of them are closer than the nebula itself, but more dim. In general, the number of stars over nebula can vary, but they are, although there are fewer than in open space. I'm not talking about big stars, they're fine.

[attach=1]
Before this tip

[attach=2]
After this Tip
Yes, it gets a better 3D Effect in the picture, good hint Dennis...

[attach=3]
A short photo love story or how this picture has been created

[attach=4]
In CS Poposhop
Several nebulas with different colors has been combined, 5 dust cloud layers superimposed, 3 different starfields (one over the dust clouds partially transparent, 2 below) + big painted stars

STORMLORD
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Oshyan on September 01, 2017, 08:40:16 AM
Micropoly Detail has essentially no effect on cloud and atmosphere quality when Defer Atmo is enabled. Set it to 0.1 if you don't have any non-atmosphere/cloud elements in your scene (as it seems is the case in these).

- Oshyan
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Dune on September 01, 2017, 03:31:52 PM
Exactly what I said.
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Denis Sirenko on September 02, 2017, 04:10:15 PM
With these settings it's quite logical you get grain; AA5 is not very high, especially without defer atmo. If you try this with defer atmo on, mp detail 0.1 (my guess that would work) and AA minimum of 6, maybe 8, you probably loose the grain.

Sometimes I set AA=7 and switch on Defer atmo if I expect noise. Below in the picture you can see how little noise with AA = 7. But for so long!

Dune, Oshyan... you made me do some experiment. I made two renderings. One with MP details 0.1 and the other with MP details 0.1. Other settings: AA=7 and Defer atmo = on.

[attach=1]

There is no difference. That is expected, since there are no objects, the processing of which takes resources and time. So I'm still not sure if I need to reduce MP details. All the same does not work. And I was wrong about the fact that the noise depends on the Micropoly detail.

Good colors, fine details, excellent setup except the noise.. How many clouds did you put in this scene?

Thanks, Dirk! This is a quadruple cloud, as in most cases.

Yes, it gets a better 3D Effect in the picture, good hint Dennis...

Great thing! Although it seems to me now that there are too many stars, but it is a matter of taste.
And one more thing. If we see a star occupying more than 1 pixel, then its middle should be white.

[attach=2]

The stars themselves are very small for us, and we see only their glare (except the Sun). And if something hinders the star, for example the nebula, then circle of the star becomes smaller and we see glare, but not a gray circle of the same diameter. And if the star was 1 pixel in size, then its middle becomes gray (or gets color), and the glayer decreases. Or the star hides completely.
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Dune on September 03, 2017, 06:11:06 AM
Interesting to see that there's actually no difference in render time. I would not have expected that.
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Oshyan on September 04, 2017, 07:33:47 AM
If there is no terrain/planet, then it's not surprising that decreasing micropoly detail has little or no effect. But it's important to know you don't need high settings and that in fact, with Defer Atmo, the Micropoly Detail has no real effect on quality.

- Oshyan
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Denis Sirenko on September 04, 2017, 11:20:50 AM
Yes, Oshyan, thank you, that's what I wanted to hear.
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Denis Sirenko on September 08, 2017, 12:52:51 PM
The new nebula is ready! It's called Gelfon-Esto.

All the nebulae rendered in Terragen. Stars and composition - Photoshop.
There are 4 clouds (two yellow on the left and two blue on the right) that I rendered separately. Total time of render is about 85 hours. And also many pieces of old clouds for dark and light thin layers in the foreground.

[attachimg=1]
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Dune on September 08, 2017, 04:26:28 PM
Awesome, but a hell of a render time. Was that for this size?
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Kadri on September 08, 2017, 04:44:45 PM

Great! I love it.
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Oshyan on September 08, 2017, 09:03:52 PM
Absolutely gorgeous! But I too wonder if the render time could be reduced. :D

- Oshyan
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Stormlord on September 09, 2017, 10:40:11 AM
Just WOW!!!
Excellent nebula, but the render times... 85 hours in total!
You mention 2 clouds left and 2 clouds on the right side, how many lights you have put into the scenes?

Nevertheless, the shape, colors and dustlanes are well done, this is a very good rendering of a space nebula and the compistion is Poposhop is great.
The only thing that I miss are some bigger stars in the foreground (maybe with glow or streaks) to bring ito the picture a better 3D Effect. So it is more a flat impression.

STORMLORD
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Denis Sirenko on September 09, 2017, 11:01:38 AM
Thank you, colleagues!

Awesome, but a hell of a render time. Was that for this size?

No, the full picture has a size 2048x2048 pixels. But since I do not know how big the nebula will be on a specific background (or maybe there's more than one nebulae), I'll render the nebula with a margin in size. So I rendered all nebulae in the size of 2048x2048 pixels too.

In addition, most of the blue nebulae are behind the frame and will be visible on a different background. Therefore, everything is not so scary :)

But I too wonder if the render time could be reduced. :D

The new version of Terragen (starting with version 4.1.11) has already reduced the rendering time by 26-27%. I am very glad for this. But since I work a lot in Photoshop, the Terragen is not a bottleneck. I work on my computer, and Terragen renders on others. So there is no urgent need for us. It would be nice, but there is no urgent need.

You mention 2 clouds left and 2 clouds on the right side, how many lights you have put into the scenes?

2 clouds left - 3 and 5 lights. 2 clouds right - 3 and 3 lights. In fact, only half of them got into the scene. I'm a little spendthrift :)

The only thing that I miss are some bigger stars in the foreground (maybe with glow or streaks) to bring ito the picture a better 3D Effect. So it is more a flat impression.

Thanks for the critical comment, Dirk! There is nothing more useful than criticism, really. The larger stars we will have in the game, in the foreground, on a separate layer. They will be slightly displaced when the camera moves. So they will not only be, but will also be mobile! Perhaps, indeed, for an independent picture I need to add them. I did not think about it, thank you!
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Hannes on September 09, 2017, 12:39:29 PM
That last one is incredible!!!!
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Denis Sirenko on September 09, 2017, 04:58:18 PM
Thanks, Hannes.
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: SILENCER on September 10, 2017, 05:27:35 PM
Fabulous.
This method is really going to come in handy
Nice research, well done. That last render was on the money
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: KyL on September 10, 2017, 09:52:21 PM
It really looks like a genuine photograph from Hubble.

Well done, it looks amazing!
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Stormlord on September 12, 2017, 10:31:16 AM
It really looks like a genuine photograph from Hubble.

Well done, it looks amazing!

Jes indeed, absolutely!

I did also another one, but compared to this masterpiece from Dennis it looks just simple.
Neverheless... here it is...

[attach=1]
Silver Cloud

STORMLORD


Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: DannyG on September 12, 2017, 04:44:04 PM
The new nebula is ready! It's called Gelfon-Esto.

All the nebulae rendered in Terragen. Stars and composition - Photoshop.
There are 4 clouds (two yellow on the left and two blue on the right) that I rendered separately. Total time of render is about 85 hours. And also many pieces of old clouds for dark and light thin layers in the foreground.

(Attachment Link)

Epic stuff
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Denis Sirenko on September 13, 2017, 11:26:22 AM
Thanks, guys!

Nice research, well done. That last render was on the money

Yes, and I get paid :)

It really looks like a genuine photograph from Hubble.

In fact, the main reference was the NASA's photo of the Pillars of Creation.

[attachimg=1]

I did also another one...

Like the colors, again. But this time the nebula itself seems more voluminous than before and then cool. Its central part is as if closer to me. And now some stars hide behind it, and some do not. I like the distribution of stars.
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Denis Sirenko on September 15, 2017, 02:43:14 PM
New! The name of this nebula is Tigrid.

[attachimg=1]

As before, all forms were generated by the Terragen, like the basic colors.
There are two main blue nebulae (rendering – 36 hours of rendering) and about a dozen auxiliary ones for dark and thin nebulae.
Stars from Photoshop.
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Hannes on September 15, 2017, 03:41:11 PM
Wow!!! Incredible. Hard to believe that this is TG.
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Dune on September 15, 2017, 04:50:43 PM
Extremely cool. Especially the cracklike stuctures attracted my attention.
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Tangled-Universe on September 15, 2017, 06:42:49 PM
Haha damn, this is sick stuff, really good! :)
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: luvsmuzik on September 15, 2017, 06:45:21 PM
About ready to hook TG4 up to my old tower unit and leave it rendering for a week or two myself! Seriously!
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Oshyan on September 16, 2017, 05:17:47 AM
These images really amaze me. I too have a hard time believing they are TG. I love being surprised by what our users can do!

- Oshyan
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Denis Sirenko on September 16, 2017, 03:50:10 PM
Thanks!

Hard to believe that this is TG.

I too have a hard time believing they are TG.

Hah! I have proofs! :) These are original TG-renders.

[attachimg=1]

Extremely cool. Especially the cracklike stuctures attracted my attention.

This is good, they should have become the center of attention, if I understood correctly about what cracks it is.

About ready to hook TG4 up to my old tower unit and leave it rendering for a week or two myself! Seriously!

It's terrible to imagine the render time if you put it all in one scene. Even if only the brightest stars are left (about 10). 8 nested clouds in each other (four cloud nodes for each nebula), AA7 with defer atmo, more or less normal resolution... Ultimately, everything depends on hardware.
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Hannes on September 16, 2017, 07:25:09 PM
Incredible!
I hope you didn't get me wrong! I believed you!!!!  ;)
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Denis Sirenko on September 16, 2017, 07:45:41 PM
Of course, Hannes :) Just showing the pieces of the process, as usual.
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Stormlord on September 17, 2017, 12:52:21 PM
WOW!!!
What a rendering, I'm speechless Dennis...

STORMLORD
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Denis Sirenko on September 18, 2017, 10:02:54 AM
Thanks!
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Kadri on September 18, 2017, 01:55:33 PM

You make me want to do space images Denis. Very fine work :)
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Denis Sirenko on September 19, 2017, 10:27:38 AM
You make me want to do space images Denis.

Thanks, Kadri! And that's good! It would be interesting to see.
In the meantime, I gave birth to a new one. More precisely, one nebula participates in two slightly different compositions:

Noirray

[attachimg=1]

Kidarrsa

[attachimg=2]

It turned out that if you screw to my nebula-generator the Vortex warp shader then you can get a generator of galaxies. It is small, but it can be found, closer it does not look so good.
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Dune on September 19, 2017, 01:11:02 PM
Terrific works! I admit you inspire to do such works as well.
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Jo Kariboo on September 19, 2017, 03:12:36 PM
Beautifull picture!!!
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: agent unawares on September 19, 2017, 03:47:57 PM
Unbelievable.
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Denis Sirenko on September 20, 2017, 10:30:34 AM
Thanks guys!
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Denis Sirenko on September 21, 2017, 10:57:03 AM
A little more visible Terragen's galaxy.

[attachimg=1]
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Denis Sirenko on September 22, 2017, 10:32:49 AM
Today I have a new nebula, called Obenhold and she is now one of my favorites.

[attachimg=1]

I'm not sure that this is possible in real life. Unless in a double system of a white dwarf and a black hole. White dwarf gets rid of the old skins, and a black hole lets the jet.
As before, Terragen gave me all the geometry, lighting and colors. Here, roughly 3 base nebulae, which are rendered separately. And in Photoshop everything is combined and processed.
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Kadri on September 22, 2017, 10:36:01 AM

Great image ones again. You should make animation from them. I would love to see them animated.
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Hannes on September 22, 2017, 10:38:05 AM
Very cool once more!! What I'd like to see is the pure output of TG before you put the images together in PS. In the end it really looks like one. Great!!
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Dune on September 22, 2017, 04:36:44 PM
Great one again, indeed. I think this is hard to animate, as it's combined in PS. Perhaps if all layers and lights could be native....
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Denis Sirenko on September 25, 2017, 11:46:37 AM
Thanks guys!

I would love to see them animated.

Thank you, Kadri! I would also like to see it animated, very much. But, I'm afraid, it's not necessary for the studio where I work. And I have more priority tasks now. So, unfortunately, until this can not be done.

Great one again, indeed. I think this is hard to animate, as it's combined in PS. Perhaps if all layers and lights could be native....

Yes, now it all consists of several layers in Photoshop. But they can be moved a little, doing something like a small animation in Photoshop, a little animated picture. For example, jets flickering, changing the brightness of the nucleus, a small displacement of near layers relative to distant, swirling thin layers and so on. But of course the full animation in the Terragen (for example a flight around) I can not do, the rendering this in one scene will take forever.

Very cool once more!! What I'd like to see is the pure output of TG before you put the images together in PS.

Of course, here they are:

[attachimg=1]

[attachimg=2]

[attachimg=3]
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Hannes on September 25, 2017, 12:57:02 PM
Cool! Thanks a lot, Denis.
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Denis Sirenko on September 29, 2017, 10:55:18 AM
Don't mention it!
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Denis Sirenko on October 05, 2017, 10:27:55 AM
Hi all!

I have a new thing - Rutal nebula. In fact, I did it half a month ago. Here I tried to play by contrast. As always, all forms are generated by TG, build in Photoshop.

[attachimg=1]
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Dune on October 05, 2017, 04:13:34 PM
A great image again!
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Denis Sirenko on October 06, 2017, 10:56:04 AM
Thanks, Dune!
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Kadri on October 06, 2017, 04:16:51 PM

Looks nice.

Because of you i begun on a nebula like scene Denis :)
But it ended up quite different than i had in my mind (and from your scenes) and just for fun i am making a 24 second small animation with it just now.
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Stormlord on October 15, 2017, 10:59:27 AM
[attachimg=1]
The Bridge...
Dust, clouds, stars....

STORMLORD
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: jaf on October 15, 2017, 02:32:09 PM
Stormlord -- I see a cat (head) in that image!
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Stormlord on October 15, 2017, 02:54:41 PM
So you have some psychic abilities... hehehehe

STORMLORD
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Denis Sirenko on October 17, 2017, 11:48:05 AM
Nice. This picture can already be misleading the viewer, almost like a Hubble in quality.
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Stormlord on October 17, 2017, 01:44:55 PM
Thank you Denis!
Indeed the big stars are from real Hubble photos.

By the time I found some big and pretty stars. But it's hard to find good looking and also big stars in a Hubble photo.
Further the stars must be in a surrounding, where you are able to mask them properly. Hard to find such...
Smaller ones are easy to find, but pretty big ones which are capable to mask them, these are hard to find and rare!

Regarding my picture "The Bridge"
I intended to make it more 3D, the dust lanes are great to improve the 3D Look and feel effect.

STORMLORD
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Denis Sirenko on October 18, 2017, 10:59:55 AM
Further the stars must be in a surrounding, where you are able to mask them properly. Hard to find such...

Yes, it is not easy to find an independent large individual star in good quality, without surrounding small stars. In addition, the Hubble stars are different from the others, they have four rays and typical just for him glare.

It is interesting that the place where the middle large star is located, and in front of it is a dark dust cloud. If there are such large rays, then there must be a bright glow, which obscures the dark cloud. That is, I think, if this star is put on top - it will become more realistic.
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Denis Sirenko on October 20, 2017, 11:09:51 AM
Hello all! I continue my generative-drawing activity.

This nebula is called Telegly. I tried to show a supernova explosion. In general, I'm satisfied. Although effect of motion from the point of explosion is still a problem for me. Stretching along one of the directions does not give a good result. The clouds look artificially stretched. Not bursting from the explosion. Therefore, I prefer not to do this at all.

[attachimg=1]
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: treddie on October 21, 2017, 11:58:26 PM
I like these a lot.  They duplicate the textures that Hubble sees, very well.  Awesome attention to detail!
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Dune on October 22, 2017, 07:48:09 AM
Yes, awesome image again. I like all the shapes that are there, and its'very realistic (as far as I can tell).
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: BigMisch on October 22, 2017, 11:05:10 PM
I'm new to TG and new to the boards, and these are so cool!! Thanks for sharing!
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: KyL on October 22, 2017, 11:48:13 PM
Wonderful photographs :)
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Denis Sirenko on October 24, 2017, 11:28:25 AM
Thanks, guys!

Awesome attention to detail!

Thanks, that's just why I need Terragen)

I'm new to TG and new to the boards...

Welcome! Although I'm also not a veteran yet)

Wonderful photographs :)

Ha-ha) Thanks.
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Stormlord on October 29, 2017, 01:09:20 PM
This is my latest attempt to create another fine astro picture based upon the cloud generator from Denis.
This time I masked several stars from real space photos and also some dust lanes as well.

[attachimg=1]
SILVER CLOUD
The effect comes more and more realistic and looks 3D like.

[attachimg=2]
Masked stars in Poposhop

[attachimg=3]
Sample Image of a masked dust cloud

[attachimg=4]
Sample Image of the masked star Formalhaut (Original Star Size 9500px x 9500px)

STORMLORD
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Denis Sirenko on October 31, 2017, 09:44:39 AM
This is a good job! I correctly understood that your illustration now uses the stars that you got from the photos below?

In the photo of Fomalhaut I really like the distribution of large, medium and small stars around Fomalhaut (starfield). But I still do not like the glare around Fomalhaut. It still seems too clouded to me. Because we do not see such a radiance around the Sun on the images with the ISS. And the Sun is a typical star.

And, Dirk, I still insist that the light around the star is an optical effect, not part of the star itself. This means that in the illustration, dark nebulae should be as if behind a star, although in fact they are in front of it. The irony is that the image of the star on the photographic images of cosmic telescopes we see so radiant only because of the imperfection of the receiver of light. The real image of a star is an infinitesimal point, so small that if it were not for this scatter on the receiver, we would not have seen it at all.
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Stormlord on October 31, 2017, 01:48:41 PM
And, Dirk, I still insist that the light around the star is an optical effect, not part of the star itself. This means that in the illustration, dark nebulae should be as if behind a star, although in fact they are in front of it. The irony is that the image of the star on the photographic images of cosmic telescopes we see so radiant only because of the imperfection of the receiver of light. The real image of a star is an infinitesimal point, so small that if it were not for this scatter on the receiver, we would not have seen it at all.

As far as I know, what we see from the sun is only the core. The glow around... this fine and faint glow which you can see in the evening belongs all to our sun! So the glow is part of our sun or stars. But nevertheless, In Astrophotos we usually don't see this faint glow around other stars. The glow in my picture above locks impressive and this is the reason why I put them into it.

by the way Denis, dId you receive my mail with the star mask?

STORMLORD
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Denis Sirenko on November 01, 2017, 03:45:37 PM
By the way, I incorrectly said: "The real image of a star is an infinitesimal point, so small that if it were not for this scatter on the receiver, we would not have seen it at all." In fact, the pixel will shine, but only one pixel, which opposite the star.

I think it's easier to show what I mean. The left picture below shows how you realize the obscuration of the dark nebula. And in the right picture I showed how it really should happen on astrophoto. Even if the dark nebula is closer than the star. The star is further away, but the glare is closer. The glare is created by the camera lens. It's just light scattered by the optical elements of the lens. The  core of the star is very, very small. Less than the pixel size of the photosensitive matrix. For the demonstration, I used your wonderful picture of Fomalhaut.

[attachimg=1]

On the left you can see that the dark nebula is blocking the star's radiance. It's as if the sun was completely blocked by the horizon at sunset (оn the right is the original correct the setting sun picture).

[attachimg=2]

Dirk, I saw the letter, I want to study it more closely tomorrow.
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Denis Sirenko on November 21, 2017, 10:31:52 AM
Hello! I have a small update! It's Dzenas nebulae.

I decided to draw another cosmic apocalypse. Here I have a very mysterious event. I myself do not quite understand the reasons for such an annular formation. Apparently, the stars that have done this are no longer alive. Need to make a scientific study :)

[attachimg=1]

In general, as always, everything was generated me TG. In Photoshop: post-process (correction of colors, composition) stars, additional light nebulae and a small pulsar in the background. A little artistic looks, but it's intended;)
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: luvsmuzik on November 21, 2017, 02:44:15 PM
In 70 years we have so advanced to see what before we could only imagine. Art imitating life or space.  :) Great images all, thanks!
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Denis Sirenko on November 22, 2017, 10:18:24 AM
Thank you!

Yes, it's amazing. I do not praise myself, but praise the achievements of science, technology, art and other achievements of intelligent life. If all the time from the beginning of the birth of the Universe to the present moment to present as one year (at least half the time was spent on creating an intelligent life, or maybe all the time), then the last 70 years is only 0.2 seconds! The analogy, unfortunately, is not mine, but it's wonderful.

Why, by the way, exactly 70?
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: luvsmuzik on November 22, 2017, 01:14:36 PM
I picked 70 years because before that we relied on earth's telescopes mostly for astronomical observation. Man reached further for the stars and got there. All technology, especially photography, has enlightened us with color and scale. Now we can imitate, in many media forms, with reasonable accuracy what the dreamers imagined. I have lived long enough to see most of this occur, so with comparison of historical theory and now fact, it is truly amazing!
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Denis Sirenko on November 24, 2017, 05:48:21 AM
Ah, got it. It is clear and here I do not argue.
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: the first seer on November 24, 2017, 11:55:53 AM
Awesome work!
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Denis Sirenko on November 24, 2017, 04:25:07 PM
Thanks, Dragonfire
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: sboerner on November 27, 2017, 02:56:57 PM
Fascinating discussion. Denis, it sounds like you may have a background in astronomy and/or optics. Did I miss that? (I just quickly scanned this thread.) Beautiful, beautiful work. Art imitating life indeed.
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Denis Sirenko on November 27, 2017, 04:19:38 PM
Thanks, Sboerner!

My english is not very reliable, unfortunately. "Background" - do you mean my other experience in real life? If so, I have experience in selling optical devices, including amateur telescopes, microscopes, binoculars... And just love astronomy, I try regularly read and watch something :)
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: sboerner on November 27, 2017, 04:25:35 PM
Your English is just fine – that's exactly what I meant by "background." Your interest in and knowledge of astronomy shines through here. Keep up the great work.
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Denis Sirenko on November 28, 2017, 10:29:15 AM
Keep up the great work.

I will try
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Seth on November 28, 2017, 10:06:02 PM
really really good !!!
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Denis Sirenko on November 29, 2017, 08:37:52 AM
Thanks, Seth!

And I have here a remake of the old nebula. This is one of the first nebulae I laid out here. It is called Torketorp. But I greatly reworked her and her surroundings. So I think that this work is worth it to show it to you. There were no new renderers in TG, only processing in Photoshop.

[attachimg=1]
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: j meyer on November 29, 2017, 03:17:40 PM
Very impressive nebulae you show in this thread.
Really good compositing. 8)
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: bobbystahr on November 30, 2017, 01:38:28 AM
agree w  j meyer...well done.
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Dune on November 30, 2017, 06:21:50 AM
Extremely realistic, great (re)work!
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Denis Sirenko on November 30, 2017, 08:53:18 AM
thanks guys!
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Kadri on December 02, 2017, 03:00:53 PM

You need those watermarks for sure or they would end up as photos everywhere :)
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: cyphyr on December 02, 2017, 04:21:31 PM
I love the fine detail, very impressive work.
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Denis Sirenko on December 04, 2017, 10:10:12 AM
You need those watermarks for sure or they would end up as photos everywhere :)

Kadri :) I would be happy to share without the watermarks, of course. But I have only two ways: share with the watermarks or not share at all.

I love the fine detail, very impressive work.

Thanks!
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Kadri on December 04, 2017, 02:44:05 PM
You need those watermarks for sure or they would end up as photos everywhere :)

Kadri :) I would be happy to share without the watermarks, of course. But I have only two ways: share with the watermarks or not share at all.
...

:)
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: bobbystahr on December 04, 2017, 03:07:16 PM
You need those watermarks for sure or they would end up as photos everywhere :)

Kadri :) I would be happy to share without the watermarks, of course. But I have only two ways: share with the watermarks or not share at all.

I love the fine detail, very impressive work.

Thanks!


So...that would be not share at all then? Are these for a client or something, or are you selling them and don't want to devalue them by also sharing with friends? Just curious. When you posted ": share with the watermarks or not share at all." it just didn't make sense to me.
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Kadri on December 04, 2017, 03:10:58 PM

Bobby he works here on this game. That is the reason i think:
https://www.google.com.tr/search?q=corris+studio+empire+peripheral+wars&newwindow=1&dcr=0&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwia8tWM3_DXAhVE3KQKHelqB04Q_AUICigB&biw=1700&bih=879
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: bobbystahr on December 04, 2017, 03:47:40 PM

Bobby he works here on this game. That is the reason i think:
https://www.google.com.tr/search?q=corris+studio+empire+peripheral+wars&newwindow=1&dcr=0&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwia8tWM3_DXAhVE3KQKHelqB04Q_AUICigB&biw=1700&bih=879

Aha, well that makes sense...Thanks Kadri. And looking thru that google page I see he's been MEMEed at least once

https://ci.memecdn.com/1416618.jpg
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Denis Sirenko on March 03, 2018, 07:11:40 AM
Hi all!

I return to work with my nebulae. A new goal is to generate a nebula with a minimum of post-processing in Photoshop. I want to show what forms I'm currently working with.

[attachimg=1]
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Dune on March 03, 2018, 09:31:35 AM
Ingenious again.
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: bobbystahr on March 03, 2018, 01:43:44 PM
Brrrrrilliant...keep on tweakin' man!
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: luvsmuzik on March 03, 2018, 02:18:15 PM
LOVELY!!! 
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: j meyer on March 03, 2018, 04:29:53 PM
 8) Awesome.
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Hannes on March 03, 2018, 04:42:49 PM
Holy cow, this look amazing!! I didn't know it's possible to create something like that in TG. It looks like a Krakatoa particle simulation with millions of particles. Hats off, brillant!
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Denis Sirenko on March 04, 2018, 06:15:41 PM
Thank you, guys!

I didn't know it's possible to create something like that in TG. It looks like a Krakatoa particle simulation with millions of particles.

Hannes, did not see Krakatoa simulation before. Right now just looked, looks cool, thanks for the information. I'm glad that something like real physical streams has turned out. Here I have three different cloud layers, which differ slightly in optical properties. But I'm still sure that Terragen can do much more. As far as I understand, in principle, Terragen can do almost anything, because it's just math. And mathematics can do anything :) It seems to me, that the question is more in the time resources for design and rendering.

And still there is a lot of work. This weekend I rendered several new pictures ... but it seems to have gotten a little worse. Tomorrow I'll take a closer look. If something is worthwhile, I will publish it.
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Denis Sirenko on March 05, 2018, 05:21:19 PM
Guys, I have a problem. A simple scheme, warp one fractal through another.

[attachimg=1]

And I sometimes see too active vertical elements and I never see anything similar in the horizontal direction.

[attach=2]

The camera looks sideways, that is, the Y axis is directed vertically. I tried to switch on/ff and adjust the power of various parameters of PFSv3. I can not understand where the problem is. Is the warper not able to correctly warp in all three axes? I tried all day to solve it, I could not. Maybe someone already decided this?
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Denis Sirenko on March 06, 2018, 12:37:46 PM
Duplicate it here, both ways work for me:

Don't know if it is a solution for your problem, but I would try to put a Vector Displacement Shader
between the Power Fractal(Warper) and the Warp Input Shader.
At least it allows control of the 3 axes.

Warp is based on the displacement generated by the warper. Displacement usually happens in only one direction, which by default is vertical.

To create displacement along all 3 axes you can use the Redirect Shader and plug 3 displacement shaders into its X, Y and Z inputs. Alternatively, as J Meyer mentioned you can use a Vector Displacement Shader instead. This will do a similar thing but there's a very important difference. Vector Displacment Shader takes colour or scalar inputs (which can be the colour output from a fractal) and converts them to displacement, whereas the Redirect Shader takes displacement inputs and simply changes their direction. A Power Fractal can output both displacement and colour but be aware of the difference because they can look different and have different settings in the fractal.

You probably want to give different seeds to each of the 3 fractals. If you don't, you'll just produce a displacement that goes along a diagonal vector, not much more interesting than what you have now.

Matt
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: WASasquatch on March 08, 2018, 10:06:49 PM
Thank you so much for revealing this technique. I've been doing nebulae in Photoshop exclusively for years and it's tiresome, and doesn't achieve the effects I want. This, this is what I am looking for. <3
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Denis Sirenko on March 10, 2018, 07:36:06 AM
WASasquatch, you are probably the most stress-resistant person in the world)) I did not even consider the option of making the nebula completely in Photoshop ... No, I'm lying! There was one attempt, but it was matte paint with NASA photos. But it quickly became clear that this was not the job I was dreaming about. Although with TG a satisfactory result is also not easy to get (if your apartment does not have a separate room for a supercomputer). In any case, it's good if it helps.
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: WASasquatch on March 10, 2018, 07:52:46 AM
WASasquatch, you are probably the most stress-resistant person in the world)) I did not even consider the option of making the nebula completely in Photoshop ... No, I'm lying! There was one attempt, but it was matte paint with NASA photos. But it quickly became clear that this was not the job I was dreaming about. Although with TG a satisfactory result is also not easy to get (if your apartment does not have a separate room for a supercomputer). In any case, it's good if it helps.

I'm assuming render times are not the best? With clouds quality really is a factor, me being on the free version I'm not sure how I feel about tackling this. I gave a couple attempts but my hesitation in quality did not make me feel confident in spending money on it... even though it'd probably be under a dollar on current rates but I I'm so strapped for cash it's not even funny.
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Denis Sirenko on March 10, 2018, 09:16:31 AM
Now the final render time is much less than I wrote for all the nebulae that have already published here. The render time I was able to reduce almost 10 times, and with this improve the quality of the picture (almost fully removed the fine noise). That I rendered 60 hours, now I can render for 8 hours on the same computer. So this is not the worst thing. You just need to leave the computer turned on for the night and the picture is ready in the morning.

Much worse is how the settings are configured when the entire node network is connected and you need to see the result of a small adjustment of one parameter. As a result, you have to switch to an outlined node scheme or create test scenes and study the result after a few hours of rendering. Or you have to choose a small area (crop) and focus on it, but there is a possibility that the same parameter can have unpredictable influence on other sites that you have not looked at. Or it is simply good to know what and how it works and to foresee the result. The main thing for me now is precisely this.

As for the quality of the render on the free version. Is it different from the paid version? Judging by what is listed on this page http://planetside.co.uk/terragen-product-comparison/, the free version contains the same render-engine as the paid versions, and the differences are only in separate functional blocks, which are usually required for solid professional work with integration with other applications.
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: WASasquatch on March 10, 2018, 07:16:38 PM
Now the final render time is much less than I wrote for all the nebulae that have already published here. The render time I was able to reduce almost 10 times, and with this improve the quality of the picture (almost fully removed the fine noise). That I rendered 60 hours, now I can render for 8 hours on the same computer. So this is not the worst thing. You just need to leave the computer turned on for the night and the picture is ready in the morning.

Much worse is how the settings are configured when the entire node network is connected and you need to see the result of a small adjustment of one parameter. As a result, you have to switch to an outlined node scheme or create test scenes and study the result after a few hours of rendering. Or you have to choose a small area (crop) and focus on it, but there is a possibility that the same parameter can have unpredictable influence on other sites that you have not looked at. Or it is simply good to know what and how it works and to foresee the result. The main thing for me now is precisely this.

As for the quality of the render on the free version. Is it different from the paid version? Judging by what is listed on this page http://planetside.co.uk/terragen-product-comparison/, the free version contains the same render-engine as the paid versions, and the differences are only in separate functional blocks, which are usually required for solid professional work with integration with other applications.

The free version is limited to 0.6 micropolygon levels, and 0.6 anti-aliasing. This has a huge impact on atmosphere/clouds. Which is entirely understandable. I played around a bit last night and have something starting. Still making adjustments with a small preview but even then the noticeable loss in quality is a little puzzling for small details, have no clue how they will look full resolution. Still worth every moment of experimentation and knowledge.
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Oshyan on March 10, 2018, 07:24:40 PM
As long as you're using Defer Atmo, AA 6 should be enough to get low noise in most cases. At the least certainly if you use Max Samples (non-adaptive). Remember you can always increase the cloud quality, even if you can't increase AA. Also if you're using v3 cloud layers, take a look at the newer Voxel Scattering Quality setting in the GI in Clouds tab of the Render GI Settings node. You can increase that when you've hit a ceiling on quality from AA.

- Oshyan
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: WASasquatch on March 10, 2018, 10:44:20 PM
As long as you're using Defer Atmo, AA 6 should be enough to get low noise in most cases. At the least certainly if you use Max Samples (non-adaptive). Remember you can always increase the cloud quality, even if you can't increase AA. Also if you're using v3 cloud layers, take a look at the newer Voxel Scattering Quality setting in the GI in Clouds tab of the Render GI Settings node. You can increase that when you've hit a ceiling on quality from AA.

- Oshyan

The fountains of knowledge that spring up around here. I'll tel ya. Thanks Oshyan, that's news to me, about cloud quality and AA limitations and also GI controls in v3 clouds. Going to try doing some testing tonight and leave one running tonight overnight.

Last planet I did with global clouds I gave up on. Mainly cause wasn't totally satisfied with the clouds in general, but boy, I spent two nights and half the planet rendered, while the planet itself can render at max TG (free) settings in less than an hour x.x LOL You can tell I don't Cloud well. Still learning all these optimization tricks.
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Denis Sirenko on March 13, 2018, 08:33:28 AM
Maybe Oshyan will correct me, but it is not even necessary to use non-adaptive max samples. It is enough to put, for example, 1/64 first samples for First sampling level, and adjust the noise level with the Pixel noise threshold parameter (which is near). Most likely it can be reduced, for example, to 0.03-0.02. It has a very strong effect on rendering time, but it can completely eliminate noise.

...Also if you're using v3 cloud layers, take a look at the newer Voxel Scattering Quality setting in the GI in Clouds tab of the Render GI Settings node...

Does the increase in this parameter always increase the render time? For some reason, in my test scene (two nested a few different cloud layers v3 without any geometric objects) once I got the opposite result - the rendering time decreased when changing the value from 25 to 50 (by 13%). But at the same time, I did not find noise reduction at all. Perhaps I've already sufficiently reduced it in other ways.

The fountains of knowledge that spring up around here...

WASasquatch, there is another way to reduce noise, use Photoshop's AA :). It is enough to render image a larger size than necessary, and then make the rescale down in the PS with suitable resampling settings. True, if the resolution of 1280 × 900 is too small for this, you will have to do several renderings. (About denoisers like Neat Image for PS, I do not need to write, I think -  such advice can offend  :))
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Oshyan on March 13, 2018, 09:39:38 PM
I mainly suggested non-adaptive just so he can be sure that he is getting the most number of samples for a given AA level, i.e. the highest quality. This avoids having to spend time fine-tuning the noise threshold.

The increase in voxel scattering quality does not always increase render time, no. There are also other sources of noise which it might not have any effect on.

- Oshyan
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: WASasquatch on March 14, 2018, 07:43:52 AM
Will have to five the the methods a try at the very least. I know noise reduction in Photoshop is possible, but it can reduce fine detail if you're trying to remove a fair amount of noise.
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Denis Sirenko on March 15, 2018, 02:39:55 PM
I mainly suggested non-adaptive just so he can be sure that he is getting the most number of samples for a given AA level, i.e. the highest quality. This avoids having to spend time fine-tuning the noise threshold.

Ok, It's clear, thanks!

The increase in voxel scattering quality does not always increase render time, no. There are also other sources of noise which it might not have any effect on.

It seemed amusing to me that sometimes increasing this parameter can REDUCE the rendering time. Although I admit that I could make a mistake in the optimization test itself.
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Denis Sirenko on March 29, 2018, 11:33:57 AM
Hello! I experimented with explosions in nebulae, for example, it may be explosions of supernovae that scatter around their internals. Here's what I got.

[attachimg=1]

[attachimg=2]

[attachimg=3]

[attachimg=4]

[attachimg=5]

[attachimg=6]

[attachimg=7]
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Dune on March 29, 2018, 03:19:32 PM
Fantastic!
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Hannes on March 29, 2018, 03:20:18 PM
This is so outstanding and unusual. Incredibly beautiful!
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: luvsmuzik on March 29, 2018, 05:42:42 PM
Excellent representations! Any jellyfish look-a-likes yet? I want to ask if you find version2, version3, or the new easy clouds easier to control in your warping. I don't want a debate, just a general answer if it is not too much disclosure.  :)
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: WASasquatch on March 29, 2018, 10:00:50 PM
Hello! I experimented with explosions in nebulae, for example, it may be explosions of supernovae that scatter around their internals. Here's what I got.

(Attachment Link)

(Attachment Link)

(Attachment Link)

(Attachment Link)

(Attachment Link)

(Attachment Link)

(Attachment Link)

Are you serious? This are amazing. I would love to see these animated lol Really want to know to trick with the hard details.

Does grayscale rendering save on time?
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Denis Sirenko on March 30, 2018, 07:42:03 AM
Thanks guys.

Excellent representations! Any jellyfish look-a-likes yet?

No, the jellyfish was not yet, can be another seed needed :) In general, I do not need it yet. For jellyfish need a more crafty warper. I have now simply "stretching" of a matter from the center of sphere of the set radius. And someone on the forum has already made an explosion in the form of a jellyfish?

I want to ask if you find version2, version3, or the new easy clouds easier to control in your warping. I don't want a debate, just a general answer if it is not too much disclosure.  :)

Oh, I do not know. I used only clouds v3 because they work better with light. With the parameter turned off "Move textures with cloud". Is there any difference what kind of cloud?

Are you serious? This are amazing. I would love to see these animated lol Really want to know to trick with the hard details.
Does grayscale rendering save on time?

Animated, yes, yes, very funny))

About details: I have a cloud 15 kilometers in size, made specifically to be able to receive small parts. I think I have no problems here. Even on the contrary sometimes the details too small)

About grayscale: No, I just did not work on color settings, it's a separate big task. Nebulae are now really just in grayscale.
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Denis Sirenko on March 30, 2018, 07:48:07 AM
I calculated that a 1 second video (800x800 px) will be rendered about a day, i.e., an explosion lasting 1 minute = 2 months of rendering.
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: WASasquatch on March 30, 2018, 07:54:35 AM
Animated, yes, yes, very funny))
Awe, why not? ;)
Nebulae are now really just in grayscale.

Well hubble uses a series of measurements to predict the correct colours (unless being represented in false colour to show something specific). Users on earth use real-world color images and composite programs to bring out real colour.
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Denis Sirenko on March 30, 2018, 08:35:20 AM
Well hubble uses a series of measurements to predict the correct colours (unless being represented in false colour to show something specific). Users on earth use real-world color images and composite programs to bring out real colour.

All this is absolutely exactly. But the fact is that the Hubble, by sampling his measurements, does this in different wavelength ranges, and gets slightly different grayscale images. The pattern of each of these measurements is determined by the chemical composition of the nebula and the physical processes. Then you just convert these different components in the colors, and you get natural color variations based on natural processes and differences. In my case, there is no attribute by which I can get different grayscale renders.
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Nacer Eddine on March 30, 2018, 10:49:33 AM
I calculated that a 1 second video (800x800 px) will be rendered about a day, i.e., an explosion lasting 1 minute = 2 months of rendering.

good job, me personally doing this job on terragen takes a lot of time especially the render . I prefer doing this work on after effects it's faster. but I respect enormously what you do.
for me it's just a comparison of time especially when you said : 1 min = 2 months of rendering.

look the semilair job in just few minutes :




Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: luvsmuzik on March 30, 2018, 04:01:04 PM
Well hubble uses a series of measurements to predict the correct colours (unless being represented in false colour to show something specific). Users on earth use real-world color images and composite programs to bring out real colour.

All this is absolutely exactly. But the fact is that the Hubble, by sampling his measurements, does this in different wavelength ranges, and gets slightly different grayscale images. The pattern of each of these measurements is determined by the chemical composition of the nebula and the physical processes. Then you just convert these different components in the colors, and you get natural color variations based on natural processes and differences. In my case, there is no attribute by which I can get different grayscale renders.

I go to this site often. here is the jellyfish from the archives. Don't we all wish we had the power to determine the chemical composition of our own grayscale images. ;D
https://apod.nasa.gov/apod/ap180323.html

As far as animating, I actually made a shockwave object from a torus in Blender a while back. I think an object might render faster than the clouds, I shall have to dig that up. That would give you a way to do a flight path, I think.
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Nacer Eddine on March 30, 2018, 04:09:22 PM
with fumefx (3dmax) you can do it in few minutes
my test  :
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: luvsmuzik on March 30, 2018, 04:40:44 PM
with fumefx (3dmax) you can do it in few minutes
my test  :


Very nice! Wish I was rich.... :)
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: WASasquatch on March 31, 2018, 06:47:01 AM
Well hubble uses a series of measurements to predict the correct colours (unless being represented in false colour to show something specific). Users on earth use real-world color images and composite programs to bring out real colour.

All this is absolutely exactly. But the fact is that the Hubble, by sampling his measurements, does this in different wavelength ranges, and gets slightly different grayscale images. The pattern of each of these measurements is determined by the chemical composition of the nebula and the physical processes. Then you just convert these different components in the colors, and you get natural color variations based on natural processes and differences. In my case, there is no attribute by which I can get different grayscale renders.

I go to this site often. here is the jellyfish from the archives. Don't we all wish we had the power to determine the chemical composition of our own grayscale images. ;D
https://apod.nasa.gov/apod/ap180323.html

As far as animating, I actually made a shockwave object from a torus in Blender a while back. I think an object might render faster than the clouds, I shall have to dig that up. That would give you a way to do a flight path, I think.

That specifically is a colour image by a DSLR camera through  normal telescope here on earth. It was shot in colour, and composite programing used to exaggerate exposure and colours.  When trying to get a picture of lets say, Jupiter, to get it's colours, you need specific settings to get those colours. But lets say you wanted the moons in the shot. you need a super exposed image to bring out the moons...
(https://s31.postimg.org/l6yqmtyej/jupiter.png)

Than you use a composite program to both correct colors, and merge your images into a composite...
(https://i1.wp.com/SoggyAstronomer.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/CombinedJupiter21.jpg?resize=700%2C369)
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Denis Sirenko on April 02, 2018, 09:17:50 AM
look the semilair job in just few minutes :


Oh, this is an interesting example. I will take note that there are some possibilities in the After Effect (never started it). But, for example, how about flying around this nebula? Or about self-shadowing?

I go to this site often. here is the jellyfish from the archives. Don't we all wish we had the power to determine the chemical composition of our own grayscale images. ;D
https://apod.nasa.gov/apod/ap180323.html

Aaa, did you talk about the jellyfish nebula?)) Well, almost an ordinary planetary fog. A similar explosion, I somehow tried to simulate.

I thought you were talking about jellyfish-similar explosions, such as nuclear:

[attachimg=1]

As far as animating, I actually made a shockwave object from a torus in Blender a while back. I think an object might render faster than the clouds, I shall have to dig that up. That would give you a way to do a flight path, I think.

I'm afraid that then I will have to part with the softness of the edges. Although, of course, everything depends on the subtleties. And there are examples of how your result looks like?

with fumefx (3dmax) you can do it in few minutes
my test  :


The drawback of this scene maked in FumeFX (as well as After Effect), it seems to me, is that there are no shading (in the original sense). In fact, all the effects that I saw are glow effects, only lighting. But in nebulae there are also so dense clots of gas and dust that they hold back the light, completely stopping the movement of the rays of light. Here you need a real ray tracing or similar technology. And this, of course, is not fast. But it seems to me can make FumeFX, it's very powerful soft, although by your example I did not see it. An example of shading can be seen here:


It was shot in colour, and composite programing used to exaggerate exposure and colours.  When trying to get a picture of lets say, Jupiter, to get it's colours, you need specific settings to get those colours.

The fact that we need to do some special settings to catch the colors of Jupiter because the image of another planet is in itself a nontrivial task. This is not due to the fact that the colors on the Jupiter were not at all and the settings can help created colorsfrom scratch. However, if you do everything right, then catch the colors that Jupiter has provided to you. The law by which these colors Jupiter appropriated, was already created, before you take a picture. In TG, however, to create colors, you must first create this law yourself and then start from it painting. I just wanted to say this :)
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: luvsmuzik on April 02, 2018, 12:59:10 PM
Here is a link by a Terragen artist who likes to do explosions. There is a clip file you could examine. maybe useful, maybe not. Take a look.

https://planetside.co.uk/forums/index.php/topic,8928.msg95553.html#msg95553

My Terragen render shockwave is in my image sharing post, Scene from the Observatory https://planetside.co.uk/forums/index.php/topic,23177.0.html
Primitive and uncomplicated. I am going to do this again now that I have a better unit and more knowledge. :)
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: WASasquatch on April 02, 2018, 02:49:37 PM
Here is a link by a Terragen artist who likes to do explosions. There is a clip file you could examine. maybe useful, maybe not. Take a look.

https://planetside.co.uk/forums/index.php/topic,8928.msg95553.html#msg95553

My Terragen render shockwave is in my image sharing post, Scene from the Observatory https://planetside.co.uk/forums/index.php/topic,23177.0.html
Primitive and uncomplicated. I am going to do this again now that I have a better unit and more knowledge. :)

is this approach related, luvsmuzik? Looking over the images and topic I don't see the relation, but am honestly wonder what you did there. Lol :D
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: luvsmuzik on April 02, 2018, 03:05:15 PM
Here is a link by a Terragen artist who likes to do explosions. There is a clip file you could examine. maybe useful, maybe not. Take a look.

https://planetside.co.uk/forums/index.php/topic,8928.msg95553.html#msg95553

My Terragen render shockwave is in my image sharing post, Scene from the Observatory https://planetside.co.uk/forums/index.php/topic,23177.0.html
Primitive and uncomplicated. I am going to do this again now that I have a better unit and more knowledge. :)

is this approach related, luvsmuzik? Looking over the images and topic I don't see the relation, but am honestly wonder what you did there. Lol :D

The jellyfish nebula as I understand it resembles an exploding cloud. A long time TG forum member has a few interesting clip files including an exploding cloud. I do believe Dennis's nuclear examples resemble such. As far as I can tell, Dennis is making his nebulae by warping clouds. I was simply trying to engage conversation about different methods, techniques, and cloud variety. Once again, I have probably overstepped.
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Denis Sirenko on April 02, 2018, 04:47:14 PM
Thanks, luvsmuzik. While I was not able to learn this clip-file.

But I make to make several test renders of a new scheme for painting my nebulae. The colors are now schematic. You can send any custom color to the red and green channel. The green channel is dense gas regions, red is sparse.

[attachimg=1]

[attachimg=2]

[attachimg=3]

[attachimg=4]

[attachimg=5]

[attachimg=6]

[attachimg=7]

[attachimg=8]

[attachimg=9]

[attachimg=10]

[attachimg=11]

[attachimg=12]

[attachimg=13]

[attachimg=14]

[attachimg=15]

[attachimg=16]

[attachimg=17]

[attachimg=18]
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Denis Sirenko on April 02, 2018, 04:49:27 PM
[attachimg=1]

[attachimg=2]

[attachimg=3]
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Oshyan on April 02, 2018, 07:02:43 PM
Your method may not be the fastest, but the results speak for themselves. Absolutely gorgeous and realistic!

- Oshyan
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Nacer Eddine on April 03, 2018, 12:43:14 AM

I did some experiments in after effects
with fractal noise and volumetric light effects
just to have an idea , look what can be exploited






Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: WASasquatch on April 03, 2018, 12:59:27 AM
Your method may not be the fastest, but the results speak for themselves. Absolutely gorgeous and realistic!

- Oshyan

Would have to agree, the results are amazing, and incredibly realistic. I've been trying to accomplish similar with his early share, but it takes so much time.
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: WASasquatch on April 03, 2018, 04:10:31 AM
Started playing around with the scene you originally shared. While doing so I accidently plugged in the wrong nodes to a warp and surface layer (meant for a mask) and created a very interesting motion effect. Refined it down to three nodes and re-rendered and got this.

I just used piped in my cloud into a merge shader, with the A Input scaled to 0.9 - 0.9 - 0.9, and than another warp shader warped by the master warper already applied to the original shape that was duplicated and scaled and merged.
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Hannes on April 03, 2018, 05:19:20 AM
Holy moly, Denis, that looks so incredibly cool!!!!
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Denis Sirenko on April 04, 2018, 08:25:34 AM
Sorry, but this is also a nebula :))

[attachimg=1]
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Nacer Eddine on April 04, 2018, 02:51:57 PM
quick test of supernova with after effects
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: WASasquatch on April 04, 2018, 06:59:14 PM
Sorry, but this is also a nebula :))

(Attachment Link)

I'm still trying to figure out how you do those fine rough details in the cloud forms, and the large twists without creating flat looking swirls with warp.

Added a recent test render... (these take anywhere from 10-30 minutes to render, not sure what creates the varying times between seeds and minor adjustments. I guess cloud mixing)
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Nacer Eddine on April 04, 2018, 11:53:51 PM
Full HD
(https://s17.postimg.org/guya8c7q7/SW_2_0_00_02_27.jpg) (https://postimg.org/image/t9l28nz8b/)


i can make it 4K or 8K as i want, of couse with AE in just few minutes.
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Matt on April 05, 2018, 12:37:45 AM
i can make it 4K or 8K as i want, of couse with AE in just few minutes.

But Denis's nebulae are absolutely beautiful and I have not seen better in any software. It's bad etiquette to do this to Denis's thread, unless you are asking for help on how to do this in Terragen or you genuinely have advice that can help Denis to make his work look better. I'm sorry to have to tell you that I don't think you do.

Matt
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Matt on April 05, 2018, 12:42:01 AM
Sorry, but this is also a nebula :))

(Attachment Link)

I hardly ever say this, but I would love to have this as a print! Can we help you to render it at a higher resolution?

Matt
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: luvsmuzik on April 05, 2018, 03:30:22 AM
I have watched and read this thread from the start. Excellent work throughout. Is it now your goal to do these nebulae entirely in Terragen with no Photoshop elements?
Beautiful images regardless.
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: WASasquatch on April 05, 2018, 06:04:30 AM
Sorry, but this is also a nebula :))

(Attachment Link)

I hardly ever say this, but I would love to have this as a print! Can we help you to render it at a higher resolution?

Matt

Man I would love to see these at high resolution and get in close to those nebulas. I'm addicted. I call them Sirenko Nebula after the creator. Been playing non-stop with his original share. Created a few from scratch. Just trying to unlock his masterful warps.

I have watched and read this thread from the start. Excellent work throughout. Is it now your goal to do these nebulae entirely in Terragen with no Photoshop elements?
Beautiful images regardless.

That's what I've wanted to do, but so far, unfortunately, lighting is very manual, and does in fact take time to get the "right positions" and sometimes you end up changing good things (in my case). I'd love a way to procedurally add light sources. Doing them manually to the point you have a star system may not be poss--wait... the PF star background... How did I forget? That would at least get your ambient stars out of the way.

Night Sky Toggle v3 for reference (https://planetside.co.uk/forums/index.php/topic,19264.msg188542.html#msg188542)

Note: The PF background idea will not work without illumination on the background. I'm sure this could be done with a huuge spotlight but I haven't attempted.
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Denis Sirenko on April 06, 2018, 10:02:04 PM
I did some experiments in after effects
with fractal noise and volumetric light effects
just to have an idea , look what can be exploited


Nacer, on the one hand, I see that the animation was created quickly and looks complicated. On the other hand, I can understand what mechanisms here were used without the use of 3D-technologies, only due to 2D-technologies. As far as I understand the ideology of After Effects - in the first place it is a 2D program, in which there are no serious possibilities for working with volumetric light. As imitation of 3D phenomena and processes is an excellent option and can be used for many tasks. However, I would like to get the most reliable image, with a real play of light and shadow on the volumes, taking into account the re-reflections, changing the lighting passing through the thickness of particles and so on. I still do not see an opportunity to achieve my goals with After Effects, because I do not have a goal to get a video, but I need a static and quite realistic picture.

Full HD
...
i can make it 4K or 8K as i want, of couse with AE in just few minutes.

The nebula is not as chaotic and complex as you pictured. It contains not only radiating components, but also absorbing, reflecting, and even re-re-re-reflecting (astronomers are now developing a technology that will allow to reconstruct the events that took place 10, 100, 1000... of years along the paths of light rays that are reflected in different parts of the nebula backward). The nebula can be seen as a landscape in 3D. There is no bottom or top, but there is a land, sky, trees and Sun. Many Suns! Look, what a beauty:

Carina nebula:

[attachimg=1]

NGC 6357:

[attachimg=2]

Orion nebula:

[attachimg=3]

After effects can not construct the nebula from its components, keep the dependencies between them when switching the seeds and rotate the camera 180 degrees and look from the back while preserving the entire structure. This is the territory of 3D-graphics.

But After Effects is faster and more artistic than TG can do animation of some processes, and also add some good effects. With this I will not argue. But in my opinion, it is better to consider it as an addition to TG, and not as an alternative.
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Denis Sirenko on April 06, 2018, 10:07:14 PM
Your method may not be the fastest, but the results speak for themselves. Absolutely gorgeous and realistic!

Oshyan, thank you. May I ask what alternative method(s) did you mean (obviously more productive, but less realistic)?
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Oshyan on April 06, 2018, 10:12:14 PM
Denis, I was referring to methods like After Effects, and other software that produces faster but poorer-looking results. As you yourself explained very well, they are not doing true volumetric (3D) calculations, shadows, etc. Realistic effects are much more time-consuming to create (from a rendering perspective, if not a creative/editing perspective). This is true even with proper, volumetric cloud simulation. It can take days to calculate a complex fluid simulation of something like a high detail volcanic plume, and then days more to render it with realistic volumetric light interaction in an animation. These are just complex problems.

I think your methods are very good for producing the realistic and beautiful results that you are aiming for. Some people don't seem as interested in realism or aesthetic, just in the fastest way to visualize an idea, and I guess that's valid too, for some purposes. But I for one appreciate realism and the beauty of these images you're creating. In fact, although I had seen some nebula in Terragen before which I considered to be realistic, you have "raised the bar" and shown me even more amazing nebula than I thought possible in Terragen. If it was something we could do in a single rendering pass, without Photoshop, I would want to animate it. :)

- Oshyan
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Denis Sirenko on April 06, 2018, 10:14:57 PM
Started playing around with the scene you originally shared. While doing so I accidently plugged in the wrong nodes to a warp and surface layer (meant for a mask) and created a very interesting motion effect. Refined it down to three nodes and re-rendered and got this.

I just used piped in my cloud into a merge shader, with the A Input scaled to 0.9 - 0.9 - 0.9, and than another warp shader warped by the master warper already applied to the original shape that was duplicated and scaled and merged.

An interesting effect. However, with close study it is clear that the nebula is double. For me, this can be a problem :) But in some cases, for example, when the details of the nebula do not have clear boundaries, this may well be useful.

In fact, I have an unresolved problem related to the imitation of the movement of the nebula due to the explosion: at me with equal speed, both the rarefied and dense parts of the nebula are scattered. Look at this photo of a crab nebula:

[attachimg=1]

[attachimg=2]

It is clearly seen that dense clumps scatter with a lag, slower than more sparse areas. Thus, a long tail is propagated along the direction of propagation of the shock wave. So far I have not achieved this effect.

Holy moly, Denis, that looks so incredibly cool!!!!

Thanks, Hannes)

I'm still trying to figure out how you do those fine rough details in the cloud forms and the large twists without creating flat looking swirls with warp.

I'm not sure I understand the question. On the attached picture there is an example of "flat looking swirls", of which you speak?
Just in case, I will say that I use different warpers with different settings for large, medium and small scales. Therefore, the results of their work are not interrelated. And now I'm working in a completely new scene, and not in the scene that I posted last year.
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Denis Sirenko on April 06, 2018, 10:29:12 PM
I have watched and read this thread from the start. Excellent work throughout. Is it now your goal to do these nebulae entirely in Terragen with no Photoshop elements?
Beautiful images regardless.

Thank you, luvsmuzik. Exactly. I need to draw almost 100 nebulae for the game. I'll go crazy if I do not get rid of the routine. The only thing that I will continue to do in Photoshop: the composition, the addition of stars and distant galaxies. There is another question with how I will paint nebulae. I have not decided yet. Initially, I wanted to create renderers with channels for painting, that is, the nebula is colored in conditional red, green and blue colors, so that later in photoshop on these channels I can start any others that I want. Now I see that even the conditional colors look interesting, and the nebula with algae (the last one published), which I painted completely in TG, demonstrated that the TG can handle it on its own.

That's what I've wanted to do, but so far, unfortunately, lighting is very manual, and does in fact take time to get the "right positions" and sometimes you end up changing good things (in my case). I'd love a way to procedurally add light sources. Doing them manually to the point you have a star system may not be poss--wait... the PF star background... How did I forget? That would at least get your ambient stars out of the way.

Night Sky Toggle v3 for reference (https://planetside.co.uk/forums/index.php/topic,19264.msg188542.html#msg188542)

Note: The PF background idea will not work without illumination on the background. I'm sure this could be done with a huuge spotlight but I haven't attempted.

Thanks for the link! This is what I was looking for and I really needed ... six months ago)) After an unsuccessful search, I realized my procedural generation of stars in Photoshop and I'm going to use them. And yet thanks for the help.

As for the manual placement of the stars: but in fact nobody manually places them in space! I abandoned the idea of placing stars manually and they are hanging in my place now always in the same place.
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Denis Sirenko on April 06, 2018, 10:33:55 PM
Sorry, but this is also a nebula :))

(Attachment Link)

I hardly ever say this, but I would love to have this as a print! Can we help you to render it at a higher resolution?

That would be interesting, thanks for the suggestion! Rendering a file with a size of, for example, 12000x12000 px (1x1 meter) takes at least a week and paralyzes all the work. What is needed for this? Should I send you the original tgd file?
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Denis Sirenko on April 06, 2018, 10:50:55 PM
If it was something we could do in a single rendering pass, without Photoshop, I would want to animate it. :)

Oshyan, do you really have a separate room with a small supercomputer?)) It would be amazing! Can I ask some questions in the mail or will we discuss the process here?

Photoshop I now use only to change the total exposure and there for a slight correction of the exposure near the stars, but for a specific seed, we can simply make the star darker or brighter.
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: WASasquatch on April 06, 2018, 11:14:55 PM
As for the manual placement of the stars: but in fact nobody manually places them in space! I abandoned the idea of placing stars manually and they are hanging in my place now always in the same place.

That's really surprising! I might actually try this approach and just work around the light! I never thought about that. I was too busy seeing dense spots, or bare spots in my clouds and wanting to move my lights around them to see the lighting effects. Thanks for that.

As for the variations in total cloud forms in repetition similar to the Crab Nebula, I would imagine your original shared idea of using a base density fractal, and than separate warping passes and fractalization would create the variation needed. Especially a final large warp for those "lag" features if the the fractal warp shader with roughness turned down a bit doesn't create it. I'm actually working on a project with similar uses in order to create variance, but be on "track" with the whole form, while using the original form for each new element. It also also adjustments to all passes (cloud nodes) a bit easier without having to look into multiple density shaders.



[attachment deleted by admin]
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Denis Sirenko on April 06, 2018, 11:16:53 PM
I want to show you a couple more. It was an experiment with the use of non-test colors, but with colors that I will be used for final images.

[attachimg=1]

[attachimg=2]
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: WASasquatch on April 06, 2018, 11:29:19 PM
I want to show you a couple more. It was an experiment with the use of non-test colors, but with colors that I will be used for final images.

(Attachment Link)

(Attachment Link)

Wow, those swhirls are amazing. Really love those small details and swirly like motion. Just plain beautiful to me.

Also it seems we may have submitted a post at the same time, and/or, the image I just uploaded at 5000x5000 just broke Page 13 of this topic...

This is a much smaller version, wanted to mention the plugin Glitterato for Photoshop that creates neat starmaps which can be adjusted for use in composite work with some added glows and such.
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Kadri on April 06, 2018, 11:39:33 PM

Those already look great Denis. Curious how the coloring, finished work will look like.
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: DannyG on April 06, 2018, 11:45:42 PM
Awesome work
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: luvsmuzik on April 07, 2018, 12:22:16 AM
Gorgeous
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Oshyan on April 07, 2018, 08:00:35 PM
Denis, yes I do have some "resources" available to me. :D Let's discuss off the forums. You can email me at oshyan AT planetside.co.uk :)

WASasquatch, yes your huge image broke the thread. ;) I removed it. If you need to post a 5k image in the future just put it in a .zip archive.

- Oshyan
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: WASasquatch on April 07, 2018, 08:12:32 PM
Denis, yes I do have some "resources" available to me. :D Let's discuss off the forums. You can email me at oshyan AT planetside.co.uk :)

WASasquatch, yes your huge image broke the thread. ;) I removed it. If you need to post a 5k image in the future just put it in a .zip archive.

- Oshyan

I knew it. :o sorry for the trouble. I remember the same exact issue with SMF image handler in the past on a graphics tutorial forum I hosted. Uses basic GD I believe regardless if Magik installed or not.
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Oshyan on April 07, 2018, 08:33:08 PM
I believe that's correct, GD2, but still.

- Oshyan
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: WASasquatch on April 09, 2018, 12:43:09 AM
This may be appreciated by everyone interest in Nebulas here: https://www.facebook.com/SciTechUniversedotcom/videos/1994502220815907/
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Denis Sirenko on April 09, 2018, 10:27:04 PM
Thank you guys!

As for the variations in total cloud forms in repetition similar to the Crab Nebula, I would imagine your original shared idea of using a base density fractal, and than separate warping passes and fractalization would create the variation needed. Especially a final large warp for those "lag" features if the the fractal warp shader with roughness turned down a bit doesn't create it. I'm actually working on a project with similar uses in order to create variance, but be on "track" with the whole form, while using the original form for each new element. It also also adjustments to all passes (cloud nodes) a bit easier without having to look into multiple density shaders.

Thanks, WASasquatch! It will take me a while to study this answer.

This is a much smaller version, wanted to mention the plugin Glitterato for Photoshop that creates neat starmaps which can be adjusted for use in composite work with some added glows and such.

It's cool that it's procedural. Perhaps this can be useful for animation. In the case of a static illustration with a nebula, I still prefer those stars that we already have for the game backgrounds. There are some special requirements for the game, which we took into account. Unfortunately, this is just the kind of thing that does not fit into my formulation of the "fully procedural nebula".

This may be appreciated by everyone interest in Nebulas here: https://www.facebook.com/SciTechUniversedotcom/videos/1994502220815907/

Yes, I've seen these nebulae. Here is the site of this man: http://www.salmonick-atelier.com/. These are the best nebulae in motion that I have seen. He created them in Houdini. As he himself writes, it took about 5 years. I suspect that 1 year left to create the basic scene, and 4 more to render)) These are very beautiful, artistic nebulae. But, nevertheless, he, and even more so to me, still has much to grow.
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Denis Sirenko on April 09, 2018, 10:40:00 PM
I also want to share the small renderings that I did at the weekend. The colors are TG, but schematic (red, green and white). A new layer of thin "clouds" appeared, they are white.

[attachimg=1]

[attachimg=2]

[attachimg=3]
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: WASasquatch on April 10, 2018, 12:09:02 AM
Those are just beautiful! And thanks for the share, didn't realize there were more done. Houdini is pretty cool.

Would be very interested in seeing a TGC clip of how you do those twists. I've been trying for couple weeks now and still haven't achieved it, I literally don't understand what you are doing different.

Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Dune on April 10, 2018, 05:18:18 AM
Extraordinarily beautiful! I really love your work.
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Hannes on April 10, 2018, 09:09:23 AM
This is so fascinating. I have to say, that to my taste it doesn't look like a space nebula as much as it did before, but nevertheless gets more and more interesting. The patterns look even more like expensive particle simulations.
I'd understand if you'd prefer to keep your secrets, but I have to confess, that I really would appreciate an example file... :)
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: WASasquatch on April 10, 2018, 07:18:40 PM
This is so fascinating. I have to say, that to my taste it doesn't look like a space nebula as much as it did before, but nevertheless gets more and more interesting. The patterns look even more like expensive particle simulations.
I'd understand if you'd prefer to keep your secrets, but I have to confess, that I really would appreciate an example file... :)
that's where I am at. There is stuff happening I just don't understand. I've been playing with wrapping and fractals for two weeks and cannot simulate those twisted rolls and fine particle like detail. Have you seen his original share for the principal?
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Denis Sirenko on April 10, 2018, 09:16:44 PM
Thanks!

This is so fascinating. I have to say, that to my taste it doesn't look like a space nebula as much as it did before, but nevertheless gets more and more interesting.

Hannes, this is an interesting moment for me. Could you tell me more precisely what exactly makes the last nebulae less natural than before? And the word "before" - with which old nebula, for example, do you compare? This is an important point, because over time, the vision is lost and criticism is needed.

Regarding the file, in fact I can not show too much, but I can now share the clip-file of the main form.
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: WASasquatch on April 11, 2018, 12:54:31 AM
Thanks!

This is so fascinating. I have to say, that to my taste it doesn't look like a space nebula as much as it did before, but nevertheless gets more and more interesting.

Hannes, this is an interesting moment for me. Could you tell me more precisely what exactly makes the last nebulae less natural than before? And the word "before" - with which old nebula, for example, do you compare? This is an important point, because over time, the vision is lost and criticism is needed.

Regarding the file, in fact I can not show too much, but I can now share the clip-file of the main form.

Thanks for the share! I think I understand where those shapes are coming from finally.
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: luvsmuzik on April 11, 2018, 01:01:28 AM
yes! Thank you for this share! I think what most of us were doing was using the Density Fractal preceding our warps for our cloud layer. I had tried some warps but could not get the opacity you achieved with your large fractal warps. Terrific stuff!

I will continue to experiment adding the Density Fractal back in, masking the warps, anything else I can fiddle with, but thanks again!  :)
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: WASasquatch on April 11, 2018, 02:00:47 AM
yes! Thank you for this share! I think what most of us were doing was using the Density Fractal preceding our warps for our cloud layer. I had tried some warps but could not get the opacity you achieved with your large fractal warps. Terrific stuff!

I will continue to experiment adding the Density Fractal back in, masking the warps, anything else I can fiddle with, but thanks again!  :)

I was stuck using much smaller scales (especially smallest scale), and single PF warpers, which only push vertically, creating noise. Honestly surprised I never thought of the redirect shader after the vertical warp discussion. The 3 axis redirection is what is specifically creating the small scale detail as it basically simulates small scale cloud build up by being warped.
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Dune on April 11, 2018, 05:36:29 AM
Thanks very much, Denis. It'll be interesting to see how you achieved your wonderful work.
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Kadri on April 11, 2018, 05:48:39 AM

Thanks for sharing Denis. Had no time to look at the file but i will for certain :)
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Denis Sirenko on April 12, 2018, 09:35:37 AM
I'm glad that it can be useful. I hope that someone will be able to improve this and achieve more realistic results. I still do not like everything in this network.

I was stuck using much smaller scales (especially smallest scale), and single PF warpers, which only push vertically, creating noise. Honestly surprised I never thought of the redirect shader after the vertical warp discussion.

WASasquatch, this is all strange, because:

About details: I have a cloud 15 kilometers in size, made specifically to be able to receive small parts. I think I have no problems here. Even on the contrary sometimes the details too small)

As for the problem with vertical stretching of clouds - both ways that I offered in this topic work:

You should either use the Redirect Shader method or the Vector Displacement Shader method, but not both.

I forgot to mention that you need a Build Vector node if you use the Vector Displacement method.

Use one of the following methods, but not both.


Method 1 - Redirect Shader:

Use 3 fractals that generate displacements. Connect fractal 1 to the 'X' input of the Redirect Shader, connect fractal 2 to the Y input, and connect fractal 3 to the Z input. The Redirect Shader is now producing 3D displacement (vector displacement). You can then use this as a warper for the Warp Shader.

Fractal 1 (disp) --\
Fractal 2 (disp) --> Redirect Shader --> Warp Shader
Fractal 3 (disp) --/


Method 2 - Build Vector and Vector Displacement Shader:

Use 3 fractals that generate colour or greyscale. Connect fractal 1 to the 'X' input of the Build Vector, connect fractal 2 to the 'Y' input, and connect fractal 3 to the Z input. Connect the Build Vector to the 'Vector function' input of a Vector Displacement Shader. The Vector Displacement Shader is now producing 3D displacement (vector displacement). You can then use this as a warper for the Warp Shader.

Fractal 1 (colour) --\
Fractal 2 (colour) --> Build Vector --> Vector Displacement Shader --> Warp Shader
Fractal 3 (colour) --/


Method 1 is simpler for your needs because there are fewer nodes and conversions. But Method 2 is simpler if you already have a vector to use as displacement, e.g. if you have a vector displacement map, where you don't need to use a Build Vector.

Matt

The 3 axis redirection is what is specifically creating the small scale detail as it basically simulates small scale cloud build up by being warped.

I do not think that this is due to small details. The main factor that allows to obtain small details is a combination of factors such as the size of the cloud and its density (as far as I could understand it). And, of course, the presence of small-scale details in the fractal sent to the warper.
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: luvsmuzik on April 12, 2018, 02:13:11 PM
So now I am wondering if method 1 and method 2 suggested by Matt can be merged if you do not apply displacement with the build color method. I shall soon see.
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Denis Sirenko on April 12, 2018, 03:47:09 PM
The first attempts to reconcile the new nebula with TG colors and my stars (Photoshop).

[attachimg=1]
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Hannes on April 12, 2018, 04:32:33 PM
Hannes, this is an interesting moment for me. Could you tell me more precisely what exactly makes the last nebulae less natural than before? And the word "before" - with which old nebula, for example, do you compare? This is an important point, because over time, the vision is lost and criticism is needed.

Hi Denis,
I was referring to these ones:
https://planetside.co.uk/forums/index.php/topic,23403.msg246588.html#msg246588

Don't get me wrong, they look absolutely stunning! But they are so extremely crisp, that they might look like something else (no idea what, but I like it!). Even more like particle simulations.

The following ones are again very much like Nebulae, so I guess, you're on the right track.
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Hannes on April 12, 2018, 04:33:28 PM
..and thanks a lot for the share of course!!!!
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: j meyer on April 12, 2018, 05:52:37 PM
Yes, thanks for sharing the file.
Never tried a contrast of 50 myself, interesting. :)
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Denis Sirenko on April 13, 2018, 04:17:46 PM
Hi Denis,
I was referring to these ones:
https://planetside.co.uk/forums/index.php/topic,23403.msg246588.html#msg246588

Don't get me wrong, they look absolutely stunning! But they are so extremely crisp, that they might look like something else (no idea what, but I like it!). Even more like particle simulations.
The following ones are again very much like Nebulae, so I guess, you're on the right track.

Ah, I understand you. Thanks for the comment. Yes, "crisp" is a very suitable word. Minor details are needed, but not so. On the last render, I reduced them.

Yes, thanks for sharing the file.
Never tried a contrast of 50 myself, interesting. :)

Yes, I had to install this to get long thin ridges. But you can and less. The desired effect appears already somewhere from 15-20 and more.

As for the variations in total cloud forms in repetition similar to the Crab Nebula, I would imagine your original shared idea of using a base density fractal, and than separate warping passes and fractalization would create the variation needed. Especially a final large warp for those "lag" features if the the fractal warp shader with roughness turned down a bit doesn't create it. I'm actually working on a project with similar uses in order to create variance, but be on "track" with the whole form, while using the original form for each new element. It also also adjustments to all passes (cloud nodes) a bit easier without having to look into multiple density shaders.

WASasquatch, I did not quite understand what you are offering. Could you elaborate, or in other words describe what you are proposing?

I tried today to achieve the effect of "blowing light clouds off the surface of heavy ones" with the help of a fractal warp shader and came to the conclusion that it does not provide any additional capabilities, compared to using an input or merge warp shader in combination with a power fractal shader. He is even capable of a little less. But, it seems, it is more productive.
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: WASasquatch on April 14, 2018, 07:45:15 PM
I do not think that this is due to small details. The main factor that allows to obtain small details is a combination of factors such as the size of the cloud and its density (as far as I could understand it). And, of course, the presence of small-scale details in the fractal sent to the warper.

On the contrary, your initial example clip setup has a smallest scale almost 5x the base scale. The warping creates "holes" (in a terrain this would look bad) in this base form, while pushing them, creating build up along the edges of the wholes, creating that small scale debris details. I attached a image that shows these low level plumes that build up and capture light

Quote from: Denis Sirenko date=1523525737
WASasquatch, I did not quite understand what you are offering. Could you elaborate, or in other words describe what you are proposing?

I tried today to achieve the effect of "blowing light clouds off the surface of heavy ones" with the help of a fractal warp shader and came to the conclusion that it does not provide any additional capabilities, compared to using an input or merge warp shader in combination with a power fractal shader. He is even capable of a little less. But, it seems, it is more productive.

I'll attach a simple TGD of what I mean.  Give me a moment.
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: WASasquatch on April 14, 2018, 08:45:04 PM
Here is a very simple example of varying repetition. You won't really see in it the render as the area we're looking at really has no really definition but what the cloud layer is forcing in due to extreme contrasts, but take a look at the last merge shaders preview.

There is clear repetition, but no shape is the same. Adding further warping, translation distances, can improve this method.

Edit: added some test renders with different seeds, and doing another at smaller scale, but will take longer.
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Stormlord on April 15, 2018, 07:12:06 PM
Thank you so much for sharing the TGC Dennis!
This helps me a lot and this simple clip was what I was asking for in my PM to you :-)

By the way... your Ideas and Images are brilliant and so beautiful!
RESPECT!!!

STORMLORD
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Denis Sirenko on April 20, 2018, 12:38:15 PM
On the contrary, your initial example clip setup has a smallest scale almost 5x the base scale.

Smallest scale - 76 meters, not 6000. Lead-in scale 26000. This means that the smallest scale is not 5x, but 340x smaller than the largest. But, as I said, it does not matter. You can get a small detail (for example, to turn a cloud into one point) if you get the desired fractal for a warper even having a minimum scale 5000.

The warping creates "holes" (in a terrain this would look bad) in this base form, while pushing them, creating build up along the edges of the wholes, creating that small scale debris details.

The reason for the appearance of such holes is not that we have too much difference in the scale of small and large parts. The fact is that you have too high and sharp peaks. This can happen on any scale. Try to adjust the fractal for the warper so that there are not too steep slopes for all octaves.

Here is a very simple example of varying repetition. You won't really see in it the render as the area we're looking at really has no really definition but what the cloud layer is forcing in due to extreme contrasts, but take a look at the last merge shaders preview.

There is clear repetition, but no shape is the same. Adding further warping, translation distances, can improve this method.

Edit: added some test renders with different seeds, and doing another at smaller scale, but will take longer.

I understand, thanks for *.tgd and examples. Honestly, I do not think I can use this method. I have a suspicion that in order to sufficiently pull the part, you need to add a large number of such transformations. Their number should exceed 10-15, and still, if there are enough small details of their duplication will be visible (although, perhaps, changing the shape of a new layer can fix this). All this, my computer just will not survive. While there are doubts in this method.

While I did this:

[attachimg=1]

[attachimg=2]

It's: (Сloud layer "A" + warping) - (Сloud layer "A")
It works fast enough. But this method is also not good in everything and it can be used only as an additional one.

Thank you so much for sharing the TGC Dennis!
This helps me a lot and this simple clip was what I was asking for in my PM to you :-)
By the way... your Ideas and Images are brilliant and so beautiful!
RESPECT!!!

Big thanks, Stormlord! This is a newer version of the file, it's better than the one you asked for because it has fewer vertical or horizontal structures. As I wrote to you in PM, I can not immediately know what I can sharing, and what not. There is a possibility that these nebulae will become an independent product that will cost some money. I posted this file, because I thought it was something I could share for free with everyone.
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: WASasquatch on April 21, 2018, 12:16:13 AM
The reason for the appearance of such holes is not that we have too much difference in the scale of small and large parts. The fact is that you have too high and sharp peaks. This can happen on any scale. Try to adjust the fractal for the warper so that there are not too steep slopes for all octaves.

As far as I can tell, octaves are directly related to your scales, predominately, you smallest scale. These peaks are not part of large scale PFs, the smallest scale directly relates to peaking.  For example if you check continue peaks, and amp up the maximum peak scale and displacement with a smallest scale of 0.025 and a maximum of 1 with a lead in of 1, you'll notice it will be full of ~+/-0.025 meter peaks.

As for repetition, I'm not sure what you hope to achieve? With expansion you have plainly visible repetition created by the source explosion, and the source explosion is never continual and only creates so much variance. The rest is independent formation of time through much slower forces, some even in different directions from cosmic sources rather than the radial source. And, again, with large scale fractalization, with low roughness, I'm not sure how the shapes could appear very similar after added warping.

Simeis remnant
(http://www.sun.org/uploads/images/Simeis147.jpg)

Veil remnant
(https://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/thumbnails/image/hs-2015-29-a-xlarge_web.jpg)

Even in the Crab Nebula there is only what looks to be 3-4 main reactions from the initial source. Example main reaction/phases: https://prnt.sc/j82f71
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/00/Crab_Nebula.jpg)
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Denis Sirenko on April 25, 2018, 08:19:13 PM
Veil remnant

Amazing photo, I have never seen this before.

WASasquatch, I'm talking only about the small details. There is no question of medium or large scale. I'm trying to achieve exactly pulling (stretching, blowing by shock wave) of some small cloud's form with the preservation of its internal structure with the help of warping or other techniques.

As far as I can tell, octaves are directly related to your scales, predominately, you smallest scale. These peaks are not part of large scale PFs, the smallest scale directly relates to peaking.  For example if you check continue peaks, and amp up the maximum peak scale and displacement with a smallest scale of 0.025 and a maximum of 1 with a lead in of 1, you'll notice it will be full of ~+/-0.025 meter peaks.

As for our conversation about getting small details. I believe that each of us understands how this happens, but we have some kind of confusion in terminology :)

I would like to share with everyone else a few new renderers of the latest version of our nebula generator. Here are Terragen's colors. Still, Photoshop was used, but I tried to reduce its use to a minimum. For example, to put in order the exposure of some regions, add saturation and a few almost transparent hazy clouds to gently introduce the nebula into black space.

[attachimg=1]

[attachimg=2]

And I cut this nebula into parts and arranged them differently.

[attachimg=3]

UPD: Yes, and the stars. The stars are also from Photoshop)
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Kadri on April 25, 2018, 08:38:08 PM

Great work!
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Dune on April 26, 2018, 05:20:40 AM
Beauties again! Thanks for sharing these wonderful renders, Denis.
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Stormlord on April 26, 2018, 10:57:10 AM
Excellent work, well done Denis

STORMLORD
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: WASasquatch on April 26, 2018, 05:31:35 PM
Veil remnant

Amazing photo, I have never seen this before.

WASasquatch, I'm talking only about the small details. There is no question of medium or large scale. I'm trying to achieve exactly pulling (stretching, blowing by shock wave) of some small cloud's form with the preservation of its internal structure with the help of warping or other techniques.

As far as I can tell, octaves are directly related to your scales, predominately, you smallest scale. These peaks are not part of large scale PFs, the smallest scale directly relates to peaking.  For example if you check continue peaks, and amp up the maximum peak scale and displacement with a smallest scale of 0.025 and a maximum of 1 with a lead in of 1, you'll notice it will be full of ~+/-0.025 meter peaks.

As for our conversation about getting small details. I believe that each of us understands how this happens, but we have some kind of confusion in terminology :)

I would like to share with everyone else a few new renderers of the latest version of our nebula generator. Here are Terragen's colors. Still, Photoshop was used, but I tried to reduce its use to a minimum. For example, to put in order the exposure of some regions, add saturation and a few almost transparent hazy clouds to gently introduce the nebula into black space.

[attachimg=1]

[attachimg=2]

And I cut this nebula into parts and arranged them differently.

[attachimg=3]

UPD: Yes, and the stars. The stars are also from Photoshop)
wow those are great! Love them! The blues look really nice. Have you tried playing with contrast settings in your render node to see of you can get better falloff results in TG?
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Jo Kariboo on April 27, 2018, 01:09:05 AM
Very nice picture!
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: pclavett on April 27, 2018, 01:39:57 AM
Amazing work on the nebulas !
Love your colours and textures !
Paul

BTW Thanks for sharing ! Appreciated !
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Denis Sirenko on April 27, 2018, 08:54:45 AM
Thanks, guys!

...The blues look really nice. Have you tried playing with contrast settings in your render node to see of you can get better falloff results in TG?

I did not play with it in TG, I do it in Photoshop. Honestly, I did not even attach importance to the presence of this setting in TG. Although it would be possible to try to do this, since I want to make a fully procedural generation of the finished result. I think I'll play with this in TG. In general, it is rather strange to see such a setting in TG. I adhere to the idea that if there is not enough contrast (or something else), then you need to achieve the desired effect by adjusting the scene, and not using post-processing (if I correctly understood, this in TG works just like postprocessing and does not participate in the mathematical calculation directly during the rendering). But the cases are different, I agree with this, and it's convenient to have it on hand if the scene settings do not help or are too complicated.
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Matt on April 28, 2018, 12:47:02 AM
I adhere to the idea that if there is not enough contrast (or something else), then you need to achieve the desired effect by adjusting the scene, and not using post-processing

Many people like to do this, but consider the fact that many photographs look the way they do because of the way the film/process/sensor reacts to different levels of incoming light after the universe has summed all the light together. If you're making a texture for a game where the engine has its own post processing then you should output linear EXR and then evaluate how your texture as it appears in game. But if you're making standalone finished pieces then post processing is an important dimension to consider when making your digital art look different from someone else's. If you ignore the importance of post processing you are limiting yourself to just one point along this dimension. Light works in a particular way in the renderer to simulate what the universe does (adds light purely on a linear scale), so some things are only possible with post processing.

Matt
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Denis Sirenko on April 28, 2018, 08:16:17 AM
I adhere to the idea that if there is not enough contrast (or something else), then you need to achieve the desired effect by adjusting the scene, and not using post-processing

Many people like to do this, but consider the fact that many photographs look the way they do because of the way the film/process/sensor reacts to different levels of incoming light after the universe has summed all the light together. If you're making a texture for a game where the engine has its own post processing then you should output linear EXR and then evaluate how your texture as it appears in game. But if you're making standalone finished pieces then post processing is an important dimension to consider when making your digital art look different from someone else's. If you ignore the importance of post processing you are limiting yourself to just one point along this dimension. Light works in a particular way in the renderer to simulate what the universe does (adds light purely on a linear scale), so some things are only possible with post processing.

Matt

Matt, thanks for the comment! Perhaps in my report, I did not place enough emphasis on the fact that I do not attach much importance to post-processing inside the Terragen, and not post-processing at all. In Photoshop, I then perform the exposure up and down, increasing or decreasing the contrast and saturation. And the text you quoted may not fully express what I wanted to say. It was supposed to end with something like this ".. before you were convinced of the physical reliability of the scene.". In other words, I prefer to process that photo that was obtained with a working camera, rather than the one that was obtained with a camera having a sensitivity dip somewhere in the middle of the brightness range.
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: WASasquatch on April 29, 2018, 04:44:43 AM
I adhere to the idea that if there is not enough contrast (or something else), then you need to achieve the desired effect by adjusting the scene, and not using post-processing

Many people like to do this, but consider the fact that many photographs look the way they do because of the way the film/process/sensor reacts to different levels of incoming light after the universe has summed all the light together. If you're making a texture for a game where the engine has its own post processing then you should output linear EXR and then evaluate how your texture as it appears in game. But if you're making standalone finished pieces then post processing is an important dimension to consider when making your digital art look different from someone else's. If you ignore the importance of post processing you are limiting yourself to just one point along this dimension. Light works in a particular way in the renderer to simulate what the universe does (adds light purely on a linear scale), so some things are only possible with post processing.

Matt

Matt, thanks for the comment! Perhaps in my report, I did not place enough emphasis on the fact that I do not attach much importance to post-processing inside the Terragen, and not post-processing at all. In Photoshop, I then perform the exposure up and down, increasing or decreasing the contrast and saturation. And the text you quoted may not fully express what I wanted to say. It was supposed to end with something like this ".. before you were convinced of the physical reliability of the scene.". In other words, I prefer to process that photo that was obtained with a working camera, rather than the one that was obtained with a camera having a sensitivity dip somewhere in the middle of the brightness range.

Regardless of what approach is better, the results can't be argued with, what you are doing is working rather well, though like Matt said, if this is going to be used in a engine, linear EXR is definitely the way to (at least with modern games). I know older engines would use textures/backdrops but this is becoming more dynamic with the use of high range shaders.

The chromatic aberration effect really adds to it imo. I've always like it.
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Denis Sirenko on April 29, 2018, 07:13:13 AM
Regardless of what approach is better, the results can't be argued with, what you are doing is working rather well, though like Matt said, if this is going to be used in a engine, linear EXR is definitely the way to (at least with modern games). I know older engines would use textures/backdrops but this is becoming more dynamic with the use of high range shaders.

What two approaches are you talking about? I also like Matt do not deny the importance of post-processing. Simply, I say that post-processing should be POST, that is, when we have already received a realistic model and now we want to achieve artistic expressiveness. But I, as usual, could misunderstand some things, because my English is not perfect. In addition, my position is my general approach, which may have exceptions or even be the basis for a different approach. For example, you can wipe the lens of the camera with sandpaper and take pictures, with a grunge claim - in this case, post processing is included in the main process of creating the image. Although by definition can not be called "post-processing", however, in essence it is it.

Our game engine has some post-processing, but it will not affect the contrast or brightness of the picture. In addition, those images (that I'm sharing here) are not the ones that will go for our background, for example I can not do aberrations or make nebulae so bright.

The chromatic aberration effect really adds to it imo. I've always like it.

Yes thank you! I love aberrations. It's great that someone noticed this ) And here I have a legitimate reason to use them - on all real space images and can be seen quite well.
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: WASasquatch on April 29, 2018, 07:41:16 AM
What two approaches are you talking about?

Oh I just mean the different approaches to post processing, whether just in TG or post-processing in another program. There is a lot of power in post processing that TG can't offer.

Our game engine has some post-processing, but it will not affect the contrast or brightness of the picture. In addition, those images (that I'm sharing here) are not the ones that will go for our background, for example I can not do aberrations or make nebulae so bright.

Yeah I figured the images you were sharing were just personal "polished" iterations. I imagine for the game it'd be much bigger, and a little more flat for the post processing in the engine.

Yes thank you! I love aberrations. It's great that someone noticed this ) And here I have a legitimate reason to use them - on all real space images and can be seen quite well.

I've always done similar in a lot of my work, I actually didn't know the name of it for a long time (and forgotten when I did figure it out) and had to reproduce it based on memory in PS which didn't yield the best results. I'm still trying to a effect I like the best to make a photoshop action out of.
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Kadri on April 29, 2018, 08:11:58 AM

"Chromatic aberration" Photographers try to avoid it.
Render people try to incorporate it to perfect renders... :-X
(We talked this quite a lot here and i tried not to post but i can't hold myself)
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: WASasquatch on April 29, 2018, 06:35:21 PM

"Chromatic aberration" Photographers try to avoid it.
Render people try to incorporate it to perfect renders... :-X
(We talked this quite a lot here and i tried not to post but i can't hold myself)

Though even that's changing, now we see professional photographers, designers, and promotional artists incorporating it in ads, commercials, movies, etc. At first it was a artifact of lenses, but now is seen as "hyper realism" as ALL lenses produce chromatic aberration 
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Kadri on April 29, 2018, 10:36:11 PM
Our eyes does have chromatic aberration too.
But we have DOF, myopy, presbiyopi and what not too.
Some of those we are aware, some not so much.
Should every image contain those things? You can of course use them as an artistic choice whenever you want.
But like the shaky cams in movies it feels cheesy, bad and the easy way to do something after a while.
So when someone says, he likes chromatic aberration, i get that feeling that he tries to put it in anything he does.
Basically what i don't like is the overuse mostly.
I like clear images because i hate blurry images (i have goggles). But i like of course when those "imperfections" are used in good places.

I don't care if this or that is used now much. It won't be 5-10 yeas later. Probably something"new (!)" will come.
From the hype of HDR TV's (for itself it is a good thing actually) it looks like something on that line will be overused for a time.


Edit: Screw that. When i read what i wrote it felt more like i have an obsession. Should take a break probably.
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: WASasquatch on April 30, 2018, 03:30:00 AM
Our eyes does have chromatic aberration too.
But we have DOF, myopy, presbiyopi and what not too.
Some of those we are aware, some not so much.
Should every image contain those things? You can of course use them as an artistic choice whenever you want.
But like the shaky cams in movies it feels cheesy, bad and the easy way to do something after a while.
So when someone says, he likes chromatic aberration, i get that feeling that he tries to put it in anything he does.
Basically what i don't like is the overuse mostly.
I like clear images because i hate blurry images (i have goggles). But i like of course when those "imperfections" are used in good places.

I don't care if this or that is used now much. It won't be 5-10 yeas later. Probably something"new (!)" will come.
From the hype of HDR TV's (for itself it is a good thing actually) it looks like something on that line will be overused for a time.


Edit: Screw that. When i read what i wrote it felt more like i have an obsession. Should take a break probably.

Than again, if someone incorporates something like this, it would be considered part of their style. I'm not sure that's something to argue against.

For example I feel with Denise's work it's as if we're viewing a raw image of a nebula via some sort of probes high definition digital camera. Without post-processing the raw image would have peripheral lens aberrations due to light exposure, and also chromatic aberrations from the overall lens curvature.

Edit: Oh I see you edited the post since I made mine haha.
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Kadri on April 30, 2018, 03:34:56 AM

No it was before :)
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Dune on April 30, 2018, 05:47:22 AM
I kind of agree with Kadri; all this fiddling to get imperfections in is sometimes too much. Or becomes a trick. Wisely used in appropriate images it's okay.
And btw.
Quote
Denise's work
... it's Denis, not Denise. Denis might not like it  ;)
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: WASasquatch on April 30, 2018, 06:29:12 AM
I kind of agree with Kadri; all this fiddling to get imperfections in is sometimes too much. Or becomes a trick. Wisely used in appropriate images it's okay.
And btw.
Quote
Denise's work
... it's Denis, not Denise. Denis might not like it  ;)

Motion blur, lens artifacting effects, lighting effects, all "imperfections" of lenses, whether your eye or camera. When you work with things yourself you can be bias to this because your tastes are vastly different as an artist yourself. However, you can't argue with real world applications where everything is littered with effects for hyper realism because the average person likes these effects (moth to light effect). Chromatic Aberration is used in movies like LOTR and The Hobbit and looks wonderful all throughout. There weren't clearly "cameras" in this world, but that's what they did. It's used really in a lot of situations where it's not even noticed because it's methodology is used for a new effect altogether like HBO (I don't know what this stands for and have only seen it in HLSL form) where you take a Chromatic Aberration and than blur it, and sharpen it, and overlay it, creating a appearance of more detail, especially on already detailed areas. The shift of the aberration is only one pixel in opposite directions.

It's also really popular in science fiction and space stuff in general, like everything modern uses it pretty much as far back as Battlestar Galactica on Scifi.
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Kadri on April 30, 2018, 10:09:26 AM

"hyper realism" of what? Cameras,photos or how we see the world?
Even if you use googles that have cracked glasses you won't see the cracks after a while.
The world will look perfect despite what you have in front of your eyes.
Popularity doesn't mean "good".
Having to adjust the effect shots to the real shots is one of the things i can understand and have no problem.
But putting the same things "always"to shoots that doesn't have those kind of problems is laziness and just because of"they like these" attitude and has nothing to do with art in general. For me at least. But as i said they have their places of course.

Technical limitations of the past (and now) are one of the problem that some things are still considered for some ok.
With 4K and maybe latter 8K you will look at movies done today and say 40 years later"Wow what shit have they done to that movies?".
You can't use the same techniques (at least at the same pixels levels) on 4K movies. It wouldn't look "hyperrealist" it would look bad.

My eyes have those kind of imperfections. When you add those imperfections to what i see those imperfections get doubled.
Show me how it should be as clear as it can be. Then my own imperfections will do the rest already.

There are more nuances of course.

Can you go more realistic then a documentary? When i look at the word documentary something like these come up:
 
*- Which serves to document (record and: or illustrate) a subject of, related to, or based on documents
*- A film, TV program, publication etc. which presents a social, political, scientific or historical subject in a factual or informative manner
 presented objectively without the insertion of fictional matter
*- A factual and objective presentation

Would you add those imperfections (or use even black and white today) to a documentary to get "hyperrealism" (I hate that word too by the way :) ) ?
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Hannes on April 30, 2018, 04:45:19 PM
Well, here are my two cents. It all depends on what you want to achieve.
If you want a perfect digital image, then don't use it. If you want to make your image look like a photograph, then it's OK to use chromatic aberration and all the other stuff that imitates lens imperfections. Lens flares as well. Also something that photographers usually try to avoid. But an image with the sun right in front of the camera without any flare might look unnatural. Somehow dead. Or just digital.
Of course all this should be used correctly, when you want that photoreal look. Some people use DOF or lens flares just because they they can, even if the whole image looks cheesy in the end, because it's not used correctly. OK, incorrect DOF can be used as an effect as well, if you want to make your image look like a miniature.

Imperfections are quite interesting and inspiring. Imagine overdriven electric guitars. The sound is created originally by using a tube amplifier that is strictly speaking a bit too weak, so the sound is overdriven, but it sounds good, since it's a harmonic distortion. This is an imperfection. There are effects devices that simulate exactly that. Should we now say, that we shouldn't use those, because a guitar has to sound like a guitar? Imagine the sound of a Hammond B3 without the imperfections of the amp and the Leslie speaker. Boring!!
Once again it depends on what you're after. When used moderately dosed it's great, otherwise it sounds or looks awful.

I know, that I am one of those who relentlessly use chromatic aberration, because I want to make my images look photoreal (as far as I am able to). I might tend to overuse it, I know, but if I put the original image and the one with CA side by side the difference is very subtle to my taste, and it adds some unexplainable organic feeling I think. Hard to explain...
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Hannes on April 30, 2018, 05:17:42 PM
Sorry for the offtopic posting, Denis!
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: WASasquatch on April 30, 2018, 05:23:31 PM

"hyper realism" of what? Cameras,photos or how we see the world?
Even if you use googles that have cracked glasses you won't see the cracks after a while.
The world will look perfect despite what you have in front of your eyes.
Popularity doesn't mean "good".
Having to adjust the effect shots to the real shots is one of the things i can understand and have no problem.
But putting the same things "always"to shoots that doesn't have those kind of problems is laziness and just because of"they like these" attitude and has nothing to do with art in general. For me at least. But as i said they have their places of course.

Technical limitations of the past (and now) are one of the problem that some things are still considered for some ok.
With 4K and maybe latter 8K you will look at movies done today and say 40 years later"Wow what shit have they done to that movies?".
You can't use the same techniques (at least at the same pixels levels) on 4K movies. It wouldn't look "hyperrealist" it would look bad.

My eyes have those kind of imperfections. When you add those imperfections to what i see those imperfections get doubled.
Show me how it should be as clear as it can be. Then my own imperfections will do the rest already.

There are more nuances of course.

Can you go more realistic then a documentary? When i look at the word documentary something like these come up:
 
*- Which serves to document (record and: or illustrate) a subject of, related to, or based on documents
*- A film, TV program, publication etc. which presents a social, political, scientific or historical subject in a factual or informative manner
 presented objectively without the insertion of fictional matter
*- A factual and objective presentation

Would you add those imperfections (or use even black and white today) to a documentary to get "hyperrealism" (I hate that word too by the way :) ) ?

Depends on the documentary... Even dinosaur CGI uses Chromatic Aberrations. Also a lot of science documentaries these days, even some older stuff like the Chasing UFOs series. You keep giving examples where it's actually used on a regular in modern applications. Even used in JW and just about every modern movie. Even older stuff like Tron Matt worked on.


Again you are arguing personal tastes with art which is about the biggest no-no there is. It's like art class. Any style someone adds is not against the curriculum. It's their style. As long as the base work is completed.

I also think when you think of CA you're thinking of high range shifts and not subtle 1px shifts you probably aren't noticing in most it's used (especially after dynamic scaling). It actually fools the eye into more depth and detail. And yes, again it's popular in hyperrealism is sketches, final photographs  of sculptures, etc. Again, because of it's ties with realism, despite debate.

Also when it comes to making money in media, what's popular is what goes... That's plainly evident in just about everything. The moth effect is the biggest trend in cinema. Over using lighting effects and CGI relentlessly to attract audiences even if the movie is absolute crap. 

I feel like if you aren't teaching a class where some is willingly coming to learn from your style, it is fairly rude to tell someone what to use or where to use use it in art. It purely goes against the principles therein and why just about every major artist never took a class, and that's what personifies them. Following in line with set rules isn't really art. It's fabrication. Like the Asteroid I did. I was trying to make an Asteroid. Not art. It follows real world settings as best I can. I fabricated an asteroid. It isn't suppose to represent anything meaningful or from some deep part of me. Though I do intend to add it to a art piece at some time if I can ever get a nebula scene looking nice.
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Kadri on April 30, 2018, 10:03:17 PM

I wrote too much and still looks like i could not write clearly what i actually mean.

Using those imperfection in renders is not realism (like showing how the real world looks).
It is only mimicking the look of cameras, photos.

Labeling the later as "realism" is what i don't like.
Otherwise nor chromatic aberration nor DOF etc. or whatever in itself  is what defines art.
What art is is quite another very subjective topic.

I know for example that Hannes uses it mostly and i like to tease him about that mostly :)
That doesn't mean that i don't like his pictures. Quite the opposite. 

Anyway. Sorry Denis.




Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: WASasquatch on April 30, 2018, 11:08:34 PM

I wrote too much and still looks like i could not write clearly what i actually mean.

Using those imperfection in renders is not realism (like showing how the real world looks).
It is only mimicking the look of cameras, photos.

Labeling the later as "realism" is what i don't like.
Otherwise nor chromatic aberration nor DOF etc. or whatever in itself  is what defines art.
What art is is quite another very subjective topic.

I know for example that Hannes uses it mostly and i like to tease him about that mostly :)
That doesn't mean that i don't like his pictures. Quite the opposite. 

Anyway. Sorry Denis.

I guess what I mean isn't easily translated either. You know what you are talking about, which makes you inherently biased to it's use, as you know what it's from, what creates it, etc. This however is not the case with the general populous. In fact it's the opposite, they're ignorant to most every subtle effect, but overall add to them the perception of detail, appeal, etc.

For example, no one is generally using it to recreate a camera effect, they're using it as an effect in general, void of specific camera/era. For example, it's use in science fiction. For some reason it's just been related to space and such. Games use it on the regular, as well as movies and tv shows in this field. Regardless of your tastes, if is generally well perceived, and again is part of a personal style, is the effect itself art, no, but it is only a small variable of the larger picture.

Art is not subjective, it's relative. You can judge other peoples art, but generally, it means nothing. It's relative to what they like, you know? Eye of the Beholder, and all.
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Oshyan on April 30, 2018, 11:36:49 PM
OK guys, please move the detailed discussion of post processing to another thread if you wish to continue. :)

- Oshyan
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Hannes on May 01, 2018, 08:33:19 AM
You're right, Oshyan. Sorry Denis, looking forward to some more of your fabulous images.
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Denis Sirenko on July 11, 2018, 12:01:48 PM
Hey guys!

So, I can take a little breath and gradually share what has accumulated over the past few weeks. This is one of several dozen processed images that Terragen gave me.

This is not the final result to which I aspire. As a final result, we need backgrounds for the game, where the nebulae will be much simpler in form (this nebula will be cut into several simpler parts), darker and they will be on the third plane after space ships and planets.

However, I just can not reconcile with this and wanted to see and share with all my nebulae in a way that they are the main goal of my work.) And this stage, I think, will be more interesting if we are talking about working with nebulae.

[attachimg=1]
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: luvsmuzik on July 11, 2018, 01:35:35 PM
Not sure how to respond, except welcome back, and a great big LOVE these images! :)
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: DocCharly65 on July 11, 2018, 02:01:58 PM
This is a beautiful and convincing nebula render - I like it!
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Dune on July 11, 2018, 02:22:33 PM
Wonderful work again!!
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: archonforest on July 11, 2018, 03:04:14 PM
VERY nice!
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: WASasquatch on July 11, 2018, 04:56:58 PM
These look really nice. Still really love the detail!

But I must admit though, for Nebulae you stated you were originally going for, they have gotten a bit surreal and unlike nebulae we can find IRL.
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Denis Sirenko on July 12, 2018, 08:18:44 AM
Thank you, guys!

But I must admit though, for Nebulae you stated you were originally going for, they have gotten a bit surreal and unlike nebulae we can find IRL.

WAS, yes, there is some unrealisticness, I admit it. In fact, after my last publication, the network of nodes has not changed much, and even simplified. This is because I 2 months was not engaged in its improvement, but in rendering a large number of nebulae and preparing them for embedding in game backgrounds. The network of nodes was even slightly simplified.

This unrealistic can occur in all components of the image. Some of them could show up due to limitations in the performance of our computers, the other part because of the incompleteness of the mathematical model. Also, some things may not look realistic, but it's more interesting, and here we deliberately moved away from the original concept of "repeating nature." There can be many reasons. But it would be more interesting and useful for me to find out exactly what things made you think so?
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: WASasquatch on July 12, 2018, 07:34:37 PM
Thank you, guys!

But I must admit though, for Nebulae you stated you were originally going for, they have gotten a bit surreal and unlike nebulae we can find IRL.

WAS, yes, there is some unrealisticness, I admit it. In fact, after my last publication, the network of nodes has not changed much, and even simplified. This is because I 2 months was not engaged in its improvement, but in rendering a large number of nebulae and preparing them for embedding in game backgrounds. The network of nodes was even slightly simplified.

This unrealistic can occur in all components of the image. Some of them could show up due to limitations in the performance of our computers, the other part because of the incompleteness of the mathematical model. Also, some things may not look realistic, but it's more interesting, and here we deliberately moved away from the original concept of "repeating nature." There can be many reasons. But it would be more interesting and useful for me to find out exactly what things made you think so?

I think someone else had mentioned it before (Hannes?) I haven't gone back through the topic. But your earlier iterations seem more natural, and like Nebulae you can find from Hubble and such. Not talking about repeating nature or anything, but the overall look. They now seem a little unlike nebulae, surreal, exaggerated, dreamy. The latest image reminds me dynamic fluid particle simulations for stress tests. They create a lot of shapes like this. Like this exaggerated one for a car doing a donut:

(https://i.ytimg.com/vi/RuZQpWo9Qhs/maxresdefault.jpg)

One thing that may help is not so many small forms going all different directions. There should be some sort of directional flow, even if on a few axis's. Currently it just seems formless and chaotic, like a test. I don't know. I'm not trying to be rude, only trying to help you remember comments you had made earlier about needing input if the idea was lost and didn't look real.

Another example:

(https://i.vimeocdn.com/video/442865010_1280x720.jpg)
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Denis Sirenko on July 13, 2018, 11:16:45 AM
I think someone else had mentioned it before (Hannes?) I haven't gone back through the topic.

Yes, Hannes noted some unrealisticness. However, he also noted that the nebulae are becoming more interesting. I'm trying to find something mean.

But your earlier iterations seem more natural, and like Nebulae you can find from Hubble and such. Not talking about repeating nature or anything, but the overall look. They now seem a little unlike nebulae, surreal, exaggerated, dreamy. The latest image reminds me dynamic fluid particle simulations for stress tests.

Here I need to understand which previous nebulae you have in mind, since I have already done a lot.

One thing that may help is not so many small forms going all different directions. There should be some sort of directional flow, even if on a few axis's. Currently it just seems formless and chaotic, like a test. I don't know. I'm not trying to be rude, only trying to help you remember comments you had made earlier about needing input if the idea was lost and didn't look real.

Thank you for the remark about the multidirectional small forms, I will draw my attention to this. As for my initial desire to get the most realistic nebula - well, you see the result of this desire, available to me now. Perhaps if I spend a few more months or years, I will get even better :)

By the way, the dreamy sensation is probably because I began to add glare (for bright light sources) in the post-processing. In addition, I publish these nebulae without additional stars — here only stars actually illuminated the nebula in the TG.

And now I'm just laying out another render.

[attachimg=1]
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Denis Sirenko on July 13, 2018, 11:28:33 AM
This is a raw EXR if someone is interested (exposure x2 only).

[attachimg=1]
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: luvsmuzik on July 13, 2018, 11:43:57 AM
Beautiful  :)
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Oshyan on July 13, 2018, 07:52:14 PM
I'm curious what concerns WAS has as well. I think the more recent iterations of your work look pretty close to real-world references like the Orion Nebula, just without all the stars, different colors, and of course not the same shapes. But the colors are often false color anyway.
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:The_Orion_Nebula.jpg
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orion_Nebula#/media/File:Orion_Nebula_-_Hubble_2006_mosaic_18000.jpg

- Oshyan
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Hannes on July 13, 2018, 09:15:47 PM
Realistic or not... These look incredible! I'm blown away that this is TG.
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Denis Sirenko on July 16, 2018, 03:12:29 PM
Thanks guys!
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: WASasquatch on July 16, 2018, 04:56:04 PM
From page 15 on, the Nebulae take on a surreal, unrealistic form. More like 3D tests, than accurate nebulae.

All these look like nebulae you can find. The latest, I can't find any references IRL that look like these. Star or not. I can in visually exaggerated films probably.

(https://planetside.co.uk/forums/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=23403.0;attach=76077;image)

(https://planetside.co.uk/forums/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=23403.0;attach=76198;image)

(https://planetside.co.uk/forums/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=23403.0;attach=76332;image)

(https://planetside.co.uk/forums/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=23403.0;attach=76723;image)
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Denis Sirenko on July 19, 2018, 09:48:47 PM
WAS, it's simple. Old nebulae are the result of painstaking design in Photoshop of one or two basic TG renders, and a large number of small parts other renders. But the last nebulae are almost raw renderings. And in fact I'm flattered that you compare them, because I spent about 1-2 days to collect the old nebulae in Photoshop, and now for new nebulae it takes about 2-3 hours for post-processing (original images size 2048x2048 px).

I will remind you that for the game these new renders I will also cut into pieces and delete unsuccessful places, add stars, add beautiful gas streams and other things. However, this nebulae will be darker, as they will go to the background in the game scene. Therefore, while they are still bright and contrasting, I decided to show them to you. I hope I was able to clarify the situation.
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: DocCharly65 on July 20, 2018, 05:29:22 AM
The last ones look even more impressive now with all the stars. Beautiful work!
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Denis Sirenko on July 21, 2018, 08:11:38 AM
DocCharly65, thanks!

And I scattered a few stars before publishing another render.

[attachimg=1]
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Hannes on July 21, 2018, 12:45:01 PM
This looks so amazing! Great work, Denis!
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: sjefen on July 22, 2018, 05:17:43 PM
DocCharly65, thanks!

And I scattered a few stars before publishing another render.

(Attachment Link)

Please render this 1920x1080 so I can have a new wallpaper  ;)

- Terje
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: sjefen on July 22, 2018, 05:57:28 PM
DocCharly65, thanks!

And I scattered a few stars before publishing another render.

(Attachment Link)

Please render this 1920x1080 so I can have a new wallpaper  ;)

- Terje


I'll render it for you/me (if you'll let me)  ;D

I just went trough this whole thread and boy have I missed out!
This is so awesome! I love space and nebula's and to see someone make this in TG is so inspiring and mesmerizing.

I love this!  :-*


- Terje
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Denis Sirenko on July 24, 2018, 08:40:41 AM
Hannes, Sjefen, thanks!

Please render this 1920x1080 so I can have a new wallpaper  ;)

Catch it! There are little differences here, I hope you do not mind.

[attachimg=1]
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Denis Sirenko on July 24, 2018, 08:46:49 AM
I saw that the compression of JPEG spoiled the small stars. PNG-version without compression can be picked up here: https://drive.google.com/open?id=19UO_loIkrn3tC8pe1d5lonuQRWAkVyZq
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: sjefen on July 24, 2018, 10:35:04 AM
Damn, it's so beautiful. I could stare at it for hours it's so mesmerizing.

I'm don't dare ask you this, cause it probably takes forever to render, but I'm just gonna tell you that if this was rendered with even higher resolution, I would definitely have printed it out and hang it on my wall.

I would pay for it  ;)


- Terje
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: WASasquatch on July 24, 2018, 04:40:44 PM
Damn, it's so beautiful. I could stare at it for hours it's so mesmerizing.

I'm don't dare ask you this, cause it probably takes forever to render, but I'm just gonna tell you that if this was rendered with even higher resolution, I would definitely have printed it out and hang it on my wall.

I would pay for it  ;)


- Terje

Heck, in general probably lots of moola in posters like this. I know I'd hang some up. Abstract art is getting really popular too
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: archonforest on July 24, 2018, 06:37:26 PM
Hannes, Sjefen, thanks!

Please render this 1920x1080 so I can have a new wallpaper  ;)

Catch it! There are little differences here, I hope you do not mind.

(Attachment Link)

WOW this is really beautiful!!!
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Denis Sirenko on July 25, 2018, 05:13:57 PM
Thanks guys!

Damn, it's so beautiful. I could stare at it for hours it's so mesmerizing.
I'm don't dare ask you this, cause it probably takes forever to render, but I'm just gonna tell you that if this was rendered with even higher resolution, I would definitely have printed it out and hang it on my wall.
I would pay for it  ;)

Sjefen, I had a conversation today with my director about the sharing or sale of the scene file, so that you could independently render the nebula in the appropriate size. As you understand, the work was done on studio money and therefore I can not be the sole administrator in these things. The result of the conversation: unfortunately, we can't distribute the files of the final scenes and images in high resolution until the moment the game is released. And the release date of the game has not yet been determined, I think it will not be very soon. But thanks for the interest shown and sorry that I can not now help anything, except for the preparation of wallpaper without watermarks. Your interest increases the likelihood that in the future it will grow into a complete product for sale.
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: WASasquatch on July 25, 2018, 05:53:47 PM
Thanks guys!

Damn, it's so beautiful. I could stare at it for hours it's so mesmerizing.
I'm don't dare ask you this, cause it probably takes forever to render, but I'm just gonna tell you that if this was rendered with even higher resolution, I would definitely have printed it out and hang it on my wall.
I would pay for it  ;)

Sjefen, I had a conversation today with my director about the sharing or sale of the scene file, so that you could independently render the nebula in the appropriate size. As you understand, the work was done on studio money and therefore I can not be the sole administrator in these things. The result of the conversation: unfortunately, we can't distribute the files of the final scenes and images in high resolution until the moment the game is released. And the release date of the game has not yet been determined, I think it will not be very soon. But thanks for the interest shown and sorry that I can not now help anything, except for the preparation of wallpaper without watermarks. Your interest increases the likelihood that in the future it will grow into a complete product for sale.

Maybe pitch the idea for promotional posters? I see the game is working partly of community action, perhaps that could play to your advantage. I know I'm already interested in the game myself, and would love to support it if I could. A poster campaign may help with sales as well as interest just cause of the nature of the mesmerizing high quality posters reaching out further than the initial game audience, and subsequently who they share their new poster with.

The relatively low cost of 3rd party poster producers these days probably wouldn't require much effort. There are even some on-demand retailers still out there that work based on individual sales of a poster.

I had one of my first "good" renders in TG printed when I was younger. Due to resolution limitations it's more a post card but I was super proud to see it physical.
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: archonforest on July 25, 2018, 08:01:25 PM
Technically you can upscale the image in PS without destroying the details. I have a method that works for me. Drop the image into PS and change the document size from 100 percent to 110 percent. Make sure you upscale only by 10 percent. Then repeat the same with 10 percent again and again. For some reason if you try to use bigger percentages the PS will destroy the details. Not sure why but this 10 percent steps worked for me several times. You might need to pump up the dpi settings also if it low.
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Hannes on July 26, 2018, 11:44:25 AM
Technically you can upscale the image in PS without destroying the details. I have a method that works for me. Drop the image into PS and change the document size from 100 percent to 110 percent. Make sure you upscale only by 10 percent. Then repeat the same with 10 percent again and again. For some reason if you try to use bigger percentages the PS will destroy the details. Not sure why but this 10 percent steps worked for me several times. You might need to pump up the dpi settings also if it low.

That sounds mighty interesting. Thanks for the tip!
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Dune on July 26, 2018, 11:46:39 AM
That's indeed good to know. I already knew that you should never use fractions of percentages.
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: WASasquatch on July 26, 2018, 07:27:13 PM
Technically you can upscale the image in PS without destroying the details. I have a method that works for me. Drop the image into PS and change the document size from 100 percent to 110 percent. Make sure you upscale only by 10 percent. Then repeat the same with 10 percent again and again. For some reason if you try to use bigger percentages the PS will destroy the details. Not sure why but this 10 percent steps worked for me several times. You might need to pump up the dpi settings also if it low.

I tried on this document, and recorded the method I used. The document DPI was set to 300 like a lot of print. The result seemed blurrier than using a regular resize with settings set for "Bicubic Smoother (Best for enlargement)".

Here is the action of what I did. Upscsale is 200% from original resolution.
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Denis Sirenko on July 27, 2018, 03:41:55 PM
Maybe pitch the idea for promotional posters? I see the game is working partly of community action, perhaps that could play to your advantage. I know I'm already interested in the game myself, and would love to support it if I could. A poster campaign may help with sales as well as interest just cause of the nature of the mesmerizing high quality posters reaching out further than the initial game audience, and subsequently who they share their new poster with.

I try not to interfere with the strategy of promoting our game. Yes, I understand that there are people who are ready to support the project now. Thanks for the willingness, WAS. I can only say that my management adheres to the strategy of unexpected appearance, and the development is quiet and as long as we need it. Those graphic materials that are already on the web are not published on the game resources specifically.

The relatively low cost of 3rd party poster producers these days probably wouldn't require much effort. There are even some on-demand retailers still out there that work based on individual sales of a poster.
I had one of my first "good" renders in TG printed when I was younger. Due to resolution limitations it's more a post card but I was super proud to see it physical.

At my workplace there is not a single poster with my nebula hanging). Although it would be interesting to see it live.

Technically you can upscale the image in PS without destroying the details. I have a method that works for me. Drop the image into PS and change the document size from 100 percent to 110 percent. Make sure you upscale only by 10 percent. Then repeat the same with 10 percent again and again. For some reason if you try to use bigger percentages the PS will destroy the details. Not sure why but this 10 percent steps worked for me several times. You might need to pump up the dpi settings also if it low.

Yes! I tried it yesterday, and it really works. Thank you for the tip! On the GIF, the comparison of a x3 increase by 110% and a single increase by 133%. (Sorry Was, but I made this test before I saw your experiment, so I publish it.)

[attachimg=1]

However, I think Sjefen will not be enough. He does not need to save small details when upscaling, but to get new small details with rendering a much larger size.
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: WASasquatch on July 27, 2018, 06:44:58 PM
Wonder why it's blurrier on my PS. Using PS filter for enlargement bicubic smooth works better than that method. I didn't do just 133% though, did double size at 200%.

Can someone run that recording I made in their PS and post results??
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Hannes on July 28, 2018, 09:42:31 AM
Although this is really interesting, shouldn't we create a new thread about that to not misuse Denis's initial thread?
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Denis Sirenko on July 30, 2018, 10:53:23 AM
Although this is really interesting, shouldn't we create a new thread about that to not misuse Denis's initial thread?

I'm afraid that a discussion of the functionality of other software as special thread may not be very appropriate on the forum, definitely not sure.

Wonder why it's blurrier on my PS. Using PS filter for enlargement bicubic smooth works better than that method. I didn't do just 133% though, did double size at 200%.
Can someone run that recording I made in their PS and post results??

Perhaps this is because an increase of 110% you also did using resampling "bicubic smoother". The mode "automatic" with a step-by-step increase of 110% better preserves the details.

In any case, there is a way even better, and it can even help Sjefen. This is the resample mode "preserve details 2.0". Tthere is in my version of Photoshop CC 2018, in which this feature first appeared. It allows you to perform a significant increasing image size without losing small details.
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: sjefen on July 30, 2018, 05:55:40 PM
Too bad I don't have Photoshop.
Only Lightroom and GIMP  :'(
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Denis Sirenko on July 30, 2018, 06:10:32 PM
Too bad I don't have Photoshop.
Only Lightroom and GIMP  :'(

Try use free trial version: https://www.adobe.com/products/photoshop.html?promoid=PC1PQQ5T&mv=other
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: sjefen on July 30, 2018, 06:12:29 PM
Thanks. I will  ;)
You just keep posting awesome renders of nebulas  ;D
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Denis Sirenko on July 30, 2018, 06:15:19 PM
I'll try)
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Denis Sirenko on August 10, 2018, 10:42:12 AM
Just for fun. Searching for a suitable amount of glowing gas (red).

[attachimg=1]
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Denis Sirenko on August 10, 2018, 10:52:34 AM
Search for the second cloud layer (green).

[attachimg=1]
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Dune on August 10, 2018, 11:18:48 AM
It's like a heart or artery, fascinating.
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: luvsmuzik on August 10, 2018, 11:48:10 AM
 :) :) :)
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: DocCharly65 on August 10, 2018, 12:41:18 PM
It's like a heart or artery, fascinating.

Exactly my first thoughts when I saw this :)  Great!
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Denis Sirenko on August 10, 2018, 06:44:11 PM
It's like a heart or artery, fascinating.

Yes, it reminded me, too.
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Hannes on August 11, 2018, 03:07:29 PM
Cool indeed! Very untypical use of TG. I love that!
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Oshyan on August 12, 2018, 01:44:28 AM
Ahh, this reminds me I really need to respond to your email re: animation. I have been too busy, sorry for not updating you. When I get back from SIGGRAPH I definitely will!

- Oshyan
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Denis Sirenko on August 12, 2018, 07:55:01 AM
Another heart. Try different colour offset values (Power Fractal Shader) on cloud layer density input.

[attachimg=1]

Ahh, this reminds me I really need to respond to your email re: animation. I have been too busy, sorry for not updating you. When I get back from SIGGRAPH I definitely will!
- Oshyan

I heard and expect when you will have the opportunity.
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Denis Sirenko on October 16, 2018, 12:51:00 PM
Hi all! Just want to share some new backgrounds. These are almost ready backgrounds for the game. Terragen + Photoshop, as usual.

bg-026
[attachimg=1]
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Denis Sirenko on October 16, 2018, 12:52:17 PM
bg-029
[attachimg=1]
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Denis Sirenko on October 16, 2018, 12:57:08 PM
bg-030
[attachimg=1]
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Denis Sirenko on October 16, 2018, 12:58:37 PM
bg-031
[attachimg=1]
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Denis Sirenko on October 16, 2018, 01:00:46 PM
bg-032
[attachimg=1]
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Denis Sirenko on October 16, 2018, 01:01:18 PM
bg-033
[attachimg=1]
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Hannes on October 16, 2018, 01:05:32 PM
This is soooo cool!!!
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: bobbystahr on October 16, 2018, 01:10:39 PM
Very cool indeed, thanks for sharing your fine work.
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: archonforest on October 16, 2018, 01:41:35 PM
What kind of game it will be? Like Elite or something?
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: j meyer on October 16, 2018, 04:03:29 PM
 8) Eyecandy, yummy.
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Dune on October 17, 2018, 06:27:25 AM
Wonderful sequence again. Great work!
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: DocCharly65 on October 17, 2018, 06:51:27 AM
Marvelous! Very nice backgrounds. I share the thoughs that the game could be something like Elite :)
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Denis Sirenko on October 17, 2018, 08:06:16 AM
Thanks, guys! No, it is not even close to the Elite. This is a space strategy. It's really hard for us to say which of the existing games is similar to. We do not strive to be like someone, but the closest thing to us in terms of gameplay is probably Imperium Galactica.
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: pokoy on October 17, 2018, 08:57:45 AM
I think this is one of my favorite threads here, amazing work.
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Yanik on October 17, 2018, 12:42:03 PM
Beautiful fractals! I would have believed it straight away if you said these renders were NASA photographs.
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: luvsmuzik on October 17, 2018, 01:53:27 PM
Beautiful work! Thrilled that Terragen could be a part of your work. These images give us a wonderful glimpse at something greater.  :)
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: WASasquatch on October 17, 2018, 06:45:09 PM
I still applaud your patience in rendering these. Without a dedicated render PC I just can't do it. One of my nebulae wanted to render for days at least how the first 4 tiles was going by end of day one. Lol

Really love the red themed ones.
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Denis Sirenko on October 19, 2018, 04:18:06 PM
Thanks guys! Nice to see positive feedback.

Beautiful fractals! I would have believed it straight away if you said these renders were NASA photographs.

Thank you, I had a similar goal. Although initially I wanted to achieve it only with the help of TG, I gradually came to the conclusion that even if TG produces a good render, with the help of PS, I can still make it even better. So why limit yourself?

I still applaud your patience in rendering these. Without a dedicated render PC I just can't do it. One of my nebulae wanted to render for days at least how the first 4 tiles was going by end of day one. Lol

Do you plan to finish it? it would be interesting to see.

And I'll show you a couple more. Did this week more, but not all are rich enough in content to be published here.

bg-042
[attachimg=1]
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Denis Sirenko on October 19, 2018, 04:19:09 PM
bg-035
[attachimg=1]
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: WASasquatch on October 20, 2018, 04:44:24 AM
I have not, unfortunately. It and literally hundreds of projects sit awaiting a decent computer. I've tried ton come back to it but always end up canceling the renders. Being in a RV in the middle of no where with just my son for entertainment, I end up using my PC a lot. Lol I wish I had another one going. I dare not abuse my fiancee's little Asus touch netbook. :P

I could do lower quality renders like I do with other stuff, but with nebula's it just doesn't feel worth it to me. The quality loss is just too much for me to get over.

BG 035 is really nice, it reminds me of remnant supernova. I am curious, would it be too much to ask for you to paste your Render node here? I'm curious what settings exactly you're using, I know I can't do higher than MPD 0.6 and AA6 but still struggling with some smaller details and at this point I don't think it's my fractals/warpers.
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Denis Sirenko on October 22, 2018, 01:01:59 PM
BG 035 is really nice, it reminds me of remnant supernova. I am curious, would it be too much to ask for you to paste your Render node here? I'm curious what settings exactly you're using, I know I can't do higher than MPD 0.6 and AA6 but still struggling with some smaller details and at this point I don't think it's my fractals/warpers.

It is important that I have only one cloud node, since a larger number makes the render time unacceptably long.

[attachimg=1]

[attachimg=2]

I will also show the settings for Cloud layer v3, since they play a big role.

[attachimg=3]
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: DocCharly65 on October 22, 2018, 01:44:48 PM
It is important that I have only one cloud node, since a larger number makes the render time unacceptably long.

Great shots again! :)

May I ask about a concrete render time?
For my animations I always have the aim to reduce the render time as much as possible. My personal limit is about 2-2.5 h per frame. above it doesn't make sense for me. I guess for usage in a game you follow completely different criteria?
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Denis Sirenko on October 22, 2018, 02:06:46 PM
DocCharly65, thanks!
Yes, of course, I need fewer frames than necessary for animation. I could afford about 100 hours for one such render with the size of 2048x2048 px: https://planetside.co.uk/forums/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=23403.0;attach=83510;image

In total, we have made about 35 such renders.
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Denis Sirenko on October 22, 2018, 02:10:27 PM
In addition I have 4 office computers at my disposal, although they are not powerful.
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: DocCharly65 on October 22, 2018, 02:19:01 PM
OK I understand - a completely different strategy :)
Fortunately I have 5 PCs for rendering too, but for other reasons. When I started my film it should have been just a 5-10 min Music video for fun and I was happy to have my new "gaming PC" for rendering in 2014. Then I kept it as rendering station and got a new PC for gaming... then this one had to render too... same happened again and again... now I won't buy another gaming PC because I anyway know what will happen to it... I keep being the bad player I am on the PS4 :)
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: WASasquatch on October 22, 2018, 07:33:49 PM
BG 035 is really nice, it reminds me of remnant supernova. I am curious, would it be too much to ask for you to paste your Render node here? I'm curious what settings exactly you're using, I know I can't do higher than MPD 0.6 and AA6 but still struggling with some smaller details and at this point I don't think it's my fractals/warpers.

It is important that I have only one cloud node, since a larger number makes the render time unacceptably long.

(Attachment Link)

(Attachment Link)

I will also show the settings for Cloud layer v3, since they play a big role.

(Attachment Link)

Thanks a lot, Denis, this helps a lot! Thanks for the node on the single cloud.
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Oshyan on October 23, 2018, 04:40:25 AM
I think the improved adaptive sampling that Matt is working on for the path tracer should be helpful for these nebula renders (lower noise for same time/faster renders)...

- Oshyan
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Denis Sirenko on October 23, 2018, 10:24:11 AM
DocCharly65, by the way, yes, with Oshyan for an animated movie, we have jointly reduced the rendering time of one frame to 1-2 hours. So here such optimization is possible, if you make a smaller frame, and the quality is a bit lower. But we still have a problem with the twinkling of stars, which still does not allow rendering so quickly.

I think the improved adaptive sampling that Matt is working on for the path tracer should be helpful for these nebula renders (lower noise for same time/faster renders)...

It would be cool if it solved the problem of star twinkling. How soon will this functionality appear?

Thanks a lot, Denis, this helps a lot! Thanks for the node on the single cloud.

I hope this somehow helps.

Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Oshyan on October 23, 2018, 06:25:04 PM
The improved adaptive sampling is available already in Frontier builds. If you have current maintenance you have access to them (4.3.09.frontier at the moment). The options are in the Edit Sampling dialog, "New adaptation curve" and "Robust adaptive sampler". They are still being worked on though, and should get better still. I do think it may help with the twinkling stars...

- Oshyan
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Denis Sirenko on October 24, 2018, 03:26:30 PM
Oshyan, our maintenance has expired. Current TG version is 4.1.25 and I haven't this functional and I think that in the near future I will not be able to upgrade to the latest version.
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Oshyan on October 24, 2018, 08:04:03 PM
Ah well, it will be waiting for you (and further improved) whenever you can justify renewing Maintenance. In the meantime I haven't forgotten about the nebula animation and the new adaptive sampling will be a good test for it. Just need to wait a few more weeks until it's more finalized.

- Oshyan
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Denis Sirenko on October 25, 2018, 10:40:42 AM
In the meantime I haven't forgotten about the nebula animation and the new adaptive sampling will be a good test for it. Just need to wait a few more weeks until it's more finalized.

Well, I heard you.
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Denis Sirenko on October 26, 2018, 02:40:43 PM
Aaand before the weekend to your attention 3 new backgrounds!

bg-041
[attachimg=1]
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Denis Sirenko on October 26, 2018, 02:41:26 PM
bg-043
[attachimg=1]
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Denis Sirenko on October 26, 2018, 02:42:06 PM
bg-044
[attachimg=1]
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Jo Kariboo on October 26, 2018, 03:45:32 PM
Beautifull!!!
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Dune on October 26, 2018, 03:49:47 PM
Wow! Beauties again!
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Hannes on October 26, 2018, 04:16:06 PM
Can't get enough of those!
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Tangled-Universe on October 26, 2018, 04:37:39 PM
Somebody squeeze me please, these are renders? :)
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Denis Sirenko on October 26, 2018, 05:16:21 PM
Thanks, guys!

Somebody squeeze me please, these are renders? :)

No, these are not only renderers in Terraggen, but also work with them using Photoshop. In Terragegen the form, lighting from several bright light sources (about 10), aerial perspective (gas) and colors were obtained.

Almost raw render can be seen here:
https://planetside.co.uk/forums/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=23403.0;attach=83510;image (in Photoshop added stars and exposition in some places)

or here:
https://planetside.co.uk/forums/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=23403.0;attach=83273;image (add exposition in some places and saturation)

or here:
https://planetside.co.uk/forums/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=23403.0;attach=83302;image (add exposition)

The using Photoshop is mainly due to the fact that we need a variety of forms for game backgrounds in which the art-director constantly makes edits.
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Denis Sirenko on October 26, 2018, 05:24:25 PM
Hi guys! New stuff!

This time the backgrounds do not have large nebulae, we need several images with a lower nebula content.

bg-045
[attachimg=1]
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Denis Sirenko on October 28, 2018, 12:36:08 PM
bg-046
[attachimg=1]
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Denis Sirenko on October 28, 2018, 12:36:59 PM
bg-047
[attachimg=1]

(If you clicked on the "Last post" button, do not forget to scroll the page up, I shared three pictures in separate posts.)
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: sjefen on October 28, 2018, 01:42:27 PM
It's so damn beautiful  :-*


- Terje
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: luvsmuzik on October 28, 2018, 01:47:27 PM
Recent shares are terrific! I tried some path tracing on your file share, but gave up after 15 hours of render...project for a long weekend, haha!
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: mhaze on October 28, 2018, 02:17:41 PM
Beautiful, incredible work.
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Oshyan on October 28, 2018, 09:30:48 PM
Path tracing is not going to do anything different here. It basically only affects surfaces like terrain and objects, not atmosphere or clouds.

- Oshyan
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Denis Sirenko on October 30, 2018, 09:18:42 AM
Thanks, guys!

Recent shares are terrific! I tried some path tracing on your file share, but gave up after 15 hours of render...project for a long weekend, haha!

Yes, it also seems to me that this is not a matter of path tracing. There is just a lot of clouds of a rather complex shape. You can try to just reduce their content. Before the render was much faster, because I rendered a flat cylindrical layer of clouds, looking up at them. And now the nebula is a big sphere that we look at from the side. This is better of course, but longer.
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: WASasquatch on October 30, 2018, 06:26:34 PM
Perhaps some day the warp shader/redirect shader won't be as heavy as it is and it would really speed up rendering. They both super slow down displacement and clouds. A V3 with a nice setup will render decently but as soon as you warp for shapes you're looking at double the render time +. It's a little unfortunate.
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Denis Sirenko on October 31, 2018, 12:06:32 PM
Perhaps some day the warp shader/redirect shader won't be as heavy as it is and it would really speed up rendering. They both super slow down displacement and clouds. A V3 with a nice setup will render decently but as soon as you warp for shapes you're looking at double the render time +. It's a little unfortunate.

I agree that the warper slows down greatly. However, I am sure that the use of two fractals through a warper is a more complicated operation than the addition of two series-connected fractals. Because in case of a serial connection, you use the sum operation, and when using a warper, before reading the value of the new color value, you must first find its location relative to the current point of space (construct a vector from the target point). As a result, you get a very valuable effect - the preservation of the total amount of white color, i.e. compliance with the law of conservation of energy (in the form of matter).

On the other hand, it did not seem to me that the redirect shader works so badly. I think so because if you leave one fractal connected directly to the warper (I'm talking about the *tgc, which I shared before), the rendering speed becomes about 2.5-3 times lower, as it should have been if I could connect three fractals to the warper WITHOUT a redirect shader at all. At least in my case, I did not see a large tax on the use of the redirect shader.

I would also like to say a few words about optimizing the rendering of my *.tgс using a non-critical form simplification.

You can make a small optimization not due to the rendering settings, but at the expense of the nebula geometric form. Several elements of the node network contains opportunities for optimization.

One possibility is to use a warping fractals. You can use not three fractals on the warper through the redirect shader, but one, right on the warp shader. Three I used to avoid the appearance of explicit directional forms, which were sometimes deliberate. But sometimes they did not appear at all. This way you can get additional rendering speed by limiting the selection of good seeds. I could not go on this because I needed a lot of good seeds, a lot of differen good forms. Using only one fractal gives x2.5-3 rendering speed increase, as I already said.

However, reducing the number of fractals on the warper will require additional adjustment of these fractal. This is due to the fact that the form will also contain three times less distorted elements. This means that it will be necessary to complicate the shape of a single fractal by increasing its displacement, roughness, clumping of variations and other. This is to your taste.

The rendering speed can also decrease significantly if you use less gas (evenly distributed fog) in the spaces between the nebula dense structures. This can be done by increasing the contrast of the fractal so that pure black areas appear between the dense structures. Or using color offset. At the same time, it is necessary to ensure that the transition from black to white through gray is smooth, without any obvious lines (although in some cases they can imitate fine thin structures of gas or dust).

You can also reduce the smallest scale for a fractal. I set it up for images of 2048x2048 pixels. For smaller sizes it can be reduced.
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Denis Sirenko on November 25, 2018, 02:47:04 PM
Hi guys! Several new backgrounds with our nebulae, I want to share.

bg-050
[attachimg=1]
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Denis Sirenko on November 25, 2018, 02:47:50 PM
bg-051
[attachimg=1]
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Denis Sirenko on November 25, 2018, 02:48:44 PM
bg-052
[attachimg=1]
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: WASasquatch on November 25, 2018, 06:28:25 PM
Path tracing is not going to do anything different here. It basically only affects surfaces like terrain and objects, not atmosphere or clouds.

- Oshyan

Than again I wonder what it'd be like on a background sphere illumimated by stars and a nebula setup with clouds over that for extra magic. Than again PT seems to hate lots of clouds


That very last nebula. [052] is one of my all time favorites from you.
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Dune on November 26, 2018, 06:06:25 AM
Fabulous again!
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Stormlord on November 27, 2018, 11:38:51 AM
The neverending Story... GREAT !!!

STORMLORD
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Kadri on November 27, 2018, 06:25:20 PM
Awesome! I like especially the last one.
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: DocCharly65 on November 28, 2018, 05:36:40 AM
Really great!
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Denis Sirenko on November 28, 2018, 01:11:43 PM
Thanks guys!
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Denis Sirenko on December 01, 2018, 05:31:04 PM
Hey guys!

I haven't shared anything with you for a long time)
Continue to marry Photoshop with TG.
This time I decided not to “degrade” the image with noise and chromatic aberrations. Is that better or worse?

bg-054
[attachimg=1]
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Denis Sirenko on December 01, 2018, 05:32:24 PM
bg-056
[attachimg=1]
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Denis Sirenko on December 01, 2018, 05:33:01 PM
bg-057
[attachimg=1]
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Oshyan on December 03, 2018, 12:34:00 AM
Absolutely gorgeous. The latest 3 are some of my favorites, though it is hard to choose from so many wonderful ones through this lengthy thread. :D

- Oshyan
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Denis Sirenko on December 04, 2018, 09:48:02 AM
Thanks, Oshyan. It is always nice to receive such feedbacks.
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Denis Sirenko on December 04, 2018, 03:11:00 PM
A couple more.

bg-058
[attachimg=1]
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Denis Sirenko on December 04, 2018, 03:11:44 PM
bg-055
[attachimg=1]
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: j meyer on December 04, 2018, 04:39:30 PM
 8) These take you really out there. Or maybe deep inside.
A fantastic journey anyway.
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: iaminonsiner on December 04, 2018, 06:18:35 PM
Absolutely fantastic.
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Denis Sirenko on December 05, 2018, 07:21:01 PM
Thanks J meyer, thanks Iaminonsiner)
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: DocCharly65 on December 06, 2018, 09:25:04 PM
Some time ago I saw some wallpaper from Hubble telescope… if they knew you and your renders - they could have saved billions of dollars ;)
Great again!
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Denis Sirenko on December 07, 2018, 07:00:35 PM
Some time ago I saw some wallpaper from Hubble telescope… if they knew you and your renders - they could have saved billions of dollars ;)
Great again!

Hah, DocCharly65! Thsnk, but I'm not such a cheap artist))
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Denis Sirenko on March 31, 2019, 07:24:22 PM
Hey guys!

I have a question. Since I am Russian, I have a question for those for whom English is their native language. On the gif here attached, you see a piece of video that I will soon publish.

[attachimg=1]

This is one of the 12 nebulae that will be there. The total duration of the video is 5,5-6 minutes, in 4K, approximately 25-30 seconds for one smooth slow flight around the nebulae of different shapes, colors and complexities.

I want to call it “The birth of not our Suns” and from this title the video will start. I want to say that nebulae are the cradle for stars; in the nebula, stars form in the future, each of them could potentially become for new civilizations what our Sun is for us. But this is not our Sun.

Tell me please, do the English say that? Are there any mistakes? Or maybe it sounds weird, but not a grammatical or some other mistake?
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: DannyG on March 31, 2019, 08:10:03 PM
Very Nice
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: sboerner on March 31, 2019, 10:00:14 PM
Denis, this is just so cool. I'd love to see the entire video.

Quote
I want to say that nebulae are the cradle for stars; in the nebula, stars form in the future, each of them could potentially become for new civilizations what our Sun is for us. But this is not our Sun.

A few thoughts . . .

Where new suns are born

or . . .

Distant cradle, new suns

or . . .

New suns for distant civilizations


Not sure any of these say precisely what you're trying to get at. Still noodling this . . . maybe inspiration will strike.
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Oshyan on April 01, 2019, 01:50:26 AM
Oh, this is exciting to see. You must have found more optimized ways to do the nebulae since I last saw. Great stuff!

For the title, that version reads a bit oddly to me in English. Alternatives to consider (not direct translations, but similar in spirit, I think):
The Birth of Other Suns
The Birth of Distant Suns
The Birth of Suns Not Our Own

- Oshyan
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Kadri on April 01, 2019, 02:13:03 AM

Looks cool!
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Dune on April 01, 2019, 05:42:56 AM
Incredibly cool!
How about 'The birth of unknown suns'? Has a mystery to it too.
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: DocCharly65 on April 01, 2019, 08:36:39 AM
Just WOW! :)
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: archonforest on April 01, 2019, 11:27:43 AM
Fascinating!!
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Stormlord on April 01, 2019, 01:27:28 PM
"Where new suns are born"

Sounds best!

STORMLORD
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: bobbystahr on April 01, 2019, 02:11:27 PM
I'd go with Oshyan's 3rd one "The Birth of Suns Not Our Own"
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Denis Sirenko on April 01, 2019, 05:18:55 PM
Thanks guys!

Sboerner, I'm not looking for alternative titles, but thanks anyway for completely new variants. By the way, "Where new Suns are born" sounds quite good, but I would like more emphasis on the birth of new intelligent orginisms, we are always excited about the existence of someone else.

You must have found more optimized ways to do the nebulae since I last saw.

Of course, Oshyan, this way is called "Terragen's flat renders in AfterFX 3D space" :)

For the title, that version reads a bit oddly to me in English. Alternatives to consider (not direct translations, but similar in spirit, I think):
The Birth of Other Suns
The Birth of Distant Suns
The Birth of Suns Not Our Own

"The birth of not our Suns" — it "reads a bit oddly" or is it just a mistake and it will be wrong to say so? In other words, can such a name be attributed to "a bit unusual, but in general there is no rule that prohibits saying so." The fact is that I strive for a slightly unusual form, but at the same time I don’t want to make a mistake. In any case, thanks for the alternatives, the second option seems most interesting.

How about 'The birth of unknown suns'? Has a mystery to it too.

And this is good, although this has already occurred to me)

I'd go with Oshyan's 3rd one "The Birth of Suns Not Our Own"

As far as I can understand, this title is the closest to what I want to say. But it is so unusual for me, so strange for me that "not our own" are at the end of the sentence. And my tongue breaks and braids when I say this (but this is my problem).
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: bobbystahr on April 01, 2019, 05:33:29 PM
As far as I can understand, this title is the closest to what I want to say. But it is so unusual for me, so strange for me that "not our own" are at the end of the sentence. And my tongue breaks and braids when I say this (but this is my problem).
Well in English it tracks very nicely but in your Native Tongue you may have to paraphrase that. The content of the title perfectly sums up what you seem to be aiming at.
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: sboerner on April 01, 2019, 06:45:14 PM
Quote
Sboerner, I'm not looking for alternative titles, but thanks anyway for completely new variants.

You're very welcome! And I completely get what you're saying. (I spent 20+ years in a daily newspaper office writing headlines among other things. Once the headline writing brain cells kick in it's hard to stop. :)

Quote
Quote from: bobbystahr on Today at 02:11:27 PM
I'd go with Oshyan's 3rd one "The Birth of Suns Not Our Own"

As far as I can understand, this title is the closest to what I want to say. But it is so unusual for me, so strange for me that "not our own" are at the end of the sentence. And my tongue breaks and braids when I say this (but this is my problem).

Notwithstanding what I just said above . . . then how about:

Quote
The Birth of Suns Beyond Our Own

Perhaps it's the negative adverb ("not") that' tripping things up. A positive one ("beyond") may seem more, well, positive. ;D

FWIW!
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Denis Sirenko on April 02, 2019, 04:05:23 PM
Well in English it tracks very nicely but in your Native Tongue you may have to paraphrase that. The content of the title perfectly sums up what you seem to be aiming at.

Ok, Bobby, I will keep this in mind.

Perhaps it's the negative adverb ("not") that' tripping things up. A positive one ("beyond") may seem more, well, positive. ;D

I understand, thank you, but most likely this is not what I need.
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Stormlord on April 03, 2019, 08:50:30 AM
"Where new Suns are born" sounds quite good, but I would like more emphasis on the birth of new intelligent orginisms, we are always excited about the existence of someone else.

Just keep it simple Denis!
"Where new suns are born!" <- TAKE IT!
"Where new suns are born, other worlds are waiting..." <- AS AN ALTERNATIVE (Keep the above one Denis)

This is simple and everyone will understand it !
Why complicating things...???

STORMLORD
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: Denis Sirenko on April 03, 2019, 06:31:34 PM
Why complicating things...???

You deprive me of my favorite hobby)
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: bobbystahr on April 03, 2019, 08:23:51 PM
Why complicating things...???

You deprive me of my favorite hobby)

ha ha ha ha I hear that loud and clear....
Title: Re: Nebulae
Post by: luvsmuzik on April 03, 2019, 08:47:25 PM
Blazing Bastards sums it up if we are going for deprivation.  ;D