Some canyon with water :)

Tangled-Universe · May 04, 2008, 02:18:16 PM

Basically the same scene as last one but now with some water

3,5 hours of rendering @ detail 0.85, AA 10 and GI 1/1.
I like the new transparency features a lot

I tried to achieve a bit muddy look with cloudy underwater mud-shapes...see what I mean

More of this one to come soon...

Martin

Phylloxera · May 04, 2008, 02:30:35 PM

Beautiful displacements !

zionner · May 04, 2008, 03:00:15 PM

I agree with Tangled, The desplacements are great!

But I like the Water much more

It brings the muddy feel across very well

rcallicotte · May 04, 2008, 04:05:48 PM

With scaling (perhaps) and additional colors placed just right, this is very good. The water is such a plus, isn't it?

Volker Harun · May 04, 2008, 04:21:52 PM

I like the scene, composition a lot.
Some fancy colour variations could add some ... hmmm ... addition ,-)

PG · May 04, 2008, 04:25:06 PM

Just wondering why you used AA 10. with such a jagged surface surely 3 would be sufficient, and would decrease that render time quite a lot, allowing you to turn other detail settings up.

Tangled-Universe · May 04, 2008, 04:26:39 PM

Thank you very much, all of you

I certainly agree about the coloring Calico and Volker.
It's one of my weakest points thus far so I'll definitely try to improve.
Tomorrow I'm going to render another version, hopefully a bit better

Martin

Tangled-Universe · May 04, 2008, 04:29:45 PM

Quote from: PG on May 04, 2008, 04:25:06 PM
Just wondering why you used AA 10. with such a jagged surface surely 3 would be sufficient, and would decrease that render time quite a lot, allowing you to turn other detail settings up.

It is something I explained when I posted an earlier version of this tgd.
The reason for AA10 is that I want the tiny fake stones to look smooth and I also don't want the whole image to look jaggy.

I'm going to render this one with some populations perhaps and then I prefer to render it with even higher AA to smooth the populations so the plants/trees won't look pixelated(/jaggy

)

Martin

Seth · May 04, 2008, 05:29:50 PM

are you gonna add some vegetation to it ?

Tangled-Universe · May 04, 2008, 05:41:10 PM

Yes I am

But first I want to improve coloring because lush/green vegetation don't really suite the colorpalette at the moment...
I'm having a test-render tomorrow and I'll post it if it isn't too ugly colorwise

Martin

choronr · May 04, 2008, 08:28:25 PM

Beautiful work Martin; this is a very natural looking composition.

RArcher · May 06, 2008, 11:51:08 AM

Wonderful displacements on the cliff wall, very natural.

Tangled-Universe · May 06, 2008, 01:37:35 PM

Hi all,

Here's an aborted test-render because of surfacing difficulties. Not an artist-wise problem like I mentioned before but a technical one

As you can see black areas appeared on the walls.
Like suggested before in my other Sandstone-thread it is not a black-colored surfacelayer showing through.
This image has a base-colour powerfractal and 5 surface layers for color.
I've tried different seeds for all the breakups and PF's and nothing worked.

Does anybody have a clue?
Thanks in advance!

Martin

p.s. it's a test-render huh...so yes I know: more color-variation, better vegetation and less dense clouds

lol

Matt · May 06, 2008, 01:53:21 PM

Are GI surface details enabled?

What do you get if you render with a white Lambert Shader covering everything?

Is there any chance it could be the vegetation?

JimB · May 06, 2008, 02:09:55 PM

The same dark patches are in the first render at the top of the thread, just not nearly as pronounced due to a thinner atmosphere. Is it something to do with the gamma and atmosphere? Is it the reflection/specularity being more pronounced due to a thicker haze?