Opinion time !

  I have seen many a night sky renderd with Pov. Of these many
star ladden skies there is often a tendency to add gas clouds,
lens flares, and star bursts. I know that these added touches
are fun to add in but how real are they really. Here in the US
where I live in a large metropolitan area we are lucky if we
can see some of the brighter planets let alone stars. But even
when I get the chance to get out into the country and look up
there a lot of stars up there but with the unaided eye there
are no gas clouds, star bursts, or fancy lens flares visible in the
night sky.
  Is this trend for special effects a side effect of astro photography ?
I know the hubble telescope has advanced nebular and galactic
photography to a new level but it's just not the stuff you see localy
in our solar system.

What do you think about this generaly ?

Do you as an artist go for the effect and damn the realism ?

Should these special effects be used only when viewing from
space and go for more of a realistic impression when looked
at through the atmosphere of the earth ?

Can you get away with excessive effects in a twin star system ?

Is it worth it to spend 3 weeks to model a perfect house with
landscaping, streets, and street lights and then throw in the best
special effect that galaxy.inc will give you when it's likely that
the night sky is as boring to look at there as it is here where I
live?

--
Ken Tyler

tyl### [at] pacbellnet

Post a reply to this message