Kenneth wrote:
> I've been working on this scene for a *long* time--far too long to admit to.
>  :-)  Endlessly tweaking 10^3 + 1 details, most of which visually interact.
> But I've been looking at it too long, so it's time to post a  version, to
> get some feedback.

And it shows. Fantastic work. :-)

> The explosion started out, long ago,  as ALL media...hundreds of individual
> media-filled spheres--which was taking forever-and-a-day to render. Had to
> switch to a different scheme (and to my faster PC!) Much less media now;
> lots of textured spheres instead, for the various smoke trails. And simple
> textured boxes for the little smoke "tendrils" under the flying embers.

It looks Hollywood worthy. The fires in the background are beautifully 
done, too.

> No gravity effect yet; that's probably obvious.  :-(  I have some
> gravity/decellearation equations ready to go, but incorporating them into
> the smoke-trail code would take a re-write (I didn't plan for that when I
> wrote the trail code, unfortunately.)  I *could* say that the explosion is
> at the "moment of detonation," before gravity and air resistance have had a
> chance to show themselves.  ;-)

It looks fine as it is, but I'm sure it would look even better with 
parabolic trajectories.

You are planning on posting some code when it's finished, right? ;-)

> The scene still needs *something*, but I'm not sure what.

The lighting on the tops of the machines seems awkward--the background 
machine in particular feels slightly "pasted in". There's blue light 
shining down from the sky, but *in* the sky all I see is black clouds. 
It feels like the machines would "fit" better if that light source were 
toned down or eliminated.

It would also be nice if the shot landing in the foreground came from a 
machine that were on the screen. It wouldn't be a problem, but you 
really made it the focal point of the image.

> Some objects on
> the ground are much-needed, but I don't want them to hide the
> background--which presents a conundrum.

I didn't notice a problem until you brought it up. :-) The image does 
"work" as it is, especially if you're going for an oh-so-slightly campy 
feel. Otherwise, maybe some low-lying rubble would work?


-- 
William Tracy
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|a|f|i|s|h|i|o|n|a|d|o|@|g|m|a|i|l|.|c|o|m|
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|w|t|r|a|c|y|@|c|a|l|p|o|l|y|.|e|d|u|
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
You know you've been raytracing too long when you know the teapot bezier 
patches by heart.

Post a reply to this message