 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Hi People,
I haven't posted in a long while, been a bit busy writing, but I thought I would
seek opinion on something I've been trying in pov-ray, as in going back to
basics and starting from scratch.
I thought I would try and simplify my scene as much as I possibly could - two
light sources (sun and shadowless camera light) and no radiosity. I am using
subsurface on the figure in the foreground, but everything else is rendered with
relatively simple textures. The only post processing I do is upping the contrast
and dropping the brightness.
What do you folks reckon?
Cheers,
Simon.
PS. Find my earlier stuff here:
http://www.landofthefirst.com/
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'whatroughbeast.png' (914 KB)
Preview of image 'whatroughbeast.png'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 13-5-2017 22:43, Simon J. Cambridge wrote:
> Hi People,
>
> I haven't posted in a long while, been a bit busy writing, but I thought I would
> seek opinion on something I've been trying in pov-ray, as in going back to
> basics and starting from scratch.
>
> I thought I would try and simplify my scene as much as I possibly could - two
> light sources (sun and shadowless camera light) and no radiosity. I am using
> subsurface on the figure in the foreground, but everything else is rendered with
> relatively simple textures. The only post processing I do is upping the contrast
> and dropping the brightness.
>
> What do you folks reckon?
>
> Cheers,
>
> Simon.
>
> PS. Find my earlier stuff here:
>
> http://www.landofthefirst.com/
>
Good morning and well done Mr Dali! :-)
I think it has a strong impact on the beholder, and I like the simple,
effective textures contrasting with the electric blue.
Is it part of "Land of the First"? It seems a little bit different to me.
--
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Simon J. Cambridge" <nomail@nomail> wrote:
> Hi People,
>
> I haven't posted in a long while, been a bit busy writing, but I thought I would
> seek opinion on something I've been trying in pov-ray, as in going back to
> basics and starting from scratch.
>
> I thought I would try and simplify my scene as much as I possibly could - two
> light sources (sun and shadowless camera light) and no radiosity. I am using
> subsurface on the figure in the foreground, but everything else is rendered with
> relatively simple textures. The only post processing I do is upping the contrast
> and dropping the brightness.
>
> What do you folks reckon?
>
> Cheers,
>
> Simon.
>
> PS. Find my earlier stuff here:
>
> http://www.landofthefirst.com/
Your rendering got my attention right away, and then I couldn't think what it
reminded me of until now. Zardoz, the floating stone head from the 1970's movie
of same name. Didn't like the movie itself much, and haven't seen it in 20 years
or so, but that flying head and the idea of solving its mystery was good enough.
I really like how the faces and figures, pristine while situated into those
ancient-looking monoliths (for lack of a better word).
I was going to say there's a washed out contrast before, and while outside
yesterday I was looking around at how things aren't so bright and dark at late
day dusk. Which is the time of day your rendering seems to be, if that applies
at all.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Simon J. Cambridge" <nomail@nomail> wrote:
> Hi People,
>
> I haven't posted in a long while, been a bit busy writing, but I thought I would
> seek opinion on something I've been trying in pov-ray, as in going back to
> basics and starting from scratch.
>
> I thought I would try and simplify my scene as much as I possibly could - two
> light sources (sun and shadowless camera light) and no radiosity. I am using
> subsurface on the figure in the foreground, but everything else is rendered with
> relatively simple textures. The only post processing I do is upping the contrast
> and dropping the brightness.
>
> What do you folks reckon?
>
> Cheers,
>
> Simon.
>
> PS. Find my earlier stuff here:
>
> http://www.landofthefirst.com/
Compelling composition ! I like it,... but, ;-) to me the creature's skin and
cloth, textures need more work i think the skin texture I cooked up here could
be a good fit :
https://wiki.blender.org/index.php/Extensions:2.6/Py/Scripts/Render/POV-Ray/Sample_Materials#Skin_Light
The tong may be perfect though! and this may reveal after the rest gets
polished
The cloth, is a delicate issue, because it looks like your choice of tint is
meaningful, evoking the virgin mary traditional dress, so color can't be changed
too much, only divided into very close tints that can be assembled like this :
https://wiki.blender.org/index.php/Extensions:2.6/Py/Scripts/Render/POV-Ray/Sample_Materials#Linen
but mostly it looks too plain, so it would benefit changing its reflection model
to oren nayar with a very high sigma, using a uv mapped fabric micro knit
element as bump map.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 5/15/2017 7:23 AM, omniverse wrote:
> "Simon J. Cambridge" <nomail@nomail> wrote:
>
>
> Your rendering got my attention right away, and then I couldn't think what it
> reminded me of until now. Zardoz, the floating stone head from the 1970's movie
> of same name. Didn't like the movie itself much, and haven't seen it in 20 years
> or so, but that flying head and the idea of solving its mystery was good enough.
>
They remind me of something I've seen but can't remember exactly what. A
series of unglazed porcelain faces set into slate or granite.
> I really like how the faces and figures, pristine while situated into those
> ancient-looking monoliths (for lack of a better word).
And each one is different as far as you can make out.
The image is very atmospheric.
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 15-5-2017 9:31, Mr wrote:
> "Simon J. Cambridge" <nomail@nomail> wrote:
>> Hi People,
>>
>> I haven't posted in a long while, been a bit busy writing, but I thought I would
>> seek opinion on something I've been trying in pov-ray, as in going back to
>> basics and starting from scratch.
>>
>> I thought I would try and simplify my scene as much as I possibly could - two
>> light sources (sun and shadowless camera light) and no radiosity. I am using
>> subsurface on the figure in the foreground, but everything else is rendered with
>> relatively simple textures. The only post processing I do is upping the contrast
>> and dropping the brightness.
>>
>> What do you folks reckon?
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> Simon.
>>
>> PS. Find my earlier stuff here:
>>
>> http://www.landofthefirst.com/
>
> Compelling composition ! I like it,... but, ;-) to me the creature's skin and
> cloth, textures need more work i think the skin texture I cooked up here could
> be a good fit :
>
https://wiki.blender.org/index.php/Extensions:2.6/Py/Scripts/Render/POV-Ray/Sample_Materials#Skin_Light
> The tong may be perfect though! and this may reveal after the rest gets
> polished
>
> The cloth, is a delicate issue, because it looks like your choice of tint is
> meaningful, evoking the virgin mary traditional dress, so color can't be changed
> too much, only divided into very close tints that can be assembled like this :
>
https://wiki.blender.org/index.php/Extensions:2.6/Py/Scripts/Render/POV-Ray/Sample_Materials#Linen
>
> but mostly it looks too plain, so it would benefit changing its reflection model
> to oren nayar with a very high sigma, using a uv mapped fabric micro knit
> element as bump map.
>
If I may comment, I am afraid those changes would destroy the
intentional 'blandness' of the scene, as far as I can judge.
--
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Thomas de Groot <tho### [at] degroot org> wrote:
> On 13-5-2017 22:43, Simon J. Cambridge wrote:
> > Hi People,
> >
> > I haven't posted in a long while, been a bit busy writing, but I thought I would
> > seek opinion on something I've been trying in pov-ray, as in going back to
> > basics and starting from scratch.
> >
> > I thought I would try and simplify my scene as much as I possibly could - two
> > light sources (sun and shadowless camera light) and no radiosity. I am using
> > subsurface on the figure in the foreground, but everything else is rendered with
> > relatively simple textures. The only post processing I do is upping the contrast
> > and dropping the brightness.
> >
> > What do you folks reckon?
> >
> > Cheers,
> >
> > Simon.
> >
> > PS. Find my earlier stuff here:
> >
> > http://www.landofthefirst.com/
> >
>
> Good morning and well done Mr Dali! :-)
>
> I think it has a strong impact on the beholder, and I like the simple,
> effective textures contrasting with the electric blue.
>
> Is it part of "Land of the First"? It seems a little bit different to me.
>
> --
> Thomas
Hi Thomas,
Thank you. I thought I would have a go at something a little more abstract, more
of a stylised representation if you will. The inspiration is from a couple of
images by surreal polish artist Zdzislaw Beksinski, one of my favourite artists,
but the imagery is definitely from the books. The sigils on the flying stones
are the big give away.
"omniverse" <omn### [at] charternet> wrote:
> Your rendering got my attention right away, and then I couldn't think what it
> reminded me of until now. Zardoz, the floating stone head from the 1970's movie
> of same name. Didn't like the movie itself much, and haven't seen it in 20 years
> or so, but that flying head and the idea of solving its mystery was good enough.
>
> I really like how the faces and figures, pristine while situated into those
> ancient-looking monoliths (for lack of a better word).
> I was going to say there's a washed out contrast before, and while outside
> yesterday I was looking around at how things aren't so bright and dark at late
> day dusk. Which is the time of day your rendering seems to be, if that applies
> at all.
Hi Omniverse,
I had forgotten Zardoz! As I said to Thomas, the inspiration is actually from Mr
Beksinski.
Glad you like it. I love evening light and use it a lot. Interesting you make
the point about contrast as I adjusted it post render. Having been thoroughly
told off by clipka about using anything other than gamma 1.0 I am still trying
to adapt to it (which is one of the reasons I went back to basics).
"Mr" <nomail@nomail> wrote:
> Compelling composition ! I like it,... but, ;-) to me the creature's skin and
> cloth, textures need more work i think the skin texture I cooked up here could
> be a good fit :
>
https://wiki.blender.org/index.php/Extensions:2.6/Py/Scripts/Render/POV-Ray/Sample_Materials#Skin_Light
> The tong may be perfect though! and this may reveal after the rest gets
> polished
>
> The cloth, is a delicate issue, because it looks like your choice of tint is
> meaningful, evoking the virgin mary traditional dress, so color can't be changed
> too much, only divided into very close tints that can be assembled like this :
>
https://wiki.blender.org/index.php/Extensions:2.6/Py/Scripts/Render/POV-Ray/Sample_Materials#Linen
>
> but mostly it looks too plain, so it would benefit changing its reflection model
> to oren nayar with a very high sigma, using a uv mapped fabric micro knit
> element as bump map.
Hi Mr,
Thank you.
I was going for contrast and simplicity. I actually do use a crackle normal for
the skin, form<1, 0, 0>, but the bump_size is less. I might try aoi and see how
that works. Nice textures you have there. May I borrow?
As you say, cloth is a tricky issue, particularly in this instance. I was trying
to avoid uv mapping altogether. I like to see if I can do it all in
pov-ray. I will try out your suggestions (which is a good excuse for further
tinkering - I am never satisfied).
Stephen <mca### [at] aolcom> wrote:
> On 5/15/2017 7:23 AM, omniverse wrote:
> > "Simon J. Cambridge" <nomail@nomail> wrote:
> >
>
> >
> > Your rendering got my attention right away, and then I couldn't think what it
> > reminded me of until now. Zardoz, the floating stone head from the 1970's movie
> > of same name. Didn't like the movie itself much, and haven't seen it in 20 years
> > or so, but that flying head and the idea of solving its mystery was good enough.
> >
>
> They remind me of something I've seen but can't remember exactly what. A
> series of unglazed porcelain faces set into slate or granite.
>
>
> > I really like how the faces and figures, pristine while situated into those
> > ancient-looking monoliths (for lack of a better word).
>
> And each one is different as far as you can make out.
> The image is very atmospheric.
>
>
> --
>
> Regards
> Stephen
Hi Stephen,
My thinking was Death Masks. But I do cheat a little. At the moment only the
first three are different. I repeat after that, though the 'tomb stones' are all
unique, (csg and intersection with an isosurface).
Creating each individual mesh takes time (expressions, postures, that kind of
thing.)
Glad you like it, and my thanks to all for your comments!
Cheers,
Simon.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 5/15/2017 11:53 AM, Thomas de Groot wrote:
> On 15-5-2017 9:31, Mr wrote:
>> Compelling composition ! I like it,... but, ;-) to me the
>> creature's skin and
>> cloth, textures need more work i think the skin texture I cooked up
>> here could
>> be a good fit :
>>
https://wiki.blender.org/index.php/Extensions:2.6/Py/Scripts/Render/POV-Ray/Sample_Materials#Skin_Light
>>
>> The tong may be perfect though! and this may reveal after the rest gets
>> polished
>>
>> The cloth, is a delicate issue, because it looks like your choice of
>> tint is
>> meaningful, evoking the virgin mary traditional dress, so color can't
>> be changed
>> too much, only divided into very close tints that can be assembled
>> like this :
>>
https://wiki.blender.org/index.php/Extensions:2.6/Py/Scripts/Render/POV-Ray/Sample_Materials#Linen
>>
>>
>> but mostly it looks too plain, so it would benefit changing its
>> reflection model
>> to oren nayar with a very high sigma, using a uv mapped fabric micro knit
>> element as bump map.
>>
>
> If I may comment, I am afraid those changes would destroy the
> intentional 'blandness' of the scene, as far as I can judge.
>
Ouch!
But I know what you mean. I think it is the sort of image. That if you
add a bit more detail to one part. It will put the image out of balance
and you will need to add more detail elsewhere.
I think the image is finished the way it is. At least this version is. :)
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 15-5-2017 13:36, Stephen wrote:
> On 5/15/2017 11:53 AM, Thomas de Groot wrote:
>> On 15-5-2017 9:31, Mr wrote:
>
>>> Compelling composition ! I like it,... but, ;-) to me the
>>> creature's skin and
>>> cloth, textures need more work i think the skin texture I cooked up
>>> here could
>>> be a good fit :
>>>
https://wiki.blender.org/index.php/Extensions:2.6/Py/Scripts/Render/POV-Ray/Sample_Materials#Skin_Light
>>>
>>>
>>> The tong may be perfect though! and this may reveal after the rest gets
>>> polished
>>>
>>> The cloth, is a delicate issue, because it looks like your choice of
>>> tint is
>>> meaningful, evoking the virgin mary traditional dress, so color can't
>>> be changed
>>> too much, only divided into very close tints that can be assembled
>>> like this :
>>>
https://wiki.blender.org/index.php/Extensions:2.6/Py/Scripts/Render/POV-Ray/Sample_Materials#Linen
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> but mostly it looks too plain, so it would benefit changing its
>>> reflection model
>>> to oren nayar with a very high sigma, using a uv mapped fabric micro
>>> knit
>>> element as bump map.
>>>
>>
>> If I may comment, I am afraid those changes would destroy the
>> intentional 'blandness' of the scene, as far as I can judge.
>>
>
> Ouch!
> But I know what you mean. I think it is the sort of image. That if you
> add a bit more detail to one part. It will put the image out of balance
> and you will need to add more detail elsewhere.
> I think the image is finished the way it is. At least this version is. :)
>
Yes indeed. Adding too many structural details would change the mood of
the scene imho.
--
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Am 13.05.2017 um 22:43 schrieb Simon J. Cambridge:
> What do you folks reckon?
For a scene that doesn't use radiosity I think it looks surprisingly good.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
