Annoying isn't it, how 40 hours into a 60 hour render you realise that the
tree trunks are floating an inch off the ground...
Getting there. Not entirely happy with the lighting, so now working on an
HDR version (should also render quicker).

Post a reply to this message

Attachments:
Download 'waterhole3.jpg' (169 KB)

Preview of image 'waterhole3.jpg'

"Joanne Simpson" <cor### [at] onewhiteravencom> schreef in bericht
news:web.43a0c02583df2d73dc45bc820@news.povray.org...
> Annoying isn't it, how 40 hours into a 60 hour render you realise that the
> tree trunks are floating an inch off the ground...
> Getting there. Not entirely happy with the lighting, so now working on an
> HDR version (should also render quicker).
>
This is taking shape very nicely. The atmosphere and the shape of the trees
are excellent. Some comments though, most of them I am sure you are already
aware of.

The waterplants and their texture are too obviously identical. Vary the
texture and - at least - rotate the plants so that the similarity becomes
less obvious.

I am not sure about the standing water in the foreground. The sandy bottom
shines through but the water surface has no apparent structure. The result
is that one does not know what one is seeing really: dry sand? wet sand?
thin water film? Especially also because some of the waterplants appear to
be under the surface...

The bark of the tree in the left foreground looks too flat. A strong normal
would be indicated here, or an isosurface trunk/bark

The reeds are a little *mechanical*. Again, some variation/randomization in
shape, position, curvature, clumping, would be better.

However... this is going to be a great picture!

Thomas

Post a reply to this message

Joanne Simpson wrote:
> Annoying isn't it, how 40 hours into a 60 hour render you realise that the
> tree trunks are floating an inch off the ground...
> Getting there. Not entirely happy with the lighting, so now working on an
> HDR version (should also render quicker).
> 
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
How are you modelling those reeds btw?

Post a reply to this message

"Thomas de Groot" <t.d### [at] internlnet> wrote in message
news:43a12590@news.povray.org...
>
> "Joanne Simpson" <cor### [at] onewhiteravencom> schreef in bericht
> news:web.43a0c02583df2d73dc45bc820@news.povray.org...
> > Annoying isn't it, how 40 hours into a 60 hour render you realise that
the
> > tree trunks are floating an inch off the ground...
> > Getting there. Not entirely happy with the lighting, so now working on
an
> > HDR version (should also render quicker).
> >
> This is taking shape very nicely. The atmosphere and the shape of the
trees
> are excellent. Some comments though, most of them I am sure you are
already
> aware of.
>
> The waterplants and their texture are too obviously identical. Vary the
> texture and - at least - rotate the plants so that the similarity becomes
> less obvious.
>
> I am not sure about the standing water in the foreground. The sandy bottom
> shines through but the water surface has no apparent structure. The result
> is that one does not know what one is seeing really: dry sand? wet sand?
> thin water film? Especially also because some of the waterplants appear to
> be under the surface...
>
> The bark of the tree in the left foreground looks too flat. A strong
normal
> would be indicated here, or an isosurface trunk/bark
>
> The reeds are a little *mechanical*. Again, some variation/randomization
in
> shape, position, curvature, clumping, would be better.
>
> However... this is going to be a great picture!
>
> Thomas
>
>
>

I second all these points, mostly the tree on the left. It's too close to
the foreground to have such little detail. My next critique is with the
reeds. They could use some curvature and variation in thickness.

I do really like the top part of the background and the lily pads. A few
things about the lilypads though, they look too thick, their size and
rotation might be a little too regular, as well as the depth below the
surface is too regular.

How the water's normal goes from wavey to flat is a nice touch. The model of
the bird could use some quality enhancements.

Looks pretty good all in all.

Post a reply to this message

"Joanne Simpson" <cor### [at] onewhiteravencom> wrote in message 
news:web.43a0c02583df2d73dc45bc820@news.povray.org...

> Annoying isn't it, how 40 hours into a 60 hour render you realise that the
> tree trunks are floating an inch off the ground...

    Yep, been there, got the...  ;)

> Getting there. Not entirely happy with the lighting, so now working on an
> HDR version (should also render quicker).


     I don't know much about HDR(I)(?) yet, but I'm wondering how you got 
that haze? For me, it works in this scene, and I'm wondering if you can't 
turn that off for now, and have a go at the points that others have made. 
I'm thinking that your test-render time might come down to around 2-3 hours. 
I may be wrong.

   Anyway, really nice so far, I'm liking the atmosphere a lot.

    ~Steve~

Post a reply to this message