 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Hi,
This is probably going to be the final version. After starting this one I
realized that any "cute" aspect the other version possessed was a preconception
I held from *before* I added the mustache, and that it indeed looks quite
sinister. This version is /slightly/ better, but I still wouldn't want to turn
my back on it...
It was rendered in five passes and took a little over 1 & 1/2 hours to complete.
It uses the following features:
- render baking via illusion.inc
- fast, fake SSS (I might start calling it "diffuse occlusion")
- a proximity pattern
- textured fog
- luminous bloom
The bubbles are just transparent spheres with an ior of 1/1.33. Both they and
the height_field were given textured fog, but the creature was not (good call
Thomas).
Comments and/or questions, welcome as always!
~Sam
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'aquatic-alien-1h_35m_29s.jpg' (229 KB)
Preview of image 'aquatic-alien-1h_35m_29s.jpg'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 03/23/2011 05:05 PM, Samuel Benge wrote:
> Hi,
>
> This is probably going to be the final version. After starting this one I
> realized that any "cute" aspect the other version possessed was a preconception
> I held from *before* I added the mustache, and that it indeed looks quite
> sinister. This version is /slightly/ better, but I still wouldn't want to turn
> my back on it...
>
> It was rendered in five passes and took a little over 1& 1/2 hours to complete.
> It uses the following features:
>
> - render baking via illusion.inc
> - fast, fake SSS (I might start calling it "diffuse occlusion")
> - a proximity pattern
> - textured fog
> - luminous bloom
>
> The bubbles are just transparent spheres with an ior of 1/1.33. Both they and
> the height_field were given textured fog, but the creature was not (good call
> Thomas).
>
> Comments and/or questions, welcome as always!
>
> ~Sam
so what's used for the water itself ... a media function of some sort
... the textured fog? and why the reciprocal for the bubbles. I was
thinking about an underwater scene, that mandel goodie I was playing
around with a while back looked like it would make neat coral (up close)
but I got stalled on exactly these issues.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
wonderful! I'd say HOF-level.
I think you forgot to add focal blur to the list of features. :)
--
a game sig: http://tinyurl.com/d3rxz9
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 3/23/2011 1:29 PM, Jim Holsenback wrote:
> On 03/23/2011 05:05 PM, Samuel Benge wrote:
>>
>> Comments and/or questions, welcome as always!
>>
>
> so what's used for the water itself ... a media function of some sort
> ... the textured fog? and why the reciprocal for the bubbles. I was
> thinking about an underwater scene, that mandel goodie I was playing
> around with a while back looked like it would make neat coral (up close)
> but I got stalled on exactly these issues.
The water is nothing. There's no water, no container for the bubbles...
The media-like effect is entirely due to the textured fog, so there's no
real volumetric present. The reciprocal for the bubbles was given as an
attempt to make them behave is if they had the ior or air inside water.
I don't know if it's an accurate way to do it though, I just knew I
should make a transform based on the ior of both water and air, and a
reciprocal seemed like the best way to do that.
Right now I'm trying to make a more physically-based air bubble effect
using blobs subtracted by blobs from one point set. It looks promising
so far, but I need more reference material...
I look forward to seeing your scene, should you feel like posting
another version eventually. I failed to comment on it last time, but it
was looking pretty good!
Sam
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 3/23/2011 2:07 PM, nemesis wrote:
> wonderful! I'd say HOF-level.
Thank you sir.
> I think you forgot to add focal blur to the list of features. :)
Oh yeah, I used 200 blur_samples with a custom bokeh.
Thanks again to Mr. Lipka for improving POV :)
Sam
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Am 23.03.2011 22:28, schrieb stbenge:
> I don't know if it's an accurate way to do it though, I just knew I
> should make a transform based on the ior of both water and air, and a
> reciprocal seemed like the best way to do that.
Yup, that's the way to do it. For all optic phenomena I know of, the
absolute IOR of participating media is irrelevant - everything is in the
/ratio/ between the respective refractive indices.
(An alternative would have been to model the water using a scene-wide
interior, i.e. using an interior{} block outside any objects.)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 3/23/2011 3:01 PM, clipka wrote:
> Am 23.03.2011 22:28, schrieb stbenge:
>
>> I don't know if it's an accurate way to do it though, I just knew I
>> should make a transform based on the ior of both water and air, and a
>> reciprocal seemed like the best way to do that.
>
> Yup, that's the way to do it. For all optic phenomena I know of, the
> absolute IOR of participating media is irrelevant - everything is in the
> /ratio/ between the respective refractive indices.
>
> (An alternative would have been to model the water using a scene-wide
> interior, i.e. using an interior{} block outside any objects.)
Ah, that sounds like the best solution. That's the way I'll most likely
do it next time. Thanks!
Sam
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Am 23.03.2011 22:35, schrieb stbenge:
> Thanks again to Mr. Lipka for improving POV :)
You're welcome - I love to see my efforts bear fruit, so to speak
(though I don't love that alien; I think it feeds on brainwave
energy...) :-)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 3/23/2011 3:12 PM, clipka wrote:
> Am 23.03.2011 22:35, schrieb stbenge:
>
>> Thanks again to Mr. Lipka for improving POV :)
>
> You're welcome - I love to see my efforts bear fruit, so to speak
> (though I don't love that alien; I think it feeds on brainwave
> energy...) :-)
That's OK. He's not the most likable fellow...
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 3/23/2011 3:08 PM, stbenge wrote:
> On 3/23/2011 3:01 PM, clipka wrote:
>> (An alternative would have been to model the water using a scene-wide
>> interior, i.e. using an interior{} block outside any objects.)
>
> Ah, that sounds like the best solution. That's the way I'll most likely
> do it next time. Thanks!
So... I tried a scene-wide interior{} block, but only received errors.
What is the proper syntax? I searched the docs, but they only seemed to
mention *object* interiors...
Thanks again,
Sam
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
