J. Grimbert wrote:
> 
> Ken wrote:
> >
> > An elegantly crafted lamp. It is intended to be used in another image
> > and was created as a seperate object to reduce clutter in the scene.
> > The lamp shade was a bit difficult to make but once I got to this point
> > I felt I could have done worse. No the lamp is not currently turned on.
> > It is day time.
> 
> The lamp is very nice!

Thank you.
 
> >  Does the lamp appear proportioned about right to you or have I missed
> > some vital element that would lend it credibility ?
> Yes, unless it's a petrol/oil lamp, old western style (sort of, rather
> middle/end of last century style).

Not.
 
> Given the expected weight of the base of the lamp, the lampshade
> can probably be a little larger (but probably not too much taller)
> without jeopardizing the equilibrum of the lamp.
> Now, there is this mass in the middle which may already prevent
> a bigger lampshade...

  I think it would be stable as is though I concur that the base height
might be bumped up a bit to give it an illusion of more weight.
 
> Would you put it on a small table or on the floor ?
> It seems a little too tall for a table, and out of proportion to be
> of use on the floor...

  I think the fact you worry about the suitability of location is the
illusion given by it already resting on a floor and it's proprotions
and proximity in comparison to the surrounding walls. Had I set it on
the floor with the walls and camera 4 times farther away I doubt you
would ever have considered it as anything but a table lamp. Then again
that is why I asked and maybe that I don't have it scaled to look right
if presented in a scene where it would rest on a table. My main concern
is if I have the lamp body to shade size correctly matched. I have seen
many real lamps that are poorly matched and they really look bad as a
result. This should not have to suffer the same indifferent treatment
as lamps in real life must endure.


-- 
Ken Tyler

mailto://tylereng@pacbell.net

Post a reply to this message