|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
GrimDude wrote:
>
> One orbit, of the Earth, by the moon. I think the view you started with was
> great! Just set the moon in motion, rotate the Earth of course, and put a
> sun in there (stars too). As long as, the camera holds its position relative
> to the moon (orbits too), Viola! This method would never allow for a full
> lunar cycle, or even be accurate by any other scale, but it's better then
> trying to make a full cycle. That would be a huge animation, were it smooth
> at all.
Huge is correct. smooth would require some 64 animations per day times
28.whatever days. 64 by this methods takes about 4.5 hours for about 5.5
days. I could speed it up by flattening the transparent layers and
presume no criticism of the clouds not moving.
> Now, if you really wanted to get interesting, use NASA images of clusters,
> nebulas, etc. and place them somewhere near where they belong. I'll leave
> the details to your imagination, but this would be easy to get carried away
> with. :)
This whole thing started as getting a good image for a flyby animation,
actually a pursuit-by animation before escape. I am running a one day
animation right now and the first thing it showed was I shouldn't be so
free with the scaling unless the full moon is always eclisped. With
correct scaling there isn't enough detail in the earth and moon to have
been worth this effort.
--
Bill Clinton is sterile and Hillary has a daughter.
Put three and three together for the unfaithful bitch.
-- The Iron Webmaster, 11
Post a reply to this message
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |