I love all of these images, they are nice.

Having seen a lot of sun down's at a ski area above the tree line, I'd say
you need a combination of both the red sky and the blue / white snow.

Here's a perfect real life example:

http://www.grandshelters.com/igloo-pics-recent-2.html
for the index

and
http://www.grandshelters.com/images/igloo-night-4-s2.jpg
here's one in daylight that shows the 'rough' area of the snow I was talking
about earlier:

http://www.grandshelters.com/images/denali-4a.jpg

It seems weird that during sunset the snow would be blue, and not red, but
you can see this effect over and over, unless the setting sun is directly
shining on the snow (which it more or less does in your examples).

For example, see:
http://www.backcountryvisions.com/galleries/alaska/denali/pages/3-100.html
and
http://www.backcountryvisions.com/galleries/alaska/denali/pages/3-80.html
and
http://www.backcountryvisions.com/galleries/alaska/southcentral/pages/3-55.h
tml
(although not as much snow).

ON THE OTHER HAND look at this image:

http://www.terraphotography.com/hi/snow_sunset_sm.jpg

This is one where the sun is shining almost directly 'against' the snow and
sure enough, it looks almost like sand.

Maybe snow has some weird reflection property.

After having said all of this, I like ALL of your images.

                  == John ==

"hughes b" <omn### [at] charternet> wrote in message
news:3d54004d@news.povray.org...
> This is really good Tim, as if you didn't know.
>
> Someone said before how the snow seems more like desert sand dunes than
> desert snow dunes and I can't get that out of my mind still. It's the
tinge
> of red still in there that does it, even though it's basically a gray-blue
> instead. Maybe what I'm trying to see here is a lot more nearby bluish
> places from sky reflection, something like where that spot is far right
and
> on the horizon. Likewise the igloo itself, a more blue-white on the
shadowed
> side would seem icey to me. And the shadow/light contrast of the ground
> isn't as different as I'd expect to be seeing, which I guess someone had
> also said in a previous thread if I remember that right.
>
> Got to ask this then, are you using assumed_gamma 1.0? I try to use that
and
> always find myself leaving it out or specifying anywhere from >1.0 to <
3.0.
> I probably shouldn't but when all else fails I start changing the gamma.
> Afraid any change like that would destroy that sky though.
>
> Fellow believer in endless scene tweaks,
> Bob
>
>

Post a reply to this message