"stm31415" <sam### [at] cscom> wrote in message 
news:web.42946dc47a1a6d40efd7d28f0@news.povray.org...
>I like it, but I would hesitate to call it final. If you like it the way it
> is, then ignore me, but here are soem things I noticed:
>
> Compositionally, it is weak. There is no line, no arrangement of objects 
> or
> colors that leads the eye through the scene. A great example is Gilles
> Trans' The Wet Bird --  The skyline leades you down past the wet birt and
> plops your eye smack on the ghostly figure. All the focal points of the
> image, with somethign to lead you through them. Less obvious is
> http://www.irtc.org/ftp/pub/stills/2002-08-31/golonls2.jpg , which has 
> many
> lines, but if you look for the strongest, longest diagonoal (bottom left
> corner) it points straight to the lit window. Had the lit window been
> somewhere else, the eye would not have found it so easily. I am not saying
> all this is neccessarily conscious in the artist's mind. Many times it
> comes out as trial and error with a final 'Ah! That's better!' But it 
> helps
> to know that it is there.
>

hmmmm .... well yeah i still like but the feedback is good also.

>
> If you are going to put textures so close to the camera (namely, the 
> stand)
> THe need to have a little more interest. Add a normal, or just a tiny
> variation in color. *Everything* has some texture, right? OTOH, you can
> spend a lifetime tweaking textures for one image ;)

yep .... i'm beginng to wonder if focal blur washed that out (so to speak)

the stand has .... normal {agate 0.1 scale 0.025}
the flasks have ... normal {granite 0.001 scale 0.01}
>
>
> Finally, lighting. It is good. It lights the room, it gives interesting
> glimpses through the flasks, but... I know you don't want to make 
> radiosity
> take too long, but if you can get the corners of the room a little darker,
> to contrast with the walls, I think the scene will really pop. [I think, 
> in
> order to acheive this, lower the error_bound, and increase the count to
> compensate, but I've never been excellent with radiosity tweaking.]

thanks ... besides the light from outside there is what I call a camlight x 
and z are same as the camera and y is translated up sightly .... it has 
0.025 fade distance and is shadowless
>
>
> All that said, I really like it. It has the potential to be a really
> interesting, moody piece, with just a little tweaking, a little
> rearranging. As it is, if feels jumbled- even if it was a photo, I'd be
> unsure of why you took it. The modelling is excellent. The textures and
> lighting are good, but can be tweaked. The major problem is the
> arrangement, which, if it does anything, leads your eye into the empty
> corner.

good feedback .... cheers

>
> -s
> 5TF!
>
>
>
>

Post a reply to this message