|
|
Excellent results. I think this is a huge achievement of modelling and
texturing, expecially the petals!
The pistil did indeed break the illusion for me. I think is is just too
regular in shape, the shaft in particular. It could look that way in
reality, closeups of organic shapes reveal some amazing realities, but
this contradicts our expectation a bit too much? It is, in a way, the
combination of texture and shape. The texture I find believable, but
not with quite so geometric a shape for the shaft. I think it is the
old problem. If this were really a photo we would say, "wow that's
amazing how precise and geometric the pistil of a flower is. But
knowing it is manufactured illusion, we say instead, "hmmm, the pistil
doesn't look 'right'" My suggestion is to give it a little more taper
towards the top. The texturing and irregularity of the tubular
crossection is good. Maybe it could be pushed a little more? You need
to establish the concept of 'celluous' in the viewer's mind.
The stamens are subtle and beautiful. I think the sss is very effective.
I think the antlers carry the illusion well enough. But there is
probably room for more experimentation there.
Post a reply to this message
|
|