>>Is that how they manage it then? My disregarding the laws of physics?
>>Strange - I would have expected that to look wrong...
> 
> It depends on how you do it. Also, I would guess that the Composite Artist
> has a hand in tweaking the colors for saturation.

OK. Cos, one of the major problems I constantly have with POV-Ray is the 
image is too dark, or it's too light, or it looks washed out, or part of 
it is too bright but the rest is too dark, or......

>>>Final Fantasy Skies: Ever heard of matte paintings?
>>
>>No.
> 
> 
> Matte Paintings are hand-drawn (either real or digital) paintings which you
> place behind the filmed objects, often used via digital compositing and
> green/blue-screen these days. They can be animated or even have parallax
> effects, depending on the technique used, but it's basically a painting
> instead of real geometry.

Right. So, background paintings, basically?

Let's see if Google can do this... ah, yes. Here we go...

http://www.lionking.org/~lynxcat/nimh/brisnico.jpg

How's *that* for a background? Of course, it doesn't move. Only the 
characters in front of it move. (Which are drawn in much lower detail.) 
There are scenes in the films where they have several layers of 
background which move in relation to each other which can create a 
parallex impression...

So basically what you're saying is the sky is wonderfully saturated 
because it was painted by a human being rather than computed by a 
hellish volumetric sampling algorithm? (Man, wouldn't it be cool to be 
able to paint like that?!!)

Post a reply to this message