I agree with that the image doesn't look quite there - IF you are after a
realistic image. The image as it exists is already effective.

This area must have been logged for all of the trees to be of such similar
age and type. The image reminds me of a large tree plantation in the state
of South Carolina in America. I toured it a few years ago. The terrain
there was of course flat.

If this assumption about this land being farmed for trees is correct, the
trees trunks are not straight enough. Trees farmed for logs are planted and
thinned as they grow. They have very straight trunks. I am not talking
about the camera distortion, which I like, but rather the wiggle in the
tree trunks. Lower branches are also often trimmed. The thinned trees are
used for pulp wood to make paper while the best and straightest trees are
allow to mature for lumber. The fallen trees would only be there as whole
trees if this were an older growth natural forrest. A natural forrest will
have
trees of many ages, sizes and many more dead and rotting trees both on the
ground and standing.

Perhaps add dead branches below the tree tops. The lower branches in any
forrest die off as the tree reaches upward for the sunlight.

I think too the trees are just a bit too thin for ferns to flourish as they
flourish in this image. Ferns thrive in shade - at least the varieties I
know.

Even on logged land with cultivated trees there are usually "weed" trees of
other varieties coming up here and there.

Perhaps the rock on the left front and tree in front should have less
moss/lichen cover given the sparseness of the trees.

I guess what doesn't look natural to me is simply that the environment
overhead would not naturally support the ground cover we see. A much older,
dense and mixed forrest perhaps would support the damp and lush ground
cover we see and the fallen trees.

Image brightness and contrast look OK to me here.
Bill P.

"Norbert Kern" <nor### [at] t-onlinede> wrote:
> I want to finish this WIP, but how?
> Starting from an atmosphere test (thanks to Abe for the starting point), the
> scene quickly developed to an half-finished state.
> Recently Gilles Tran motivated me to start working on it again after showing
> an earlier version to him along the way.
> The rock and the dead mossy tree are still likely to be changed.
>
> Two questions:
> - The image seems to lack something - but what? I already added and deleted
> several animals, they didn't seem to fit.
> - Is the picture bright enough? I have three different LCD monitors, all
> with different Gamma. I want to collect other opinions.
>
> Eventually the final picture will be rendered in 3000+ pixels and will take
> at least six weeks on two computers.
>
>
> Norbert Kern

Post a reply to this message