On Fri, 28 Mar 2003 11:45:23 -0500, "Slashdolt"
<jer### [at] questsoftwarecom> said:


>I can't explain it, but somehow this image almost has a feeling of being an
>old photograph, that was perhaps even colorized.  Not that you really
>colorized anything, it just somehow conveys that feeling to me, like I'd
>expect to see it hanging on a gas-station wall.  Maybe it's all the bright
>reds with the rest of the colors being relatively dull.  I really like that.

I got that feeling, too.  This image reminds me of some lithograph
prints my Dad had on the wall in the garage when I was a kid.  I like
the look, it's part of the reason why this pic was my favorite of the
round.

---
Jet Jaguar
I have a spam blocking address.  Replying to me is like pulling teeth.
Visit my crappy home page at http://home.att.net/~chmilnir/
MSTie #54297

Post a reply to this message

Great idea for the discussion.  I'm still kind of a newbie, so I probably
can't too much to the discussion, though I'm learning alot from it.  I
loved the image - has sort of a sad nostalgic feel to it. It sort of
reminds me of an album cover, now if I can just remember which album.

Post a reply to this message

thank you - I'm glad that there's some mood in the picture. Because of all
the light in this pic. I tell you where it's from. I thought I could
imitate an photography with a small blend and long lightning. (like maybe
15 sec. So I had to light up the scene. For shure normally there just 3
lights in that scene plus moonlight. But it wasn't enough and the pic was
too dark, so I used some lights around the gas-station. I didn't use any
lights for that fellow in the car, so that's maybe the reason for why he's
looking more 2D than 3D. And the fact that there's glas before him makes
him more 2D than 3D. So you might be right.
For me, lightning is always the hardest part of a scene, but the good thing
about all that 3D is that you can put lights whereever you want them. Drop
Shadows or not or create highlights.
The Sharpen Filter was also a hard decision, cause I read that there's no
postprocessing allowed. But it also said in extern graphic software like
PS. So I just looked for some old pics in older competiotions which used
render post processes. In my eyes that's ok, because it's part of the
rendering, only if I would use some Filters which need more time to process
that wouldn't be too good. But it has to come straight of of the renderer,
not loosing any more seconds for post processing pics.
But that's the tool I'm working with. For example it doesn't have any grain
or noise filters, which in some cases wouldn't be bad - you have to do that
with lightning which costs time.
Of course the sharpen filter isn't too good for the anti-aliasing, so just
don't use it too much, cause AA makes the render time higher.

Thanks Stefan

Post a reply to this message

lexx wrote:
> 
> thank you - I'm glad that there's some mood in the picture. Because of all
> the light in this pic. I tell you where it's from. I thought I could
> imitate an photography with a small blend and long lightning. (like maybe
> 15 sec. So I had to light up the scene. For shure normally there just 3
> lights in that scene plus moonlight. But it wasn't enough and the pic was
> too dark, so I used some lights around the gas-station.

I did not say the image is too bright, it's just the majority of the light
technically seems to come from the light bulbs at the ceiling.  But those
themselves would have to be much brighter in that case.  Just imagine
taking a photo of such a scenery at night - the light bulbs would have to
be strongly overexposed if you don't want the rest to be completely black.

Christoph

-- 
POV-Ray tutorials, include files, Sim-POV,
HCR-Edit and more: http://www.tu-bs.de/~y0013390/
Last updated 28 Feb. 2003 _____./\/^>_*_<^\/\.______

Post a reply to this message

>I did not say the image is too bright, it's just the majority of the light
>technically seems to come from the light bulbs at the ceiling.  But those
>themselves would have to be much brighter in that case.  Just imagine
>taking a photo of such a scenery at night - the light bulbs would have to
>be strongly overexposed if you don't want the rest to be completely black.

now I know what you mean. I guess in that case you're right.

Post a reply to this message

lexx wrote:
>I also had a version on which you see the street at the horizont with
>mountains and trees, but to finish this pic at the deadline I decided to
>put a wall to block the view, cause a lot details wouldn't be there. But
>this gas station will be part of my village which I will create some day ;)
>but right now the environment contains only trees.

Looking forward to seeing more, though it'll lead to urban
sprall...hopefully you'll keep the trees :-). Since it's set in 1929 your
village will be more sparse than our crowded modern times. When I look at
old photos and movies I'm always struck by how much empty space there was;
I'm even old enough to start saying things like "I remember when this was
just a cotton field..."

If you have a decent alternative version, consider posting it to the
binaries group. I think seeing what the artist chose *not* to do would be
really valuable.

>I called it Lexxaco, cause my pseudo name is Lexx. So I created the texxaco
>Logo using my name on it.

Ah, very nice idea, and your painted textures are wonderful. So the village
will be Lexxington or Lexxberg? I'm afraid I have a bit of a negative
connotation for Lex, as in Lex Luthor from Superman, but I can tell you're
not an evil supervillain.

>As I said I put the antialiasing on best, and the sharpening tool works like
>a Sharpen-Filter, which brings a better look to the pic, but kills a bit of
>the anti-aliasing. You're right the resolution could have been a bit
>higher, but otherwise more details must have been on this pic, cause
>there's still some work to do. But for now it's finished.
>It was a hard decision to put that scene at night and you're right, there
>must be a gradient at the sky . let me say, I just forgot it.

I don't think there has to be a gradient, and the sky color you chose is
very nice. I hate to admit it, but I didn't notice the constellations. I
used to put recognizable constellations in some of my sims to see if anyone
would notice.

>It's always good to hear critics by people who know 3D, cause after a while
>working on the pic I sometimes don't know what to change. It's such a hard
>but fun hobby.
>I will post a better resolution image on my homepage, and post the link
>here.

I also have trouble "seeing" an image after working on it a while. Even
though we have tremendous tools, the subtle touches can make or break an
image. I'm especially interested in Christoph's comments and advice about
lighting. Lighting in CGI is both simple and complex at the same time,
making it difficult to perfect.

To me your image recalls the nostalgic feeling of an old calendar image, one
I might have seen hanging in a Texaco station while I was young (the 60's).

Post a reply to this message

Yes, a great image. I too wish it were larger and I look forward to seeing the
rest of Lexxville! 

A few things I noticed and thought as I looked at the image. I wondered why
there were no power lines on the top set of braces on the poles? I think there
are usually two high voltage lines up top. The base of the fire hydrant was too
clean - unless the pavement was just laid down. The other texturing, which is
great, leads me to think the pavement has been there for some years. Just a
little dirt around the base of the hydrant would have helped I think.  

I like the dominant red color very much. It feels very appropriate for the
period. 

Did you think about adding a small security light inside the gas station?
Certainly not necessary, but it might have brought out more of the inside
detail. 

How did you come to use Cinema 4D as your tool of choice for rendering? Have you
tried other tools?      
Regards, Bill P.

Post a reply to this message

hi good idea with the security light. I'll think of it. but except the
shelves there's nothing inside the gas station :) Don't model what you
don't see.
No I haven't tried other tools yet for rendering.
Very funny Renderdog, when you said I remeber when this was all corn fields
:)

Post a reply to this message

web.3e83fe29ce400dddcd8c2c4b0@news.povray.org...
> A great entry, this image shows a lot of hard work. I wish the image was
> larger to show more of the details and hand painted textures.

I agree with that. Sure we could have seen more details (an this image is
full of beutiful details) if the image was larger. That was something that
ranked down this image, I believe.

> The car is excellent, well modelled and textured. The hydrant and pumps
look
> a little like plastic, but that might be the look of paint in low light.
> The lighting is excellent; even the lightbulbs have detail in them, but
> they probably should glow more? A lot of nice touches on the ground.

The modelling is impressive. Not only in the car but in everything.
I cannot find anything wrong. Also with textures.
Talking about the light, as Christopher said those lightblubs are too dim
and
could no illuminate the scene, though you can see their effect clearly.
They should be brighter.

> I looked for a gradient in the sky, but maybe those are overused. I also
> would have liked to see the road and powerlines go to the horizon, instead
> of blocked by a wall.

Well, I think the sky is right, and the wall it's perhaps too uniform, but
fits
OK in the image. Also, IMO, it would have supposed a lot of extra work
to do a different background, cause it would have needed to be as detailed
as the rest of the image to fit.

> Cinema 4D has a lot of great anti-aliasing and sharpening tools; a lot of
> Cinema 4D images have this crisp, sharp look. I don't think POV-Ray would
> have done as well on the powerlines; but maybe the credit should go to the
> artist and not the tool!

Don't know if the use of those C4D tools have been a good idea (I haven't
seen the image without the use of those tools). What I mean is that they
give
the image a 2D look. A more 3D look would have been better (IMO)

> The guy behind the wheel is a bit comical, with his bright eyes and big
> smile. Very well done.

The guy behind the wheel is great (he's modelled and textured by the Lexx,
and shows he's a very good 3D artist).
A great image.
Bye

Txemi Jendrix
http://www.txemijendrix.com

Post a reply to this message

"Renderdog" <slo### [at] hiwaaynet> wrote in message
news:web.3e83fe29ce400dddcd8c2c4b0@news.povray.org...
| A great entry, this image shows a lot of hard work. I wish the image
was
| larger to show more of the details and hand painted textures.
|

This is a wonderful picture not only because of the level of detail, but
because you have shared not only the physical appearance of your
imaginary station, but also your feelings about it. What is more
noteworthy to me is that you have done so without resorting to brute
force. There is no corny love scene nor grandfather / grandson sharing
moment to trigger a viewer gag reflex, yet your affection for the period
is still communicated.

 -Shay

Post a reply to this message