 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Well, I don't know if I like the docks. I guess they're gonna need a
lot more detail 'for I'm happy.
The ever-annoying "grey line" is gone. Lots of little modifications
too.
Comments?
H.E. Day
<><
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'adventure001.jpg' (52 KB)
Preview of image 'adventure001.jpg'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
H.E. Day <The### [at] heday freeserverscom> wrote:
> [-- text/plain, encoding 7bit, 10 lines --]
> Well, I don't know if I like the docks. I guess they're gonna need a
> lot more detail 'for I'm happy.
> The ever-annoying "grey line" is gone. Lots of little modifications
> too.
> Comments?
I see you put back the clouds as well, or at least fiddled with them. They
look a little strange on the left, very solid fading to pale. Interesting
effect, but I'm not sure it works for me.
One thing that definitely doesn't work is the dock. It's too massive and
too solid. It also throws off the balance in the picture, although it does
help to scale the station. Were you planning some kind of city scape on it?
That might help, but not much. It seems to me that if they can build a dock
right on the top of the falls, why go to the trouble of building a floating
station, one that if ever those jets fail is going to be a rather expensive
blunder. If the flying station is all there is, then there's an arguement
that mobility was important. Possibly a small dock, or several small
structures that link on to the main structure in some way, with mooring
lines to hold the station in place, but can themselves be moved when the
station needs to relocate?
Btw, don't think I mentioned it, but I really like the layer of algae on the
bottom of the station. Definitely adds realism.
Geoff
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
I liked the concept of a free-floating city/station/whatever better. The
ambiguity of its purpose (power station?, expensive hotel?, exploration of a
new planet?, ...) added intrigue and interest to the picture. The fact that
it was the only man-made object in the scene with no outside attachments was
a good thing.
Besides, it seems to have lots of "docks" near the middle of the structure.
Perhaps you could have a small supply ship or shuttle coming to visit,
taking off, or just sitting around. It could hover on a tether near the
widest point of the station if you didn't actually want it to sit on the
structure.
As always its fun to see what you can do (wish I knew how you do it :-)
"Geoff Wedig" <wed### [at] darwinepbicwruedu> wrote in message
news:3ab24269@news.povray.org...
> H.E. Day <The### [at] hedayfreeserverscom> wrote:
>
> > [-- text/plain, encoding 7bit, 10 lines --]
>
> > Well, I don't know if I like the docks. I guess they're gonna need a
> > lot more detail 'for I'm happy.
> > The ever-annoying "grey line" is gone. Lots of little modifications
> > too.
> > Comments?
>
> I see you put back the clouds as well, or at least fiddled with them.
They
> look a little strange on the left, very solid fading to pale. Interesting
> effect, but I'm not sure it works for me.
>
> One thing that definitely doesn't work is the dock. It's too massive and
> too solid. It also throws off the balance in the picture, although it
does
> help to scale the station. Were you planning some kind of city scape on
it?
> That might help, but not much. It seems to me that if they can build a
dock
> right on the top of the falls, why go to the trouble of building a
floating
> station, one that if ever those jets fail is going to be a rather
expensive
> blunder. If the flying station is all there is, then there's an arguement
> that mobility was important. Possibly a small dock, or several small
> structures that link on to the main structure in some way, with mooring
> lines to hold the station in place, but can themselves be moved when the
> station needs to relocate?
>
> Btw, don't think I mentioned it, but I really like the layer of algae on
the
> bottom of the station. Definitely adds realism.
>
> Geoff
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"H.E. Day" wrote:
>
> Comments?
Ah! Looking at this one I finally recognized the waterfall that everyone was
talking about :P
Before I just couldn't figure it out for some reason, although looking back now
I can clearly see it in the previous versions too. Weird.
--
Margus Ramst
Personal e-mail: mar### [at] peakeduee
TAG (Team Assistance Group) e-mail: mar### [at] tagpovrayorg
Home page http://www.hot.ee/margusrt
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>
I agree that what looks like a harbor seems out of place so close to a
waterfall. In reality I know of just such a place. There is a lock so that
boats can get up and down the falls. At this real life place though they have a
floating barrier, and lots of warning buoys to keep people safely away from the
falls.
--
Dan Johnson
http://www.geocities.com/zapob
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
I agree with the others that the dock is far too massive, and I did like the
idea of the free floating structure. And I still think the flow lines aren't
great. Never mess with a good thing! ;)
--
David Fontaine <dav### [at] faricynet> ICQ 55354965
My raytracing gallery: http://davidf.faricy.net/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"H.E. Day" wrote:
> Comments?
You put the old sky back - great. The grey line is gone - good. And as
Geoff said, the green bottom makes more depth.
But, as others said, the dock is not a good thing. I'd get rid of it and
try to make the waterfall somehow clearer. And maybe move the station a
bit to make it fit to the golden section... have you tried taking it
closer a bit, so that it fills the bottom right of the picture? It does
not have to be completely visible, in fact it could make an interesting
effect if it were not. Would leave something to the imagination.
--
Jari
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> But, as others said, the dock is not a good thing. I'd get rid of it and
> try to make the waterfall somehow clearer. And maybe move the station a
> bit to make it fit to the golden section... have you tried taking it
> closer a bit, so that it fills the bottom right of the picture? It does
> not have to be completely visible, in fact it could make an interesting
> effect if it were not. Would leave something to the imagination.
Hmm. Good idea. I'll experiment tonight.
H.E. Day
<><
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
The dock is history. :) So are the extension thingies. I'll post more
tomorrow. Hopefully.... :)
Ewioh Yad
<><
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
And if you make the waterfall more transparent, maybe put in some lit cavern
behind the water, halfway down into the hole.. something akin to a scene
from The Guns of Navarone. Not so much the guns, but the feel of a hole cut
into the wall of a sheer cliff face behind the water.
David
> > But, as others said, the dock is not a good thing. I'd get rid of it and
> > try to make the waterfall somehow clearer. And maybe move the station a
> > bit to make it fit to the golden section... have you tried taking it
> > closer a bit, so that it fills the bottom right of the picture? It does
> > not have to be completely visible, in fact it could make an interesting
> > effect if it were not. Would leave something to the imagination.
>
> Hmm. Good idea. I'll experiment tonight.
>
> H.E. Day
> <><
>
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
You're awesome, man.
Setep
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"H.E. Day" wrote:
> Comments?
Only that I'm in awe of what people with more imagination and patience can do.
--
Anton Sherwood -- br0### [at] p0b0xcom -- http://ogre.nu/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Excuse me Mr. Yad...but I believe you are making a mistake. Perhaps I'm the
only one, but I feel the docks have promise. They not only give a sense of
scale but they add an element of intrigue and contrast to the station...
With a solitary "ground" reference I notice and appreciate more the fact
that the station is floating. Sure, they're incomplete...but I dare imagine
what you could do with them between now and the competition deadline...
I think you're on to something...don't throw it away...
-Chris-
H.E. Day <The### [at] hedayfreeserverscom> wrote in message
news:3AB2C65E.F844CB35@heday.freeservers.com...
> The dock is history. :) So are the extension thingies. I'll post more
> tomorrow. Hopefully.... :)
>
> Ewioh Yad
> <><
>
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
In article <3AB23EAE.60C476FB@heday.freeservers.com>, "H.E. Day"
<The### [at] hedayfreeserverscom> wrote:
> Well, I don't know if I like the docks. I guess they're gonna need a
> lot more detail 'for I'm happy.
> The ever-annoying "grey line" is gone. Lots of little modifications
> too.
> Comments?
Wow.
Wow.
Um, wow.
I think the waterfall looks pretty good, like a huge, shallow lake
emptying into...something. Maybe it empties into a deep channel leading
to the ocean...I like the way you leave it for the viewer to figure out
where the water is going. Perhaps some land in the distance would work...
I think the dock is a good idea, but the glow beneath the "floats" needs
work...maybe if it was more of a tube shape instead of a cylinder or the
shape it is now. The sharp points at the sides just look wrong somehow.
The sky looks good. Not realistic, but very good...I wouldn't change
them.
Maybe put those cables at the bottom on some kind of arm that connects
to the fortress...like it's replenishing it's power and taking on
supplies for another patrol. Maybe a second fortress hovering in the
distance, floating off to take the place of the one being resupplied.
Something under that big slab to the left would look nice...a well
defended supply station.
--
Christopher James Huff
Personal: chr### [at] maccom, http://homepage.mac.com/chrishuff/
TAG: chr### [at] tagpovrayorg, http://tag.povray.org/
<><
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 2001-03-16 18:02, Margus Ramst <mar### [at] peakeduee> wrote:
>"H.E. Day" wrote:
>>
>> Comments?
>
>Ah! Looking at this one I finally recognized the waterfall that
>everyone was talking about :P
>Before I just couldn't figure it out for some reason, although looking
>back now I can clearly see it in the previous versions too. Weird.
I had the same problem at first, especially in the first version: I
thought that the "ocean" was land and that the "waterfall" was the sea
with a rather weird wave pattern on it. But then it suddenly clicked
into place and I could view it both ways.
This version is much clearer. The "dock" really helps to see the water
as water. Unlike most of the others I like it and I also like the
bridges.
I would put something on the dock to show that it is in use -
warehouses, vehicles, etc.
hp
--
_ | Peter J. Holzer | All Linux applications run on Solaris,
|_|_) | Sysadmin WSR | which is our implementation of Linux.
| | | hjp### [at] wsracat |
__/ | http://www.hjp.at/ | -- Scott McNealy, Dec. 2000
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
