"Jim Charter" <jrc### [at] msncom> schreef in bericht
news:43e3a137$1@news.povray.org...
> >
> Yes, I think you are taking it in the right direction.  I think adding
> more elements improves this picture.  Moving the balloon closer adds a
> lot.  Allows us to mentally "enter" the scene.  The waterfall is a great
> element but needs work yet I feel.  I question its placement.  Too close
> to the center of the composition and it cuts the cliff edge right next
> to where the moon cuts the cliff edge.  And I question its realness.  It
> really needs to suggest falling water in order to emphasize the sense of
> height of the cliff. I think there needs to be a sense of the water
> breaking up and vapourizing as it falls.  Where ever you put it, it is
> going to be an attention getting element in the scene and as such will
> need to be spot on.  I think the hazy clouds might be too much.  Maybe
> make them more of a hint?

Right on the spot, Jim!
I have not been too happy with the waterfall's location. I mainly did choose
it because it was a lower part of the cliff. However, it does not work well
with the moon here. And, indeed, it is too centrally placed. More work
needed here.
The clouds: I put them in to judge their effect. Still not what I would
like, though.

Thomas

Post a reply to this message

"Orchid XP v2" <voi### [at] devnull> schreef in bericht
news:43e3b2fb$1@news.povray.org...
> > This time, a larger version. Slow rendering (about 36 hours in total)
> > especially for the lower half of the image.
>
> Eeeps! o__O
>
> I'd offer you render power... but it's kind of impractical. Soz. :-/
>
Thanks! Don't worry, I'll manage :-)

>
> I think the mist is maybe a little OTT.
>
Depends on the intention. I probably shall experiment a little bit more with
that.

> Perhaps make it more patchy, or make it hug the surface more closely or
> something... I'm not sure. You'd have to play with it...
>
> I really do like those plants though.

Yep! The red ones have already been changed again though.

Thomas

Post a reply to this message

"Stefan Viljoen polard.com>" <spamnot@<removethis> schreef in bericht
news:43e39e9f@news.povray.org...
>
> Excellent! Looks like some painting by Jon Lomberg from the book Cosmos by
> Carl Sagan... very conceivably an alien landscape.
>
Thanks Stefan! Yes, the impression is of a painting, and I don't want to
destroy that, although I shall work a little bit more on it. It reminds me
somehow of the backgrounds of some (Italian) Renaissance paintings.
something you see through a window, behind the main subject of the painting.

Thomas

Post a reply to this message

"stm31415" <sam### [at] cscom> schreef in bericht
news:web.43e3eb0b220a2816b3eb90420@news.povray.org...
>
> Very pretty.
>
> My main problem with the waterfall is not hte way it looks (though it
would
> be nicer if you worked on that) but is it's geological effect on the
> surroundings. It seems to have had no effect whatsoever on the cliff.
> Either put a dent in the cliff (hard?) or move and scale the waterfall so
> as to place it in an extant dent.
>
Well, it *is* in a lower part of the cliff, but I agree that it looks
somewhat artificial there. Oh well, there is still a lot to do on it!

Thomas

Post a reply to this message

"Stefan Viljoen polard.com>" <spamnot@<removethis> schreef in bericht
news:43e4552f@news.povray.org...
> Orchid XP v2 spake:
> >
> > How on earth do you "tweak" an image that takes 36 *hours* to render?
o__O
> >
> > Sheesh... you have way more patients than me!
> >
> > (Not, of course, that I consider this a BAD thing... You seem to have
> > produced a pretty cool image as a result.)
>
> Hey! I've got a trace of something I didn't design (I just modified it)
> which has been running about 600+ hours so far...
>

I would like to "tweak" it to a more rapid render indeed!!! You have to find
a balance: less objects and faster render but less interesting image, or
more objects and slower render but more interesting image.

I am not sure about this, but I assume that it is the calculation of the
lightfall and shadows of the object elements that takes all the time?

Thomas

Post a reply to this message

"s.day" <s.d### [at] uelacuk> schreef in bericht
news:web.43e3eb6f220a28162a868be00@news.povray.org...
>
> This is looking really good and is better than the earlier post, I like
the
> balloon it helps to give scale to the rest of the image, also I agree with
> the many comments about the bottom of the waterfall. At first I wasn't so
> keen on the colours but the more I look at it the more I like the 'washed
> out' look, it makes it look less rendered and more like a
painting/drawing.
>
> At 36 hours I wouldn't fancy turning on radiosity..
>
> Great work.
>

Thanks Sean! Still some work to do (of course!). I like the painting-like
look too!

Thomas

Post a reply to this message

Thomas de Groot wrote:
> A new version of the Alien Cliff.
> Added have been: cloud, waterfall, "birds".
> This time, a larger version. Slow rendering (about 36 hours in total)
> especially for the lower half of the image.
> 
> I am curious about any comments of course!
> 
> Thomas
> 
> 
> 

very impressive,

I like the overall look of this image, especially the colors ....
The waterfall fits quite good as eye-candy in the background. The dropplets 
should be getting smaller in the lower part. Also a misty cloud at the bottom 
would help to imply the enormous height of the fall.

As you have a small lake in the forground you could also add a shallow river 
coming from the fall to feed this lake. Could bring some reflective highlights 
to midplane of the image.

... dave

Post a reply to this message

"David El Tom" <dav### [at] t-onlinede> schreef in bericht
news:43e46932$1@news.povray.org...
>
> very impressive,
>
Really? ;-) Thanks!

> I like the overall look of this image, especially the colors ....
> The waterfall fits quite good as eye-candy in the background. The
dropplets
> should be getting smaller in the lower part. Also a misty cloud at the
bottom
> would help to imply the enormous height of the fall.
>
The waterfall still needs work. I have a media ready to make the mist at the
base. However, I know that that is going to increase my render time, so I
have postponed that till now.

> As you have a small lake in the forground you could also add a shallow
river
> coming from the fall to feed this lake. Could bring some reflective
highlights
> to midplane of the image.
>
I shall have to think about this. It depends on what I am going to do with
the isosurface...

Thomas

Post a reply to this message

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Thomas de Groot wrote:
> "stm31415" <sam### [at] cscom> schreef in bericht
>>My main problem with the waterfall is not hte way it looks (though it
> would
> 
>>be nicer if you worked on that) but is it's geological effect on the
>>surroundings. It seems to have had no effect whatsoever on the cliff.
>>Either put a dent in the cliff (hard?) or move and scale the waterfall so
>>as to place it in an extant dent.
>>
> Well, it *is* in a lower part of the cliff, but I agree that it looks
> somewhat artificial there. Oh well, there is still a lot to do on it!
> 

	As a reference for a similar waterfall, you might find these
interesting:
http://www.henrik-ks.dk/photoshtml/BrecheDeRoland/06_23TinaAndHenrikInfronfOfTheGavarnieLaGrandeCascade.JPG
http://www.stmarys-sfc.ac.uk/lourdes2004/On%20the%20way%20to%20the%20glacier%20at%20Gavarnie.JPG
http://www.balades-pyrenees.com/gavarnie_gravure.htm

		Jerome

- --
******************************
*      Jerome M. Berger      *
*  mailto:jeb### [at] freefr   *
*  http://jeberger.free.fr/  *
******************************
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFD5HIod0kWM4JG3k8RAjoFAKCaK4TCurp50IO7lgrcDRyuOI0MqQCeLHuz
6Q9BWPaf7HHGUCMoIGWjI8Y=
=ZGmC
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Post a reply to this message

Most awesome. Whatever changes you make as the image develops, I trust your
judgment. :O)

Post a reply to this message