 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Stephen wrote:
>> Thanks for the praise, continuous refinement over the last week, I'm not
>> a born modeller. ;-)
>
> No one is but the more you practice the better you get, and in reply to your
> reply to Sean. I think a lot of the attraction of the snakes is the way they
> are posed together.
Thanks. I'm not sure if this is the final posing, I like the heads, but
their bodies are shifting the image's balance to the right, so I'm
thinking about either having the lower snake curve its body more to the
left to counterbalance, or changing their pose altogether... We'll see
what works best.
Regards,
Tim
--
aka "Tim Nikias"
Homepage: <http://www.nolights.de>
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> This last week, I've been trying to model a morilia viridis: a python.
I looked at the image first and said, hmmm, looks like a python and then
read your post! =D
I have a corn snake (rendered by god!) and when I saw your 3d python it
made me think of it, it's a snow white corn (like albinos, but it's
missing more than just one pigmentation, so it's like white and offwhite
some places).
Good job!
Simon
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> I looked at the image first and said, hmmm, looks like a python and then
> read your post! =D
Oh, forgot to ask, for your final image, do you expect to give POV-rats
to it too? hehe
But I'm just wondering can it be animated (ie articulated)? I've been
thinking on doing a snake movement algo in C/C++ and OpenGL (to just
quickly see the movement) the result could then be exported to a povray
anim... unfortunately, I don't have time for any of these things anymore...
Keep up the good work!
Simon
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"St." <dot### [at] dot com> wrote:
> You may want to UV map the head or the body so as to be able to
> distinguish between them in your final image - the heads of snakes tend to
> have larger scaly patterns above the eyes and down to the nostrils.
Hmm, scratch that. According to this image,
http://www.reptilis.org/morelie%20v/imageZoom.htm, my above statement isn't
true of 'all' snakes. Can't say I've ever noticed the scales on a python's
head before though...
So, you could still UV map your model and just scale down (bump_map wise),
the part between the eyes to the nostrils. Sorted m8.
~Steve~
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Grrr! http://www.reptilis.org/morelie%20viridis/image10.htm
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Fri, 02 Feb 2007 18:47:32 +0100, Tim Nikias
<JUS### [at] gmxnetWARE> wrote:
>
>Thanks. I'm not sure if this is the final posing, I like the heads, but
>their bodies are shifting the image's balance to the right, so I'm
>thinking about either having the lower snake curve its body more to the
>left to counterbalance, or changing their pose altogether... We'll see
>what works best.
I hope you post further versions. And there is nothing wrong (IMO) with an
asymmetrical picture. I like the composition as it is.
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Tim Cook wrote:
> It's snakes! On a plane!
>
That came also to my mind when I saw the topic.
...and I haven't even seen the movie!
--
Eero "Aero" Ahonen
http://www.zbxt.net
aer### [at] removethiszbxtnetinvalid
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Just a quick update before I switch the computer off. Added a tongue and
refined the pose to something much better IMHO. Also tweaked the spine a
little. I'm thinking about letting the slightly darker snake also have
it's tail move from right to left as another layer behind their current
positions, but I've got to test that. To me, it feels like there's too
little of the snake on top, but just about the right amount for the one
underneath.
Oh, and I'll get to the replies to all your posts later.
Regards,
Tim
--
aka "Tim Nikias"
Homepage: <http://www.nolights.de>
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'snakes_wip2.jpg' (65 KB)
Preview of image 'snakes_wip2.jpg'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Tim Nikias wrote:
> Just a quick update before I switch the computer off. Added a tongue
> and refined the pose to something much better IMHO.
It's just my opinion of course, but I have to say that I liked the previous
pose much better. The snakes followed each other more closely, making it
look like they belong together and moved in unison, though still
independently. I also don't think there were too much focus to the right -
the image was well balanced in its asymmetrical way.
In the new pose, the snakes look much more separated, like they casually
happened to move over each other by chance, but without there being any
meaning or purpose behind. While the old pose looks like the result of the
two snakes moving forward together while twisting around each other, the new
one looks more like they moved randomly around completely independent of
each other and happened to end up that way. That may be what you're aiming
at, but knowing your previous images, I would guess not. Take my words with
a grain of salt though - it's just the way I perceive the images right now.
Rune
--
http://runevision.com
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Rune wrote:
> Tim Nikias wrote:
>> Just a quick update before I switch the computer off. Added a tongue
>> and refined the pose to something much better IMHO.
>
> It's just my opinion of course, but I have to say that I liked the previous
> pose much better. The snakes followed each other more closely, making it
> look like they belong together and moved in unison, though still
> independently. I also don't think there were too much focus to the right -
> the image was well balanced in its asymmetrical way.
I've got the older version saved as well, of course, so I'll look where
I end up.
> In the new pose, the snakes look much more separated, like they casually
> happened to move over each other by chance, but without there being any
> meaning or purpose behind. While the old pose looks like the result of the
> two snakes moving forward together while twisting around each other, the new
> one looks more like they moved randomly around completely independent of
> each other and happened to end up that way. That may be what you're aiming
> at, but knowing your previous images, I would guess not. Take my words with
> a grain of salt though - it's just the way I perceive the images right now.
Sure, a grain of salt is the way I take just about all comments and
suggestions, no worries. :-) But you're right, that's why I was thinking
about adding another part of the on-top snake to follow the front part
of the below-snake. I'm also thinking about an attempt to just keep the
heads, but have the on-top snake curve along the current below-snake
pose... I wasn't too satisfied with the first pose, like I said, I felt
it too much of an asymmetry, the new one lacks a little of the closeness
you mention. But it's a WIP, so things will/may/should still change. :-D
Regards,
Tim
--
aka "Tim Nikias"
Homepage: <http://www.nolights.de>
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
