Thomas de Groot wrote:
> Apart from white, I would suggest blue.
> I think teal has already too much green in it, and like green, it
> offends the eyes somewhat, especially if you have to look at the
> image over a longer period.

Hmm. It sounds sensible, but I'm not sure... (I really like the teal.)

> Black is ok, but only for a small image
> like the one presented with one flower.
> just my 2 cts :-)

I think I agree with that. :) Though there might be someone somewhere who 
have an interior style in their house where the black set fits in perfectly. 
;)

Rune
-- 
http://runevision.com

Post a reply to this message

Rune wrote:

> Are you referring to the metal as being light metallic blue and requesting a 
> sky blue background, or are you requesting a gradient from light metallic 
> blue to sky blue? 

No gradient, was just trying to suggest some shades of "lighter" blue.

> Well anyway, here's sky blue. (I don't like it.)

I like it better than the dark blue, but you need to like it ;)

Post a reply to this message

Rune wrote:
> Okay, so I've finally gotten all the details to a level where I'm satisfied 
> with it. (You wouldn't believe how many tweaks I've made since the last 
> version I posted, that probably no one else than me even notices...) Making 
> test-prints with my printer have made me aware of issues with things than 
> don't work as well on print as on the screen, because nuances in colors and 
> luminance is lost once printed. To deal with that, contrast of certain 
> textures have been enhanced, which looks better on the screen too as a 
> bonus.
> 
> Anyway, I've splitted the image into several layers, and once the background 
> layer was separate, it suddenly got temptingly easy to play around with 
> it... In my head the background was always just white, but after having seen 
> some of the possible alternatives, I'm suddenly not sure I prefer white 
> anymore. I don't know which version I want to have printed!
> 
> What to do, what to do...
> 
> What do you think?
> 
That it, apart from aesthetics, would depend on things I don't know.
One is the printing process. If it is an inkjet like technique, the 
black is probably not good. It costs a lot of ink and the paper might 
become so soaking wet that it deforms.  OTOH black works well for book 
covers and single pictures, it really makes color stand out, much more 
than on screen. But, you are losing shadows and hence depth. My 
experiences with blueish backgrounds using professional CMYK printers 
are not good. None of my book covers that have shades of blue are any 
near the color that I specified.

The other big question is the wall you will be hanging it on. If the 
background color differs too much from the wall color, the first 
impression would be the composition of the frames and not what is in it.
That is why I think e.g. the black version won't work, in close up 
possibly, but not for your composition with 6 different frames from 5 
meters away. I assumed that you were going for a white background 
because you had a white wall. If the wall color is not white, using the 
same color as a background immediately suggests that the picture was 
designed specific for that wall. That would give the whole thing another 
level. It might also lead to more people saying 'oh, can you do 
something for me too?' If that is a good thing or not depends on how you 
plan the rest of your career.

> Teaser image is attached, the full versions can be seen here (in png format, 
> so the page is slightly heavy):
> http://runevision.com/3d/metalandflowers/
> 
> BTW, the blue, teal and green color is carefully selected. Colors with red 
> in don't work well so shades of red, yellow, and violet are out. Also, light 
> colors don't work well (except completely white), nor almost black or gray 
> ones (except completely black). I also tried some linear gradient with color 
> to white and color to black. At first it looks really sweet, but after 
> looking at it for a little white it begins to just look cheap. Compromises 
> don't work here. Just one strong color.
> 
> Rune
>

Post a reply to this message

Among other things, Rune saw fit to write:

> Anyway, I've splitted the image into several layers, and once the
> background layer was separate, it suddenly got temptingly easy to play
> around with it... In my head the background was always just white, but
> after having seen some of the possible alternatives, I'm suddenly not sure
> I prefer white anymore. I don't know which version I want to have printed!
> 
> What to do, what to do...
> 
> What do you think?

Hmm... print it in a transparent slide with no background so you can
physically change the background ;)

I'd go for white or blue. It would probably depend on the rest of your
furniture and decoration.

-- 
light_source{9+9*x,1}camera{orthographic look_at(1-y)/4angle 30location
9/4-z*4}light_source{-9*z,1}union{box{.9-z.1+x clipped_by{plane{2+y-4*x
0}}}box{z-y-.1.1+z}box{-.1.1+x}box{.1z-.1}pigment{rgb<.8.2,1>}}//Jellby

Post a reply to this message

I tried out a few more colors. I gave Christians suggested sky blue another 
chance and made a lighter less saturated blue. It looked better. Quite ok. 
Then I tried gold to see if really no colors with yellow in would work at 
all. Gold looks ok too actually. Not something I'd have on my walls myself, 
but it doesn't look wrong. Then, for some reason I tried an average of light 
blue and gold - and got a really nice color I thought first was called 
beige, but is actually called khaki (according to wikipedia). This is the 
first light color I really like as background. So now, I'm even more 
undecided... :/

Khaki is up at http://runevision.com/3d/metalandflowers/

Khaki, being light, has the advantage that it doesn't suffer from the 
problem that Andrel mentioned:

"If the background color differs too much from the wall color, the first 
impression would be the composition of the frames and not what is in it."

Khaki on a white wall differs just enough to be interesting, but not so much 
that it distracts from the motive. That said, I don't really mind that much 
if people first notice the composition of frames, since this composition is 
indeed part of the "art". So as I said, I'm still undecided...

Rune
-- 
http://runevision.com

Post a reply to this message

andrel wrote:
> Rune wrote:
>> What do you think?
>>
> That it, apart from aesthetics, would depend on things I don't know.
> One is the printing process.

I have yet to investigate the printing process for the posters for myself. I 
plan to have them made locally (by which I mean in this country), but after 
that I plan to put the designs on Zazzle. I also don't know the printing 
process on Zazzle...

> My experiences with blueish backgrounds using professional CMYK
> printers are not good. None of my book covers that have shades of
> blue are any near the color that I specified.

Worse than with private CMYK printers? Because in my own print tests all the 
background colors I've tried have matched beautifully in the first try.

> The other big question is the wall you will be hanging it on.

White walls. (Or off-white or whatever it's called that means that it's not 
completely sterile white, but it looks white none the less.)

> If the background color differs too much from the wall color, the first
> impression would be the composition of the frames and not what is in it.

Well, since this composition is part of the "art", that isn't completely 
undesired, but of course it should preferably be balanced.

> I assumed that you were going for a white background
> because you had a white wall. If the wall color is not white, using
> the same color as a background immediately suggests that the picture
> was designed specific for that wall. That would give the whole thing
> another level. It might also lead to more people saying 'oh, can you
> do something for me too?' If that is a good thing or not depends on
> how you plan the rest of your career.

White wall or not, I'm not sure I agree that the posters should preferably 
be the same color as the wall. Part of the reason to put up images on the 
wall in the first place is to break the big plain surface IMO. If they 
should deviate little, some or much from the color of the wall is a matter 
of how strong an effect is desired. I agree though, that the more difference 
there's between the wall and main poster color, the stronger and more 
contrasted the motive must be to still shine through and make impact.

Rune
-- 
http://runevision.com

Post a reply to this message

Jellby wrote:
> Among other things, Rune saw fit to write:
>> What do you think?
>
> Hmm... print it in a transparent slide with no background so you can
> physically change the background ;)

Oooh, yes! I want that...! :P

> I'd go for white or blue. It would probably depend on the rest of your
> furniture and decoration.

I was undecided between white, blue and teal, but then I made a khaki 
version and now I'm undecided between white, blue, teal and khaki... :/

Rune
-- 
http://runevision.com

Post a reply to this message

"Rune" <new### [at] runevisioncom> wrote in message 
news:46c86c63@news.povray.org...

> Khaki is up at http://runevision.com/3d/metalandflowers/

   I like all variations Rune! Very small typo noticed - "motive" should be 
'motif'.


     ~Steve~




> Rune
> -- 
> http://runevision.com
>

Post a reply to this message

I'm partial to the blue one myself, with the teal one being a close 
second.

Nicely done. :-)

Jim

Post a reply to this message

Oooh, I really like the Kahaki.  For one thing it'd work very well on my 
walls (which are a sort of forest green). :-)

Jim

Post a reply to this message