 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Jim Charter wrote:
> Techically stunning, especially the lush grass matted with debris, the
> accuracy of the tree species, even the sky.
> Thematically I feel like the thought is there, the elements are orbiting
> around but haven't come together quite yet.
Well put, thats exactly how I feel about it too.
> Compositionally, the
> symmetry, with the ruin right in the center, perhaps calls for something
> more pared down and stark, or else the lushness wants for less symmetry?
Yes, I'm aware of that and I think my idea by using a more 'Classical'
(meant as opposed to 'Romantic') layout was to add an ironic touch
already to the composition. But I'm definitely not so sure anymore where
and how far this ironic distance should go.
> The ruin, feels not quite right, something so destroyed, yet still
> maintaining crucial details of wrought iron and archway.
> That it is not overgrown in such a lush setting, and the flanking dead
> trees are the tipoff to what you are aiming to say off course, but I
> just don't quite feel that it has jelled into a total statement.
In fact the 'design' of the ruin is stolen from Caspar David Friedrich
who used the building within several paintings - and by sometimes
'putting' the ruin in total different environments. Thats quite usual
for artists (not only painters) of the Romanticism as they where not
interested Realism but in an idealized picture of nature and the middle
ages.
> The strange coincedence of events around the cross with raven, for
> instance, leaving the tree behind seem to float.
Yes, the raven. Edgar Allen Poe - as I do read him - meant his well
known novels and poems quite ironic or even as a parody to the 'German
Gothic Art' that was quite en vogue during the 19th century in America.
Poe's other writings, letters and art criticism do make it quite clear
that he was in fact a child of the 'Age of Enlightenment'.
Thanks a lot for your input Jim, it forced me to actually think again
about my own intentions because I got quite sidetracked by purely
technical aspects.
-Ive
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Mr. Art wrote:
> Just a question: Why is it called "The Blue Flower"? Is there some
> reference that I am missing?
There is no blue flower in the picture but there is a reminiscence to
the "Blue Flower" seen as a symbolic reference to Romanticism -
including lyric, music and painting.
Novalis, a German 18th century writer, used the "Blaue Blume" as
metaphor for search for the unreachable, desire and unfulfilled love.
-Ive
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Thomas de Groot wrote:
> For a first try, this is really excellent. The grass in particular is one
> of the best I have seen.
>
Thank you, Thomas.
> Personally, I find the tree trunks too smooth and would like to see a bit of
> rough bark. Also, the two dead trees, on both sides of the ruin, are a bit
> overdone, imo. Only one dead tree should be much more natural looking in
> this context. I would choose the right one, and replace the left one by a
> major bush.
>
> Like Jaime, I would like to see some stone structure in the wall.
>
Will work on those.
> The raven on the cross is very appropriate, although maybe a bit of a
>
some more thought as I'm still not so sure about the direction to go...
...see my reply to Jim for more.
-Ive
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Stephen wrote:
> Is the title "The Blue Flower" a symbolic reference to romanticism? If so it
> fits.
> Quoth the raven, "Nevermore".
Yes, and thank you Stephen, I was already thinking that nobody
recognizes it - and would have made the title quite senseless.
-Ive
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Jaime Vives Piqueres wrote:
> good, but the ruins seems too uniform, as missing some hint at the
> building stones/bricks. The only other thing that pops out clearly as CG is
> the trunk textures of the trees next to the ruins. But overall, this is
> very promising!
>
Thank you Jaime, you are absolutely right and I will see what I can do
about the bark and the stones.
-Ive
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Bill Pragnell wrote:
> That grass is beautiful, really believable. I've never seen such good clumpy cg
> grass before. I look forward to further instalments...
>
Thank you Bill, and I look forward too 'cause I have currently no idea
about the direction it will go... ;)
-Ive
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Alain wrote:
>
> Let see... An old forest should have dead branches, and some boulders
> and smaller rocks. Some more bushes and undergrowth would also seem
> appropriate.
> The two bare trees don't need to be dead trees, just trees that loose
> ther leaves faster. But they look to symetrical to the ruin. just
> displacing one a bit should do the job.
> I'd also slightly reorient the camera somewhat to the left.
> As ther is a ruin, there shold also be some broken stone blocks, and
> some almost intact but partialy buried.
> Tree bark tend to get rougher near the base of the tree, but some trees
> tend to keep some smoothness for a very long time. Maples and oaks tend
> to have very rough bark, with vertical grooves that can get to be an
> inch deep and sometimes more.
>
Thank you Allen for all the useful suggestions, I'll keep them in mind.
> Where is the blue flower?
;) ...see my replies to Stephen, Jim and 'Mr Art'.
-Ive
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Reactor wrote:
> It looks really good!
Thank you.
> Others have already mentioned the stonework not having
> individual pieces, but I do have one other nitpick. Without really knowing
> anything concrete about the size and type of building, it still seems odd that
> the hills and trees are so close in front of or behind the remaining wall.
You might be right, but in fact I'm not so much interested in 'Realism'
(and I do not mean photo-realistic rendering here) but more in
'Romanticism'. You may want to read my reply to Jim for more about that.
> I also think the fog should probably be scattering media, because it seems to
> have a hazy sort of glow in the shadowed areas.
>
Yes. For a final render I will definitely use scattering media and also
radiosity (currently there is just a fill light at the camera position
to fake some ambient light). Some test renderings have already shown
that this will look really good - but also will be incredible slow.
So before actually using media and radiosity I want to make sure that
everything else is 'right'.
-Ive
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Sat, 25 Apr 2009 11:11:15 +0200, Ive <"ive### [at] lilysoft org"> wrote:
>
>Yes, I'm aware of that and I think my idea by using a more 'Classical'
>(meant as opposed to 'Romantic') layout was to add an ironic touch
>already to the composition. But I'm definitely not so sure anymore where
>and how far this ironic distance should go.
>
>
I'll expect to see a few Greco-Roman gods and Heroes in the foreground, then.
Not to mention chubby nudes :)
>
>> The strange coincedence of events around the cross with raven, for
>> instance, leaving the tree behind seem to float.
>
>Yes, the raven. Edgar Allen Poe - as I do read him - meant his well
>known novels and poems quite ironic or even as a parody to the 'German
>Gothic Art' that was quite en vogue during the 19th century in America.
>Poe's other writings, letters and art criticism do make it quite clear
>that he was in fact a child of the 'Age of Enlightenment'.
>
This would make a good backdrop only it is too good :)
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Really great!!!
But anybody who don't know your references will ask: "Where is the blue
flower?"
Xavier
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
