 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
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
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Ah! I didn't know this. Thanks.
Ive wrote:
> 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
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
The meadow close-by looks very realistic. But I have some slight problem
with the fog, not sure what exactly. Would a ground fog be better..?
But definitively you need to add crusty details to the stems of the trees,
they look way too smooth! And the horizon needs distant, small trees, as
well. Or something.
What about the one or another mushroom on the meadow?
Have some climbing plants grow on a part of the ruin, maybe.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Ive, can you send me the source code for the grass and maybe, too, for the
leafs in the grass? And for the trees? Wow, that would be nice!
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Jim Charter <jrc### [at] msncom> wrote:
> Thematically I feel like the thought is there, the elements are orbiting
> around but haven't come together quite yet. 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?
> The strange coincedence of events around the cross with raven, for
> instance, leaving the tree behind seem to float.
I agree with Jim that this is a great start, but having the ruins dead-center
and flanked by the dead trees is a bit too symetrically boring. Moving the
camera (and therefore the ruins) off to one side would help the composition
greatly and would remove the unfortunate tangent of headstone->raven->dead
tree. Leading the eye compositionally is something that can really make or
break a piece.
Also, as others mentioned, more roughness to the dead tree and I'd like to see
some stone or brick work peering through the "stucco."
-Rob
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
