s.day wrote:
> "Ross" <rli### [at] everestkcnet> wrote:
> 
>>super nice. all those white pixels in the snow are distracting though.
>>hopefully a higher quality AA render will get rid of them?
> 
> 
> Yes, I think they are caused by the low roughness value and high specular
> highlighting, I may play around with the settings a bit more if higher AA
> doesn't get rid of them.
> 
> 
>>which way will the snowman be facing? i think towards the sun would be best,
>>so you don't really see much of his face (perhaps just a near side eye and a
>>long carrot for the nose?)
>>for the nearest tree, i would imagine to see snow built up around the base
>>from the direction the wind blows.
>>
> 
> 
> That's pretty much what I am planning to do with the snowman and the base of
> the tree. Thanks for the comments.
> 
> Sean
> 

I thought that was an intentional effect to make the snow sparkle.  I 
think you should keep it.

Skip

Post a reply to this message

Wow, this is incredible. A sure contender. Despite what you have said about
the radiosity, I think the settings are very good. The blotches at the base
of the snowman are really only noticable if you know what radiosity
artifacts are, and are looking for them :)

I have seen snowscapes like this where the snow has melted off of the trees
(although there is usually still some buildup/trenching around the base). I
really really like the dark trees.

Capital work. Good luck.

-Stefan

Post a reply to this message

"s.day" <s.d### [at] uelacuk> wrote:
> "Ross" <rli### [at] everestkcnet> wrote:
> > super nice. all those white pixels in the snow are distracting though.
> > hopefully a higher quality AA render will get rid of them?
>
> Yes, I think they are caused by the low roughness value and high specular
> highlighting, I may play around with the settings a bit more if higher AA
> doesn't get rid of them.

Real snow has 'em -- tiny crystals with their normals aligned just so
they reflect the sun towards the eye.  To me, yours look just fine ;)

--
jussi

Post a reply to this message

s.day wrote:
> Thought I would post my WIP for this round of IRTC. Any comments/advice are
> welcome. I know the sky is a bit fake but the topic is fire and ice so this
> is meant to represent the fire (along with the Sun). 

Was it just my newsreader (thunderbird) that hid this under a thread 
dating from May 2001? I nearly missed it which would have been a great 
shame.

Really like the snow - (and the sparkly bits in it), the trees are good 
but their bases are not as good as the rest of the scene. I didn't spot 
the glow round the sun - which shows it must have worked.

Post a reply to this message

> Was it just my newsreader (thunderbird) that hid this under a thread 
> dating from May 2001? I nearly missed it which would have been a great 
> shame.

Thunderbird has a nasty habit of doing this. (If an older thread exists 
with the same subject line, it mistakenly things they're related. It's 
even worse if the old thread is one you marked "ignore"...!) The 
original Mozilla suit had the same damn bug too. :-/

Post a reply to this message

"s.day" <s.d### [at] uelacuk> wrote:
> Thought I would post my WIP for this round of IRTC. Any comments/advice are
> welcome. I know the sky is a bit fake but the topic is fire and ice so this
> is meant to represent the fire (along with the Sun).

Damn, what do you mean "WIP"?
That snow looks just brilliant, I think it couldn't be more realistic. Good
job!

Post a reply to this message

"stm31415" <sam### [at] cscom> wrote:
> You probably are already busy fixing this, but I think the bottom of the
> nearest tree is problematic *because* the tree seems to be sitting on top
> of the snow. Snoe has (shudder) subsurface scattering, so you ought to see
> the tree through the snow a bit, darkening the area around its trunk.
>
Thanks, I have already changed this part as I thought the same. However, I
am still not totally happy with it and think the idea you have of seeing
the base of the tree through the snow a bit may help.

Thanks,

Sean

Post a reply to this message

"Smws" <smw### [at] poboxcom> wrote:

> I have seen snowscapes like this where the snow has melted off of the trees
> (although there is usually still some buildup/trenching around the base). I
> really really like the dark trees.
>
> Capital work. Good luck.
>
> -Stefan

I have done some test renders with snow on the nearest tree and am trying to
get a good balance between the amount of snow so you don't loose the dark
tree against the sun etc.. I can't decide if I prefer it with or without
snow..

Thanks for the comment.

Sean

Post a reply to this message

"jute" <nomail@nomail> wrote:
> "s.day" <s.d### [at] uelacuk> wrote:
> > "Ross" <rli### [at] everestkcnet> wrote:
> > > super nice. all those white pixels in the snow are distracting though.
> > > hopefully a higher quality AA render will get rid of them?
> >
> > Yes, I think they are caused by the low roughness value and high specular
> > highlighting, I may play around with the settings a bit more if higher AA
> > doesn't get rid of them.
>
> Real snow has 'em -- tiny crystals with their normals aligned just so
> they reflect the sun towards the eye.  To me, yours look just fine ;)
>
> --
> jussi

Thanks, that is the effect I was trying to get with the high specular values
and low roughness. I read the debate about this topic in a recent snow
picture post and liked the sparkle effect. I do not think I have achieved
it as well as that post did but may try to improve on it by either
adjusting the normal or the specular values.

Thanks for the comment.

Sean

Post a reply to this message

Skip Talbot <Ski### [at] aolcom> wrote:
> s.day wrote:
> > "Ross" <rli### [at] everestkcnet> wrote:
> >
> >>super nice. all those white pixels in the snow are distracting though.
> >>hopefully a higher quality AA render will get rid of them?
> >
> >
> > Yes, I think they are caused by the low roughness value and high specular
> > highlighting, I may play around with the settings a bit more if higher AA
> > doesn't get rid of them.
> >
> >
> >>which way will the snowman be facing? i think towards the sun would be best,
> >>so you don't really see much of his face (perhaps just a near side eye and a
> >>long carrot for the nose?)
> >>for the nearest tree, i would imagine to see snow built up around the base
> >>from the direction the wind blows.
> >>
> >
> >
> > That's pretty much what I am planning to do with the snowman and the base of
> > the tree. Thanks for the comments.
> >
> > Sean
> >
>
> I thought that was an intentional effect to make the snow sparkle.  I
> think you should keep it.
>
> Skip

Thanks Skip, it was intentional but I am not sure if it has worked as well
as I want yet (I should have really said improve not 'get rid of'), I will
try to improve it for the final image as I think they look a bit too
speckly.

Sean

Post a reply to this message