Tremulous Forum
Media => Modeling Center => Topic started by: jm82792 on December 11, 2010, 04:20:27 am
-
I elaborate far too much, I'll keep it simple.
It's a WIP that needs a lot of work, I am hoping on doing an animation(only 3 shots, a 30 second story) with it if I can get some unknowns to happen(ocean simulator for Blender will make the ocean animated and not still like this.)
yes I know, shoot me it's not Tremulous related.
I'll do some that is sometime later.
Let me know if the contrast stinks.
Blender's new color correction pipeline might be messing around,
and I apologize for the bad compression, it made it grainy, I should have done PNG.
(http://i145.photobucket.com/albums/r234/jm82792/NewRocks.jpg)
-
Great work!
1st comment!
-
I elaborate far too much, I'll keep it simple.
It's a WIP that needs a lot of work, I am hoping on doing an animation(only 3 shots, a 30 second story) with it if I can get some unknowns to happen(ocean simulator for Blender will make the ocean animated and not still like this.)
yes I know, shoot me it's not Tremulous related.
I'll do some that is sometime later.
Let me know if the contrast stinks.
Blender's new color correction pipeline might be messing around,
and I apologize for the bad compression, it made it grainy, I should have done PNG.
[image]
I see you've done some nice post-processing... I'd be interested to see what it looks like with clearer lighting, but even without it, that's some nice stuff. Don't worry about compression, it looks great anyway. But yeah, more contrast!
FIIIIRST!
(http://www.lolblog.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2008/10/facepalm.jpg)
-
It looks nice!
I am, however, unsure as to whether the lighthouse is far away, in the background, or on top of the rock in the foreground.
-
It's too dark. I'm working on another render that should bring the perspective in.
Plus some fog and other random corrections/additions as it looks way too blank right now.
I've been tangling with holding back or waiting, it's a wip so it's got work that needs to be done.
-
No clouds, no water.
The clouds I dislike(need to be more voluminous and stormy), the water looks decent but I am waiting for a Blender build that's coming soon that would make the job much easier than doing it manually.
The rain is a total pain and a question mark.
Plus finally I need to get some fog and stuff in soon,
time has been limited lately and I am getting sick of how Blender handles the darker scenes with the contrast.
(http://img716.imageshack.us/img716/7411/28419991.png)
-
Looks nice, but the rain, water and clouds gave it a lot more atmosphere.
-
Yeah it's what I'm working on.
-
Yep, i'd have to say i prefer the original.
-
View My Video (http://tinypic.com/r/28iovhd/7)
Elcheapo foam. I'll make it look a heck of a lot better but it's already (hopefully) not going to induce any vomiting.
-
better than my first model!
and everyone knows what that was, right?
-
Not really for the modeling, more so for lighting, composition and fx junk that I struggle with.
Modeling this was easy, the rocks were just some painting and a displacement map.
I miss Maya's noob stuff where you push a button and you get a perfect ocean with seafoam :)
-
I've got a more but I dunno this stood out as semi interesting development,
Basically take a physically accurate volumetric object, render it and it gets me nice beams of light that I can comp into the scene.
(http://img143.imageshack.us/img143/6148/61674455.png)
-
(http://i.imgur.com/3Q46Z.png)
When you shine a light on it you see how interesting it looks!
Nice job!
Do you just have your monitor brightness set much higher than mine?
Don't forget about all the cool stuff you can do with layers. Please see my attempt at a wet lens :) [attached].
-
How did you do the rain? Particle trails?
-
The rain droplets look good, I'm no pro so I don't know precisely what to say or criticize.
For the color it's all default, ATI catalyst is also default.
I think since Blender uses OpenEXR for compositing(and viewing) and when it's saved as PNG I get some color/gamma/etc issues. I am using Blender's Alpha correction pipeline so it should look correct but I have no idea.....
The camera artifacts are low priority since I still have a good amount of "bigger deal" postpro to do.
I plan on using a texture to displace the image in such a way to make it appear that the lens has droplet's ofwater on it. I have yet to experiment with lens MM(I am a camera moron, the perspective millimeters),
color artifacts cameras have and such.
I have ram in the mail, my 4 gigs isn't working well enough so I am upgrading to 6 gigs.
Rain was done with post pro vector blur, low quality so it looks like there are trails,
it actually duplicates and fades out the object to make it "blur".
More samples, the smoother it looks......
-
I'm no pro so I don't know precisely what to say or criticize.
Here's a trick, simply say what you think of the end result, rather than attempting to pick apart the methods used to get there.
color artifacts cameras have and such.
Absolutely, i was just thinking to myself that it wasn't the fact that i could hardly see a bloody thing in your renders that was the problem, it was the total absence of chromatic aberration...
-
He wanted criticize I have nothing to say and the informality of the forum has somewhat grown on me compared to the other science related forums(where you would get flamed if you had Tremulous's posting stigma there) I occasionally venture.
Regarding it being dark, I have no clue what's wrong.
I do recall reading an article talking about the issues I'm having and I didn't recall any method to fix it.
Utilizing OpenEXR seems to fix the issue.
http://www.openexr.com/
And when I color adjust I'll do it with OpenEXR not with a PNG, after color correction derive a PNG,.
http://www.openexr.com/about.html
-
So it wasn't intentionally lit to be dark? That is kind of odd.
-
No not at all.
It looks so dark it's a joke online for some odd reason.
Still trying to figure out how to use the color correction pipeline
The 6 gigs of ram(just installed the 2 more gigs) is swallowed up when rendering but it helps with stability.
(http://img233.imageshack.us/img233/5673/screenshotqm.png)
-
Material work.... "Thick Sea Foam and Deep Ocean Water"
Needs lots of work, dunno what's up with the dark areas but I'll fix it(I've never done node composting for materials before. I think it's the reflectivity with the black sky since it has nothing else to "see") and this is far from being finished.
Still needs finer veins of foam, ripples, and you get the idea.
It will be blended around the rock's edge and will be blended with a much lighter amount of foam for the bulk of the water that's away from the rocks.
No particles, I'd have a crapton(a million or so 16 or so face primitives) of spherical primitives that have their emission to be controlled with textures since Blender 2.56 doesn't have the feature reinstated.
Just keeping some updates coming, although they are rather crappy.
-
(http://img715.imageshack.us/img715/622/lightfogandpostproindir.png)
-
what are you doing?? Start making sexy tremulous models! You've got the talent!
-
what are you doing?? Start making sexy tremulous models! You've got the talent!
QFT
-
what are you doing?? Start making sexy tremulous models! You've got the talent!
That's hardly the same.
Nice, but the lighting seems a bit of as though it was coming from a star and not a beam of light like a lighthouse.
-
Jeez i was inspiring him....But it is really good and I know how difficult the models are to make.
-
If your output image is really that dark on your screen as well, you need to send it into gimp and adjust the brightness before posting it.
Here's a little job I did on it using a radial gradient with upped contrast and brightness.
-
Swampcell, the modeling was done 4 months ago(yes I've been chipping at this scene that long) my modeling IMHO is amateur and I'm hoping to make it up with lighting, materials, etc.
But thanks for the compliments, your the first one to specifically point that out :)
I'm not sure about trem stuff, if the devs wanted something I'd do it for them but I don't really want to blankly model stuff and hope it gets in, or get it in myself.
Anyways this scene needs a lot more work,
I've abandoned so many projects and I'm rather determined that this won't be one.
Nux that's really bright :o
I think I got the brightness under-control.
I set the gamma correction to straight instead of sky since the sky is very dark.
It helped a lot, it should look decent and not that dark right?
Or is it still way dark?
CreatureofHell,
Yes I see what you mean it looks like the glare isn't interacting with the lighthouse properly.
I'll have to eventually paint a alpha mask so that the glare goes over the lighthouse.
Or I could render everything at once, right now the glare is made using a invisible copy of the actual lighthouse,
then I derive an alpha mask from the original glare for it since the glare is scene as a cube(voxels i think) because it's volumetric.
The reason I can't seamlessly comp it in is because the Z depth (what I use to combine things based on distance from the camera) is a cube not what your(how the light effects the volumetric cube seeing.
If I render it all at once it could work but that will probably end in a computer crash.
-
Well it still seems dark to me. ??? I don't know if you need to up your monitors contrast or something.
Just in case you're seeing it the same way I am, I'll warn you that even nighttime pictures need bright spots. Firstly for realism, because the human eye adjusts to the overall luminosity of the evironment. Secondly to make it look interesting, since if your goal is to highlight fog (like in my latest example), then your bright lighthouse should be illuminating it strongly (my first example highlighted the top of the lighthouse with stronger blues to compliment the orange, and my second obviously highlighted the 'feel' of wetness.)
-
jm82792: go through these: http://www.lagom.nl/lcd-test/
I have no significant experience in rendering (just basic scenes), but is it normal to need 4+ GBs of RAM for such scene?
-
yes, rendering takes a lot of ram.
-
Well it still seems dark to me. ??? I don't know if you need to up your monitors contrast or something.
Just in case you're seeing it the same way I am, I'll warn you that even nighttime pictures need bright spots. Firstly for realism, because the human eye adjusts to the overall luminosity of the evironment. Secondly to make it look interesting, since if your goal is to highlight fog (like in my latest example), then your bright lighthouse should be illuminating it strongly (my first example highlighted the top of the lighthouse with stronger blues to compliment the orange, and my second obviously highlighted the 'feel' of wetness.)
Okay I calibrated my LCD screen and it looks dark/crappy/unintelligible like you guys are saying.
I can't see well past a foot so I'm going to get my friend to help me get it better but it's decent and I understand.
I also(I suck at color) now understand and notice what you're doing.
My recent render I posted is bleh now(from my gamma being semi fixed), and I'll work on adding more contrast then brightness to make a focal point.
Fixing color within Blender's lighting will be better than post pro,
I'll work on it and post something soon.
-
Non serious LuxRender test because the other project has temporarily burned me out.
For the lighthouse I need to do more small rocks, upgrade the water, grunge it up and such...........
Anyways it's Not my model but my materials and lighting. Took me 20 minutes to setup(I've never touched lux before),
the exporter plug-in and Blender experimental build is sorta buggy.
(http://img208.imageshack.us/img208/3813/mazdarx8scene00001.png)
Yes there are many glaring issues, render noise because it takes hours to let it go.
Material issue I dunno what to do about, and the materials need tweaks.
But whatever not going to make it pretty as it's just an acquittance test with LuxRender.
The benefit with LuxRender is it's physically correct and handles color in a much more realistic way, compared to faster biased rendering engines such as Blender internal.
-
I'm still alive............
Yeah I know there is more to do, but it's an overhaul from the former renders.
Did a day to night conversion using nodes because Blender doesn't seem to handle darkness well.
One has water(needs work I know, but it won't induce vommiting),
the other has a splash that needs work and all the rocks need work.
(http://i145.photobucket.com/albums/r234/jm82792/CG%20Stuff/Water.jpg)
(http://i145.photobucket.com/albums/r234/jm82792/CG%20Stuff/splashwip.jpg)
-
Looking very nice!
I've very roughly stuck the two together to see how it looks. :}
-
Ah thanks Nux, I've already gotten it comped but well what I had on hand is what I posted :)
I'll do more work and in a few weeks I'll post some more from this idiotic project.
-
I like what I see. Keep up the good work.
-
Thanks :)
It's been one of those head bangers that you can't let go of.
I'll keep at it....
-
That looks great! Much better than before.
-
Yeah lots of tweaking since I'm faking so much :)
-
I request a 1680x1050 lighthouse :P
-
I request a 1680x1050 lighthouse :P
1920x1080 or gtfo. No, seriously, that would make great wallpaper.
-
I'll give it out soon :)
It takes lots of tweaking as it's mostly composting but I still have more detail like models, textures, etc to add.
This rat's nest of nodes is what turns it from ugly to nice, no way I could make it decent without nodes.
(http://img268.imageshack.us/img268/5862/compositingratnest.png)
-
Okay a bit more comp work(need more splashes,grunge for lighthouse, reflections for water, etc), it seems to look great within gimp but windows image viewer makes it look so banded.
My friend pointed out it looked funky with the background rock not being big enough.
I'm learning GIMP for the lighthouse textures and maybe a hammered cement path.
I might take it to the next level and do GIMP for a layer(well in a couple months, need's more Blender side work) because the foam isn't fluffy.
(http://img862.imageshack.us/img862/6284/tga.jpg)
-
@IMG
That's pretty sweet, but a little dark maybe?
-
Who hammers cement?
-
Who hammers cement?
Waves, along with severe temperature fluctuations.
-
Looks perfect, like sci-fi xD
-
I'll have fire and brimstone rain on me if I fail some college tests.
So no updates for 2 weeks, if you don't hear of me you will know why...
I plan on a fat splash on the large background rocks, and various other things to get this stupid thing done.
-
It's too blurry, I'd like to add a ship or something, and make it a panorama.
Plus I've got to do rain, mist, and stuff.
Blender gives me aspect ratio and pixel count conundrums that I"m attempting to comprehend so I can do a panorama.
Finally the water is off, how can a large splash result from that wave?
Ah whatever more stuff to do, more bugs to fix.
(http://img195.imageshack.us/img195/7761/11328438.jpg)
-
I passed my tests and did well, so I'm alive and have 6 more credits.
I made the buoy light and buoy red,
but this older version is green.
Yes it's too distracting, there is some funny looking green above it and such.
But I'm thinking the concept of using it would be a nice idea.
(make it further away from the camera, less bright)
And yes the background splash is bleh, it's on top of the lighthouse and looks off.
Finally the actual lighthouse looks like it's a day old, I'll grunge it up.
(http://imageshack.us/m/18/9002/25014835.png)
-
I have to say, the previous picture has much better composition than this latest one.
The water looks really nice! If you can just make the water around where the wave breaks as white as the breaking wave itself it'll look more fitting. Here's an example of what I mean:
http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2009/11/14/article-1227469-0734E11D000005DC-486_634x691.jpg (http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2009/11/14/article-1227469-0734E11D000005DC-486_634x691.jpg)
-
I have to say, the previous picture has much better composition than this latest one.
The water looks really nice! If you can just make the water around where the wave breaks as white as the breaking wave itself it'll look more fitting. Here's an example of what I mean:
http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2009/11/14/article-1227469-0734E11D000005DC-486_634x691.jpg (http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2009/11/14/article-1227469-0734E11D000005DC-486_634x691.jpg)
I think I know what you mean,
it too dark and not good in that area.
I guess I got too fixed on the buoy.
I'll look into making it more white around the rocks,
it might be somewhat of an interesting thing to try.
Thanks nux for the feedback :)
-
I realized it was a single RGB curve that made it look decent to bad.
I'll update the thing in a week or two since this thing has grown into a rather convoluted monster.
-
I am sick of this project but well it's almost there, although I might need to do extensive research on linear and non linear color workflow.
It's so annoying on how touchy color stuff is.
(http://img217.imageshack.us/img217/3064/exp5.jpg)
-
Learning GIMP
(http://img838.imageshack.us/img838/2062/exp5.png)
-
windmill in sea?
-
vcxzet is right. Those lights definitely need changing.
-
Yes, the glare from the lights looks out of place and also the bouy looks rather large because there's not much perspective to contrast it with the size of the lighthouse.
The waves have never looked better! That's some mighty fine water-on-rock action right there!
My advice if you're getting sick of the project is to:
- Find a specific use for the picture if you haven't already got one (e.g. as a backdrop in a new project). You might hate it because it doesn't have a purpose yet.
- Try out new ideas on it (especially daft ones). You could be getting sick of it because you've passed the technical challenge of it that motivated you.
If you can see it through to a proper conclusion, you'll be glad you did.
-
Man...that's incredible! Nice work.
-
Yes, the glare from the lights looks out of place and also the bouy looks rather large because there's not much perspective to contrast it with the size of the lighthouse.
The waves have never looked better! That's some mighty fine water-on-rock action right there!
My advice if you're getting sick of the project is to:
- Find a specific use for the picture if you haven't already got one (e.g. as a backdrop in a new project). You might hate it because it doesn't have a purpose yet.
- Try out new ideas on it (especially daft ones). You could be getting sick of it because you've passed the technical challenge of it that motivated you.
If you can see it through to a proper conclusion, you'll be glad you did.
I've had a lot of annoyance from not knowing HOW to set perspective.
That lighthouse looks like it's tiny, any suggestions on how to set the scale better?
I'm not a photographer, I'm terrible at perspective.
I'll remove the glare, check if the bouy is proper scale(3 meters or whatever in height, maybe I just modeled it and forgot to keep scale) and add some details to set the scale.
I like the subject matter but your right Nux, the technical portion is almost gone....
Maybe some rain, more detail to the lighthouse and such.
-
That glare is as it would've been put hastily in there. Those lights from lighthouse that go in tight X shape, are eager to get proper glare.
I hope this pic helps, that, how much you should soften that glare.
(http://www.onlinestarregister.org/images/articles/light-glare.jpg)
I had a simple method of perspective sight, but I not good in explaining, and even good old Wikipedia, doesn't have the most simple way of perspective, what I learned in school. But I'll give the shot. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perspective_distortion_%28photography%29#Technical_background)
Also, I think that buoy's waves don't blend well in rest of sea.
Otherwise, this pic is totally awesome.
-
A simple and effective way of introducing perspective is to simply put an object in the extreme foreground, in all it's detailed glory; perhaps a hill or (if you can get closer to the water) another buoy. You can still have a buoy further away (in fact that helps provide the size information) but by having a close, perhaps partially obstructive object you're helping the viewer appreciate the scale of the scene.
As it stands, though the two objects are probably of different size and importance they both occupy the same status in the picture: something that's neither the focus, nor the background but instead some sort of confused middleground. Using the objects to create perspective is giving them 'roles' which they're currently lacking.
-
It might just be me, but those waves look huge in comparison to the lighthouse. I could be wrong, but usually it seems the patches of blue bordered by foam are about 1/4 that size. Other than that, and the odd lens flare, it looks great.
-K
-
I will change the camera's lens from 35 millimeters to 30, however it will be the last thing I do.
This is because it warps the image but not the splash overlays.
It is easy to do within gimp, however I do not wish to mess with 6 splashes until it'd nearly final.
It does set the scale, I changed the buoy and that also really helped.
Plus I removed the ugly glare.
I'll post something soon :)
Thanks for the valuable feedback.
-
This is what you get when you take a monkey and let him play with GIMP for 15 minutes.
(seriously I barely know how to use GIMP)
The colors, contrast and such may differ since I didn't linearized the image.
More to do, but it seems that the more stuff I use like GIMP and Blender, and not just one program things are easier to accomplish.
(http://img683.imageshack.us/img683/456/editeda.png)
-
The tiny buoy works so much better it's hard not to underemphasize just how much better that tiny buoy is.
-
Thanks Nux!
Do the splashes work on the rocks?
Or does it look like a drunken monkey overdid it?
-
I have to admit, you've gone a little mad with the splashes. It now looks like the ground is asploding or at least shaking violently. Also the bottom highlight is quite obviously showing off a repeated pattern which you should avoid making so obvious.
The crash seems a little disconnected from the waves so I would advise either trying to blend the crash with the connected (uncrashed) wave better or else don't bother and make the splash larger so that it appears to come from a wave off-screen. If you could make the water local to the splash whiter in a seamless way, that would also help put the crash in context.
Funnily enough, as I'm writing this the tv in the other room is talking about crashing waves. :)
-
Alright I'll do that in the future, this test finished. :)
Time for more work.
-
Man I can't wait to make more blender stuff this year, I have been missing out on every opportinity for blender since 2009-2010 (the time I kept being inactive due to my family using too much bandwidth) :/
-
I have had some issues rendering my scene with the water repeating, even with exponentially decreasing poly-count of the water the further it goes.
6 gigs of ram with a Q9400 only takes you so far I guess.
I am going to render the thing in a few passes and combine them.
Also I am considering using a different render to see if all the colour bleed, caustics and physically correct light awesomeness is worth it.
-
Eventually I'll finish it.
(http://img708.imageshack.us/img708/9984/unledtga.png)
-
Looks quite realistic now. Nice work. :D
Seems like you've also learned quite a bit too. Success!
-
Thanks nux :)
-
Lookin good! The lower contrast between the foam and the water makes it look much less out of place.
-K
-
(http://img10.imageshack.us/img10/1905/workingwith.png)
I'm done with this project.
Too complex usage of nodes(you can only make a rat's nest work for so long), it was originally a test when I undertook this project 11 months ago.
-
An impressive final comp. I think your work has paid off, eh?
-
Yeah it did ;D
Now the question is what to do now.
-
Now the question is what to do now.
Release different resolution wallpapers?
Oh, and yes, great job! The final product looks very good.
-
That would be a pain to do :(
I'd have to rerender it, I barely got it to render it last time.
I might be slightly temped to render a really wide render, maybe if I'm in some sort of nutty state.
Anyways, feel free to use the render for everything but commercial use.
-
Anyways, feel free to use the render for everything but non commercial use.
I'm going to guess you meant "everything but commercial use" rather than, you know, the opposite.
-
Anyways, feel free to use the render for everything but non commercial use.
I'm going to guess you meant "everything but commercial use" rather than, you know, the opposite.
so you mean i have to pull my new webstore featuring prints and coffee mugs and such?
-
Anyways, feel free to use the render, as long as it's non commercial use.
Yeah that was a typo.