|
|
Begin the Attack...
About Truespace Archives
These pages are a copy of the official truespace forums prior to their removal somewhere around 2011.
They are retained here for archive purposes only.
Begin the Attack... // Image Gallery
Post by Magnatude // Feb 2, 2006, 5:51pm
|
Magnatude
Total Posts: 12
|
Support your local TS6.6 artists....
This took me some time to model (the Space Station) I went overload with the polycount.
I did this with 2 renders, one with all the models, and another with just the foreground ships. 3 lights were used (one local in the bay, one IBL and one local light outside to the far left.
I put in lots of windows guys, I think I've made up for my lack of windows on my spaceships with this one. lol
Edited for smaller pic below... |
Post by Johny // Feb 2, 2006, 6:09pm
|
Johny
Total Posts: 672
|
Magnatude, I can not see your image properly. :(
Your image is bigger than my monitor :(
Can you post it again in 800x600pixel format ? |
Post by Magnatude // Feb 2, 2006, 6:28pm
|
Magnatude
Total Posts: 12
|
Ok, here ya go...
http://www.scirpg.com/xtetra/StationXExtreme800600.jpg |
Post by mrbones // Feb 3, 2006, 11:14pm
|
mrbones
Total Posts: 1280
|
This looks great, maybee composite a couple of lazer beams in there or something. Other wise, very dramatic and moving, it leads your eyes right to the landing decks, maybee some characters down there to give it more a sense of scale.;) Might give a better idea of the window sizes too. just a thought and suggestion, cheers |
Post by W!ZARD // Feb 3, 2006, 11:29pm
|
W!ZARD
Total Posts: 2603
|
Ah - so much easier to see what's going on in the smaller image - what it looses in detail is more than made up for by the drama of the whole picture. You are going from strength to strength with your space art Richard - well done! This is great (and really does work so much better when it can be seen all in one go - smaller is often better):D |
Post by Johny // Feb 3, 2006, 11:30pm
|
Johny
Total Posts: 672
|
Now look better ;) |
Post by Alien // Feb 4, 2006, 1:38am
|
Alien
Total Posts: 1231
|
Magnatude: Thanks for posting a smaller pic, but do you think you could edit your 1st post so that it shows the same [smaller] pic, please? as it causes those of us using a lower screen res to have to keep scrolling from side to side to read text in posts. |
Post by KeithC // Feb 4, 2006, 4:38am
|
KeithC
Total Posts: 467
|
Looks good, you should submit this to CG Talk when you're done.
-Keith |
Post by Magnatude // Feb 4, 2006, 7:42am
|
Magnatude
Total Posts: 12
|
Thanks...
I feel this is one is a leap in my 3D art, a milestone.
I dunno if this is good enough for CG talk, I chat with Leigh Van der Byl quite a bit, but I dont think she has seen this one yet. (I take her opinions with some professional weight)... but its sitting there so she can lay the smack-down, lol.
I'm working on a series of renders that will continue this story, and yes, there will be some "lasers" in a battle scene.
I'm experimenting with the particle generators again and seeing what makes the best effect. |
Post by KeithC // Feb 4, 2006, 8:28am
|
KeithC
Total Posts: 467
|
The window (I'm assuming) in the top command center, on the battleship to the left could be lit up. That would help break things up a bit. Perhaps a light or two on a few of the wing tips, etc. would work as well.
-Keith |
Post by Magnatude // Feb 4, 2006, 2:16pm
|
Magnatude
Total Posts: 12
|
Actually no windows on the ships are pointing toward the camera (they are forward facing and lit up as a dark green) My ship designs deliberately have *few* windows. The ships are manned by rather small crews (most of everything is automated and many of the ships are unmanned drones)
Crews on these ships range from 10 to 20 personel.
I thought my overabundance of windows on the spaceport would make up for my previous ship designs.
I do put lots of windows on my liners and merchant vessels.
I would put light on my cruisers if they were not approaching for a surprise attack.
(Just pointing out the madness behind my methods):D |
Post by KeithC // Feb 4, 2006, 6:14pm
|
KeithC
Total Posts: 467
|
Those are good points. Any chance of posting some full shots of the ships?
-Keith |
Post by Magnatude // Feb 4, 2006, 6:53pm
|
Magnatude
Total Posts: 12
|
Heres the Battlecruiser:
http://www.gamezoid.com/images/17784_189420.jpg
and there are several variants of this one too...
http://members.shaw.ca/magnatude/images/SBC-testrender.jpg
Including skirting... I have some "pirate" versions too that I'm working on.
The Destroyers..
Image removed by administrator. Max size for images in forum is 800x600. Please do not link to images larger than 800x600 to avoid having them removed.
Thanks.
Norm |
Post by Vizu // Feb 5, 2006, 1:49am
|
Vizu
Total Posts: 628
|
Yeah you post in in CGTALK.
For my taste a bit to dark and flat but okay, is youre style. |
Post by Magnatude // Feb 5, 2006, 7:26am
|
Magnatude
Total Posts: 12
|
Viz, I nearly pooped myself when they actually accepted it in CGTalk.:eek:
CGTalk Thread (http://forums.cgsociety.org/showthread.php?t=315889) |
Post by spacekdet // Feb 5, 2006, 2:21pm
|
spacekdet
Total Posts: 1360
|
I have to agree with Vizu on this one: flat and dark.
Sit back a few feet from your screen with the pic loaded up and squint- what do you see?
It could really use some contrast and more dramatic/ brighter lighting.
It's brown on brown on brown- not much depth or drama with your current lighting scheme.
Just my lowly opinion. |
Post by W!ZARD // Feb 6, 2006, 1:46am
|
W!ZARD
Total Posts: 2603
|
I've looked at this image several times now - I still like, I agree that it's a new milestone for you and I like the soft lighting.... except that it appears to be spaceships in space and you don't get soft lighting in space - there is no atmosphere to soften the light.
Just a thought but you might try rerendering with a 'harder' light set up. Or not. It's great as it is! |
Post by Vizu // Feb 6, 2006, 3:32am
|
Vizu
Total Posts: 628
|
W!ZARD ! i respect youre comment that you like it how it is.
You have do a good job with it and don´t be terrible about my or someone else meaning ;) is a think of taste and everyone have a other taste ! Good so.
Hold it up
@FrankLad ! Wehahaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa
sorry for this :) |
Post by Magnatude // Feb 6, 2006, 6:28am
|
Magnatude
Total Posts: 12
|
yep I totally understand...
The region of space is akin to the nebula seen through the hubble (gaseous columns/pillars) in many cases holding breathable regions of gas. Yes, it's in the "out-there" realm of fantastic, but its an anime Scifi-fantasy.
I've been pounded by Sci-realists which dislike my spaceship designs because if the turret placements create a vunerable area on the Stern...(however see Captain Harlok/Starblazers/Yamoto/Galaxy Express 999 anime) :D
I've had to tone down my spaceships because of the poly-count in my scenes... it gets really hard to manipulate things in a scene (I'm using an Athlon 64 3200+ with 1gig PC 3200 Ram ATIX700pro PCI-E
In this scene it was very choppy when all layers were displayed it was nearly unmanagable.
Stephen:
I dont know if doing this in a hard light would make it look "nicer" wouldnt the nebula/cloud create a soft light? I'm just going off the hubble pic: "Gas Pillars in M16 - Eagle Nebula" |
Post by W!ZARD // Feb 7, 2006, 9:00pm
|
W!ZARD
Total Posts: 2603
|
yep I totally understand...
Stephen:
I dont know if doing this in a hard light would make it look "nicer" wouldnt the nebula/cloud create a soft light? I'm just going off the hubble pic: "Gas Pillars in M16 - Eagle Nebula"
Well now there's a very good question Richard! Bearing in mind that I'm usually a bit fussy about the lighting in space art (I've been into astronomy since I was a kid) and also considering that I've not spent much time inside gaseous nebulae I'd have to say I don't know. The thing with space is that it's so damn big!
It's my understanding that interstellar gas clouds are actually quite thin. Those hubble pics are undeniably beatiful but they are NOT representative of what one would see with the naked eye. Not only are they time exposures they are also usually artificially coloured by the use of filters to expose the delicate cloud forms.
I know that atmosphereic fog certainly difuses and colours the light (by absorbing some parts of the spectrum but atmospheric fog is really dense with billions of particles per square meter but stellar gas is much much thinner. I'm guessing that a typical stellar gas cloud would be maybe a dozen particles per square meter and would have little if any effect over short distances such as indicated in your picture.
I'm guessing again but I imagine that from the inside of Orions nebula all you would see with the unaided eye would be a faint suggestion of haze around the nearby stars. Remember those apparent dense gas clouds in the Hubble pictures are seriously HUGE. Those gaseous columns and pillars are lightyears long!
At the end of the day though we don't really have a clue whats going on with our own planet (global warming anyone?) let alone deep space. Your image is is science fiction so if you want to postulate space as having foggy bits why not? It's no more or less silly than air intakes on a spaceship and ships with artificial gravity pointlessly allowing the crew to stand at right angles to the line of thrust as we see in Star Wars and Star Trek ships. (Why do they do that anyway?)
Scientific purism apart you picture was good enough to be featured in this weeks 3dcommune newsletter (congrats!). More importantly it tells a story, asks a question and features interesting composition and lighting features - it also shows a unique vision and style that is 100% yours and is something you should be proud of - and hey, it works for me:)
I'm just looking forward to the next one!
HTH
Stephen |
Post by ProfessorKhaos // Feb 8, 2006, 6:37am
|
ProfessorKhaos
Total Posts: 622
|
Just remember... "in space no one can hear you scream" unless of course it's Captain Kirk stranded inside a dead moon in Star Trek II: The Wrath of Kahn.
Another source of soft lighting might be in low orbit around a planet. The planet could be large enough to be better than a point source of light and could give you possibilities for variation in colors (land vs ocean vs cloud cover). In practice this is secondary to the primary light source (sun) though and could bring out details normally buried in pure black shadows.
Would be interesting to see this effect modelled using GI with a very dim image map :) Wonder what that'd look like. Maybe augmented with an infinite light to bring back some crispness to strong shadows. |
Post by ProfessorKhaos // Feb 8, 2006, 8:36am
|
ProfessorKhaos
Total Posts: 622
|
Space-Tut (forgive me I had no starship) :)
1 infinite light set deliberately very bright (intensity 4)
GI used to provide ambient illumination by planet below... note the detail still visible in the shadows. Planet image used for GI included
<EDIT> Forgive me. Guess I should realize you were using TS6.6. This image is with Vray. You should be able to achieve similar effects with the FastGI shader I would think. |
Post by ProfessorKhaos // Feb 8, 2006, 8:52am
|
ProfessorKhaos
Total Posts: 622
|
Shadow detail more obvious in this example at a slight sacrifice to infinite light's shadow. GI rendering plus same GI image mapped on sphere with normals flipped. Had I used a higher resolution for the planet map, this could show a more traditional "everything in focus" space image. |
Post by Magnatude // Feb 8, 2006, 10:21am
|
Magnatude
Total Posts: 12
|
Space-Tut (forgive me I had no starship) :)
<EDIT> Forgive me. Guess I should realize you were using TS6.6. This image is with Vray. You should be able to achieve similar effects with the FastGI shader I would think.
Sure sure... rub salt in me and Wizards' wounds, lol.
This render made me realize I might have to go to version 7 due to high poly counts. I'd like to see my ships actually look lumpy/bumpy from my bumpmapping... not just pretend to be.
Come-on Shephen... lets work really hard on winning an upgrade! |
Post by Alien // Feb 8, 2006, 1:18pm
|
Alien
Total Posts: 1231
|
This render made me realize I might have to go to version 7 due to high poly counts. I'd like to see my ships actually look lumpy/bumpy from my bumpmapping... not just pretend to be.
When you say "high", how many faces are we talking about here? |
Post by Magnatude // Feb 8, 2006, 7:46pm
|
Magnatude
Total Posts: 12
|
The ships are between 10000 to 40000 faces each and the Station is 70000. |
Post by W!ZARD // Feb 9, 2006, 7:37pm
|
W!ZARD
Total Posts: 2603
|
Sure sure... rub salt in me and Wizards' wounds, lol.
This render made me realize I might have to go to version 7 due to high poly counts. I'd like to see my ships actually look lumpy/bumpy from my bumpmapping... not just pretend to be.
Come-on Stephen... lets work really hard on winning an upgrade!
Sorry it's taken me a while to get back to you Richard - I've been following your suggestion and working hard on a ship of my own but not a spaceship. I'll post some results soon....
Prof. Khaos, thanks for some interesting suggestions - when I saw the words 'Space-tut' I was expecting a Tut-orial - thanks for a good LOL. Your suggestions about space lighting are good and easy enough to adapt even with such archaic technology as tS 6.6 ;) . I can't help thinking that in many space scenarios the contrast is way higher between brightside and not so bright side. Are there any experienced astronauts on these forums??
At least with space art one usually doesn't have to worry about realistic caustics.
Finally, is "global" illumination a valid term in space - shouldn'y it be Extra-global illumination? Just a thought... |
Post by rj0 // Feb 9, 2006, 7:47pm
|
rj0
Total Posts: 167
|
Perhaps extra-terrestrial illumination -).
rj |
Post by Magnatude // Feb 9, 2006, 9:41pm
|
Magnatude
Total Posts: 12
|
I recall watching that movie on people thinking that the moon landing was fake...one question arose about the moon photos and why you could see things in the shadows... apparently there is quite a bit of reflected light and radiosity going on up there. |
Post by ProfessorKhaos // Feb 10, 2006, 4:44am
|
ProfessorKhaos
Total Posts: 622
|
The ambient light from the earth is actually greater than the ambient light from the moon, which some can read books by. The earth's clouds and surface is actually significantly more reflective than the moon's surface so you could imagine how bright a source of light that could be, especially in low orbit.
That being said, the unfiltered sun is extremely bright, and as such most cameras can't capture the dynamic range appropriately, thus making the shade appear much darker.
I used to work in the space business many years ago in California. The reflected light from the earth can actually warm surfaces of a satellite because of it's brightness. |
|
