Advanced search
Registered users
Username:

Password:

Log me on automatically next visit?

» Forgot password
» Registration
Random image

Chameleon
Chameleon
Comments: 10
richter

19.11.2018, 06:54








Google ads below

      

    


Gold of sunset
Gold of sunset

            

Gold of sunset
Description: Bryce 7.1 Pro.

Render Normal AA, map HDRI, volumetric clouds, render time 40 hours.
The frame is made and rendered in Bryce.
Added by: slepalex
Keywords:  
Date: 12.16.2011 21:44
Hits: 1533
Downloads: 42
Rating: 5.00 (3 Vote(s))
File size: 410.9 KB
Previous image: High Water



Author: Comment:
rashadcarter1
Admin

Join Date: 06.04.2006
Comments: 2622
-

This looks amazing. Looks almost more like Vue than Bryce. I think you might have afforded a slightly greater haze but otherwise, perfect render.

40 hours seems tad long, but such is the price for volumetric clouds. if you used soft shadows as well, it would explain the long render time.
12.16.2011 23:31 Offline rashadcarter1 rashadcarter1 at aol.com
davidbrinnen
Admin

Join Date: 01.03.2004
Comments: 2227
-

Beautifully balanced piece, the gradient of colours seen the sky is very good. My only criticism is the large area's of blackness or almost blackness on the left. While I normally like such contrast, they are a little "heavy" for a "light" piece like this. Again, though this is not really a technical criticism, more an artistic one, and in that case, the desires of the artist are more important than that of the observer.
12.17.2011 09:39 Offline davidbrinnen mail at davidbrinnen.co.uk http://www.davidbrinnen.com
slepalex
Member

Join Date: 10.15.2010
Comments: 831
-

Rashad, except volume clouds here there is a coastal foam (2D Face) with material Blend Transparency and the cloned tree xFrog with the same material of foliage. HDR map is external that too increases render time.

David, really, the left part too dark. But such big contrast turns out at shooting by the usual camera against light. Here only the sun and HDR map. I didn't want to apply additional light sources.

Thanks for comments.
12.17.2011 20:22 Offline slepalex slepalex at yandex.ru
davidbrinnen
Admin

Join Date: 01.03.2004
Comments: 2227
-

That is true, true of photographs, however I would suggest we do not have to be bound by the same rules. It, as I said, the choice of the artist, if you want such contrast then it is yours to have.
12.17.2011 22:14 Offline davidbrinnen mail at davidbrinnen.co.uk http://www.davidbrinnen.com
slepalex
Member

Join Date: 10.15.2010
Comments: 831
-

I agree with you 100 %, David, concerning rules. And in this picture so it has turned out. And I decided, so be it. :))
12.17.2011 23:00 Offline slepalex slepalex at yandex.ru
Horo
Admin

Join Date: 05.26.2004
Comments: 4464
-

Another outstanding render of yours. Nothing important for me to add. The black on the left - it does look photorealistic but not human perception realistic because we can adapt to bright and dark parts, a film or sensor cannot. However, an artificially made picture expresses what the artist had in mind and discussion about realism are vain. If the very dark parts were made a bit brighter, tghis would also make the sun appear less bright. I like your choices. Full marks.
12.18.2011 19:16 Offline Horo h.-r.h.wernli at bluewin.ch https://www.horo.ch/
STKydd
Member

Join Date: 03.01.2011
Comments: 238
-

Really great render, i don't think i can add anything else that has not been said.
12.19.2011 15:29 Offline STKydd dragonsbain at yahoo.com
Facebook Comments


Previous image:
High Water  
 Next image:
Just some hole in the ground.

 

 
[Discord Server]  |   [Vote for The Best Artist]

Powered by 4images 1.8   Copyright © 2015 4homepages.de

Template © 2002 www.vierstra.com