USS Drake Shot

Thomas P · April 1st, 2004, 07:59 PM

Well... this is done but I still have no eye for composition. Was working on planet textures using layered procedural textures which boost rendering times on my poor little computer! Though a 'finished' pic I know you all will add your valued input.

http://3d.concept40.com/temps/drakeplanet01.jpg

skyhawk223 · April 2nd, 2004, 05:42 AM

I really like the scene, especially the blueness of the planet. Very small nits are that the planet is missing a sense of depth. I assume it's a gas giant of some sort? The edge of the plant seems too sharp. Can it be softened a bit? Not sure about how you feel about atmospheres, but a very small one might help here, especially if it is a gas giant.
I love the background starfield. Very subtle.

Thomas P · April 2nd, 2004, 06:09 AM

Yeah, a sense of depth is the problem I see with this too but have struggled trying to fix it. The planet is a big ball of gases that constantly boils and that is the texture effect I went for. I had tried to soften the edge but decided against it - heh!

Thomas P · April 2nd, 2004, 10:47 AM

I really don't want this to become a WIP topic so here is a revised version of picture. This one I'm happy with so it's done and will go onto my site later today.

http://3d.concept40.com/images_gal/drake_040204.jpg

I think I addressed the depth issue and tweaked the planets. I added back the atmospheric haze the original picture had.

skyhawk223 · April 2nd, 2004, 11:59 AM

Wow, case closed, huh?
Boy, you are sneaky. Didn't think we'd notice that second ship in there, did you...
The moon looked fine without an atmosphere.
Varying the depth of the blue might give more overall depth. Brighter lights and darker darks might do the trick.

On an unrelated note, do you save all of your MAX scene setups?

Thomas P · April 2nd, 2004, 02:07 PM

Yes - well most of 'em.

April 7th, 2004, 05:04 PM

Hey, I didn't notice this thread.
I think the composition is a bit off, as you mentioned. Everything is stacked up in the very center of the frame. I suspect you did that because putting the ship on the blue planet would've made it disappear. I don't know if that second ship addresses the depth issue since it clearly is just a few hundred meters astern of first ship. It might actually compound the stacking problem, too.

I also suck at composition!

Thomas P · April 7th, 2004, 06:04 PM

Space is too big - stuff looks out of scale. Real space pics are always close up images and so there is nothing to compare with.

April 7th, 2004, 06:15 PM

Well, I don't really think depth was much of a problem. I didn't think "That's no moon!"

skyhawk223 · April 8th, 2004, 05:31 AM

Thomas-if it were up to you, how big would space be?

Thomas P · April 8th, 2004, 04:29 PM

Depends on how many people I'd let share it!

April 9th, 2004, 01:45 PM

I think one of the problems is the small moon looks like a big rock. Like the stone ball chasing Indiana Jones. I think one thing that bothers me is the moon don't pick up the very bright light being given off by the blue thing. Also you may want to play with the objects seperately. Even though the front ship may render like that, you may want to render it seperately and push the perspective lens effect on it more. you know how perspective makes the nacelles want to touch in the back.

blurring the background may help... but I would add the blue into the shadows (add a tiny bit of blue to the ambient lighting) And add a blue light hitting the ship and moon from the gas giant.

i think that would help.

Thomas P · April 9th, 2004, 02:03 PM

I did use the camera perspective trick and it fixed it some, I could try even more. The original was made from 4 layers and then composited - seems I'll have to work on my technique more.

April 11th, 2004, 01:08 PM

its a hard thing to do.

And I tend to be too critical of art. So don't mind me.