The modeling, etc., is unquestionably fantastic … but the images do actually have a serious exposure-problem. You have areas on the front of the camera which appear to go to “opaque darkness.” There is “no detail in the shadow.”
For a real-world photographer, the moon is a harsh mistress: the negative is tossed off the photo editor’s light table and lands in the Bucket Of Death. But in the case of a render, I’ve found that there’s something that you can do. I render images purposely with a slightly “bland” look, then re-shape the tonal ranges “in post” with curves.
(In film terms … I make sure that the necessary detail exists on the negative, because if it doesn’t, it really is a piece of scrap plastic. If the necessary image data is there, then, through burning-and-dodging or other darkroom tricks, I “in post” produce the final presentation that I want.)
This is amazing! I wish I could do work at this level! XD one question! How did u do the wire renders? I read somewhere that it wasn’t so easy to do a wireframe in cycles?
Waw, that’s quite a lot of positive reviews. Thank you every ones. I’ll try to answer your questions. @sundialsvc4: oh yes, i see what you mean: My monitor is nicely calibrated, and it was already quite dark when i made it. Now that i visualize the picture on another machine (i am away from home for a while), it is seriously dark ! It is something i have to work on, for sure. @Waterworm: haha, they are getting a bit old aren’t they ? But i still like it a lot. @Tungerz: thanks a lot ! @Mobyfreerunner: Hi, thanks. For the wire renders: it is a bit tricky in fact. What i did is a copy of the file, then i jointed all the meshes into one. Then i applied one material that uses UV unwrap. It is a setting i found in the great Cycles thread in here somewhere. I can’t recall the name of the guy that invented the way to do that… I believe you’ll find it by searching for “cycles wireframe material” or so in this forum. There is a human bust shown as example… I can’t search it for you know, as i use a painfully slow connection right now… maybe next week ! @danilius: thanks ! Nothing fancy for the material: it’s only a glossy shader. I spent much time tweaking the glossyness amount, that’s all ! @jafem: Thank you. Topology is not an area where i am particularly good. In fact i struggled a lot ! I believe there are numerous flaws in there ! @Kelly Bellis : Thanks a lot ! @MarcoG_Ita : Maybe if i have them on another server and add links it would work better ? @koolstrings: The closeUp ? It was quite quick in fact. It seems to be everyone’s favourite, but it ws just a small render, halfway through the modeling process: the front of the camera wasn’t even modelled at that stage. I use GPU rendering on a GTX570. I’d say it took about 5 minutes or so. The turntable ran for a good 3 hours. @rioforce: beats me ! I can’t remember !
Yes, that is the thread I was thinking of. Let me some time and i will find it for you this WE. Or better, link to a blend with the proper material… As µI said, I am not home ow, and my connection is a real real pain…
@ Kelly Bellis: I have found the material and prepared a file for you: see your PM box in a short bit.
@ fernan: Thanks !
@ Mrmagician: yes, I remember your help. I am very proud of my very 1st featured row appearance !
@ 1818 :Yep, you are right. I guess there is always something to improve on !
@ Farmfield : Thanks for the nice words ! Still too much lens flares you think ?
It’s the type of flare - obviously added/digital flare. It breaks the illusion of reality. To sad VideoCopilot haven’t ported their Optical Flares for PS, that is an awesome plugin to create some nice flaring.
