Angel in Vertigo

Straight from WIP to finished:) I couldnt leave this model without trying to show it in action. So here it is Angel in Vertigo. Modeled in Blender, rendered in Kerkythea.

http://images23.fotosik.pl/266/66195ce42fe49a92.jpg

Special thanks to Bob McKain over at F3D for sharing his sky background plates.

Unless the guy’s in a flat spin (not a good thing!) I can’t see any reason for the rather extreme circular motion blur. Good job on the jet, though something about it cheats the scale, makes it look like a scale model, large scale, but not full-size. Not sure what the vapor trail’s supposed to be, but it doesn’t line up well with the nacelles.

I like that vertigo stuff. Looks good to me. It’s not reality, but it captures the feel of it.

Awesome work, i love it. Good use of the heat blurring as well.

Is the faded background image of the plane also your model?

I agree on the scale feel. I think the reason is the plane far below. Somehow it is too big and its shadow is too close compared to ground’s detail. At least with my eyes, if I hide the farther plane with my hand, the ground’s detailing changes the feel that the closer plane is much higher and more real scale.

Anyway, very good model and good rendering nevertheless.

you done awwwwwwwwwwwwwwwesome job, though not real but pretty much cool.

Fantastic. Love the lighting. Awesome texture, right down to the rib banding.

I think you did a great job on the scene. If you were traveling that fast and turning, you better believe it’d be a blur.

Yes, there would definitely be a blur, but not circular as depicted, with the center of the blur nearly directly below the jet. Think about it – a supersonic aircraft travels in a very broad arc as it turns, with the “center” of that arc far removed from directly below the jet. So the blur would be much more linear, mainly along the principle vector of the jet’s motion (forward), with a subtle curvature only. UNLESS, of course, the jet is spinning on its own central axis, which means it’s completely out of control and in danger of crashing, in other words, a flat spin.

I’ve made some changes on image - added engine glows and lower plane scaled down a little bit.

Circular blur on image is of course not as in real world - from this altitude should be almost unnoticeable. But ALL in CG is a fake. To be 100% real our scenes should have one light thousands miles from center. There is no GI, shaders, radiosity etc in nature. Or rather there is all together. From one big sun and it is “counted” in real time. :slight_smile:

I didn’t try to reproduce every elements of reality, but capture a sence, dynamics, mood etc. Vertigo made this scene dynamics - without it is only next “fly over” scene. So I tried to create something not only reproduce. Same as in every other kind of, let’s say art (small letter of course :)) - movies, novels, paintings, even photographs.

http://images30.fotosik.pl/268/5f85f066c0439ebd.jpg

A lot better! Very good!

can i ask how you did the disrupted airflow (i think thats what it is) from the wingtips?
is it post-pro?
im a big fan of your work here and on military-meshes so its a good way to learn :slight_smile:

very well done :slight_smile: its very convincing, and to those who are saying about the circular blur…
picasso wasnt exactly realistic, but was an artist MYRS doesnt have to make everything realistic because he too is an artist…
fair enough?
i like it to be honest, it creates a nice focal point in the centre :slight_smile:

//charlie
ps. is there any chance of you realeasing one of your finished works to the community, maybe on a look and learn type license so it cant be reproduced but can be studied, as you seem to make blender as accesible as mainstream 3d apps with ease? i just think it would be a benefit to those learning:) thanks you for considering :slight_smile:

All smokes, vapor trials etc are postprocessed. Also colour balanced, blur (every kind) added etc after rendering. Model was rendered without background. Kerkythea has no alpha channel pass possible, so need to use some tricks to get it. So render+render alpha+background were mounted together in postprocess. This technique gives very high control level on your final image.

About PS. Who knowns, maybe soon… :wink:

I have no problem with using a blur “artistically” to enhance the feeling of motion, I just feel that in this case using a centralized circular blur is a poor artistic choice because the feeling it conveys is that the viewer and/or subject is spinning about a point above the center of the blur, and for me that breaks the sense of immersion in the image. By the same token, the fact that the other jet is not blurred also breaks the illusion, because it’s completely inconsistent with the context of the scene.

Even artistic choices have to be made with a sense of contributing to the overall unity of the image, both in visual and in conceptual content.

I find it rather amazing that so many artists on this board tout and flout the idea of “photorealism” and “realism” and “realistic pictures”, yet when told of an impression that there’s a break in that sense of realism, simply back up and punt by saying “it’s artistic” or “I didn’t want it that way.”

I think it looks realistic enough… the blur seems right enough for a hectic turn from that point of view. Really nice!

It depend on what you understand as “overall unity of the image”, cause I think that it is very subjective term. Focusing and spining effect was planed and it is part of image concept, so I can say: yes, overall unity is preserved. If you feel spining and focusing that’s great: it is what I planed you to feel. I know perfect that in reality plane should crash after such spining, but I want auditory to believe, that it will no crash, that it is normal but very fast turn. And, cause so far your opinion about circular blur is the only one negative I suppose that most viewers accepted my concept.

Don’t get me wrong: I really appreciate your opinion - it is very important to get also such comments. I always analyse it and if accept - try to use in practice. Simply this time disagree with you and stay with my opinion.:slight_smile:

Don’t think I was slamming the image, mrys, overall I think it’s pretty well-done, I just think it could be stronger if the blur and some of the other “effects” were more consistent with the actuality of such a scene.

Much of my response may be due to experience, not with jets, but in low-flying small aircraft and helis, hanging out shooting 16mm film in Alaska many years ago. Hard to forget seeing the landscape sweep past during a hard bank, or shooting the shoreline from just above pontoon level during a lake landing. Lotsa blur, you betcha. Luckily no spins though!

Over all I think this is a pretty effective scene. There’s a definitive feeling of movement going on and the modeling and the texturing are great.

The radial blur is really up to the artist, but I’d have to disagree with this composition. I find the placement of the distant plane very distracting. I think moving it or eliminating it altogether would greatly improve the image.

But don’t get me wrong – don’t think I don’t think this is fantastic. It’s very well done.

An interesting approach would be to animate the model along a fairly true-to-life flight path with the camera following its POV, then use Motion Blur in the rendering. You wouldn’t even need the jet in place, for that matter, since it’s heavily composited anyway. A handful of frames and you have a “pre-blurred” choice.