Cloud tunnel (again, Blender can render good volumetric clouds)

Look I don’t know what you and Free_Ality’s bias against rendering realistic clouds with BI is but leave flaming out of the topic.

Get a digital camera and take photos of clouds or textures or do this in a paint program oe 3rd party app. instead is two things I hear that try to block the advancement of Blender texturing and rendering features and tests. If everyone had the attitude, we can fake this or do this in a third party app. from the start we wouldn’t have SSS, raytracing, procedural textures, a compositor, and a whole list of other features, heck, would Blender even have a native renderer?

Awesome work! I don’t know what some of these people’s problems are. This IS the test section, and taking a picture and giving it world coordinates would not be that interesting of a test.

Keep it up! Can’t wait for the result!

I posted a new thread in News & Discussion to find the level of discontent or embrace for certain features like procedural textures to seperate that discussion from here.

You should expect long rendertimes for really good high quality effects, especially if the renderer isn’t optimized for the sort of thing.

I think the only reason they used the vertex colors approach is for the realtime lighting effects in the game. What you’ve done in Blender is not that far off from what they’ve done for Flight Simulator. Google for Flight Simulator clouds and tell me they don’t look pretty darn good. Please…if they were done in Blender there would be cheers of glory. :spin:

http://www.blendernewbies.com/tmp/mfsx_7.jpg

Hi, This post is very informative, however I would like some specific information. If someone can help me then please send me a private message. Best Regards,

Look I don’t know what you and Free_Ality’s bias against rendering realistic clouds with BI is but leave flaming out of the topic

Oh, shut up you baby. Id love some nice Bl clouds, and Im not against their development.

But they should be effective to use, and your’s just arent. Im not waiting a day to render some clouds that might work for more than a background. Plus in all honesty, they look a flat background painting.

You should expect long rendertimes for really good high quality effects, especially if the renderer isn’t optimized for the sort of thing.

That’s just dumb. Especially since these arent really good quality. They look alright, but not high quality. If your using, say, indigo, of course you should expect long times, since it works off of ‘real’ physical lighting rigs(as far as I know). If you’re using BI, not so much. Sorry, but its just not worth waiting so long.

Still, go ahead prove me wrong. Id love to see you bust out some fantastic clouds, but until the render times are reasonable, and they look real good, I wont bother.

Peace.

Free_Ality, you want “good clouds” that don’t take a day to render, I just got a new image with volumetric clouds up at this thread.
http://blenderartists.org/forum/showthread.php?p=949532#post949532

If you want depth and poofiness you’ll like this one better.

even SSS takes quite long. often its much quicker to fake it with a good light setup. much the same with these clouds…
http://www.rustboy.com/rustweb.htm under Making Of…

either something like that, or creative use of halos. @ndy gave us some crazy smoke trails/clouds way back with version 2.25 that looked next to real, and all of it without SSS, raytracing, <crazy feature that will solve all your problems>, etc etc.

for animations youre not gonna sit around and wait. dont even get into ‘well why dont we paint the fucking thing?’ because it is not the same thing at all. right now you have only static images, which is why they could be duplicated in Photoshop.

show us an animation of your clouds moving in a realistic way.

@CD: Much better, rendertime?