I’ve not posted anything in a long time. Most of my blendering has been restricted to playing about with geometry and never getting finished images. However, here is my most recent image which I’m quite happy with. I know there are some problems but it’s taken too long and I don’t intend to change it.

Mostly, this was me experimenting with UV mapping - something I’d never really done before. The texture was edited from a photo to make a tileable texture.


That looks really good. THe lighting is nice and the tiled texture is perfect. The only thing I noticed was that on the right hand side of the picture the edge pixels of the window thing have been repeated or mapped so that they’re stretched to make horizontal lines of one colour. At least that’s what it looks like.

Its a nice pic but… I’m not sure. It kinda make me feel like something is missing. Don’t know what. Maybe you were trying to make it look like that. :expressionless: Could use a few more details though. Maybe some post processing in photoshop.


The texture is indeed stretched there. I noticed after taking a long time to render and didn’t feel like fixing it.

As for something missing - maybe there is. Possibly something more through the gate (as it is the distant mountains are largely painted in Corel Photopaint - they were totall washed out in the render). Possibly also some more detail to the ground and/or some objects sitting inside.

take that tile pic and create a bump map in GIMP its needed badly. great lighting

I think you did a very fine job with it. You can always look closely at small details and point out improvements, but you know, that only happens if first “the picture works.” And this one does. It’s a nice, well-composed shot and well executed.

To me, the main comment I would make is that “a stonemason probably would not leave the block work finished-out like that.” You notice that beneath the arch the edge of the wall is kinda “just there,” continuing the blockwork and using some very thin blocks on the left side. Probably the stonemason would have set a column of blocks on the left and right-hand sides beneath the arch, and would not have used blocks of unequal thinness. A Roman mason would have done it one way; a Greek another; a German another way again; all according to the customs of his location and craft. The mortar-lines probably also would not be so thick; this appears to be a texture taken from concrete block work.

None of these points ‘scream out’ from the picture, but they are the sort of detail that research into the techniques of a stonemason would have revealed. Had this been done as a commercial shot, a game set, or especially a movie project, they would have been a gaffe.


Yes, that could, and possibly should be improved. Unfortunately the lighting makes it take a long time to re-render.

Actually, it is a photo of stonework on a 12th century Scottish church (Dalmeny for anyone who knows it).


What sort of lighting set-up do you have?

I rather like the image. It has a very good tone to it. But I do agree with sundialsvc4 about the “column of blocks” around the arch. It looks somewhat unnatural. The other thing that bothers me is that the stairs have a sloped transition between steps. I haven’t actually seen stairs like that, but maybe I should go to more ancient sites or something. I’d think they’d be hard for someone to actually build. Good job, though.