My version of Earth

I won’t say crappy, considering the effort you put in and the anxiety you’re probably feeling right now…but there’s much room for improvement. Of course, I realize that this is a finished project, so here is what could have been done better:

  1. Atmospheric glow. There shouldn’t be any glowing at the dark side of the planet. Since when do you see a bright blue sky overhead at night? :smiley: And, the atmosphere also glows inwards so that the land at the very edge of the planet are blued out.

  2. Stars are too sparse. Make more.

  3. Bump-mapping is too strong. Mountains can reach 5km up, but is still nothing when seen from that distance. The most you can see are the shadows they cast. That effect should be recreated.

All these apply…unless this is exactly what you want it to be. After all, it’s your version of it. :wink:

You won’t say the model is crappy? How very nice of you. Since you were so kind, I won’t say that your ‘bedside manner’ sucks.

Data 65 - perhaps the specularity needs toning down, since there appears to be a quite noticeable bright spot left of center.

Okay, so I’ll say it’s really crappy. Crappy to those who still think Earth is rectangular.

Oh yeah, water reflects light most of the time.

Hey, I think it’s very good. Let’s start with that. Sure you could improve upon it in lots of ways, but you might just be trying to ape the “usual” picture.

Earth is extremely reflective, and like all objects in space, there is a sharp contrast between light and dark. A globe that might be very accurately depicted might not be considered visually appealing for this very reason. But does that make this render “bad?” No, I definitely do not think so.

  1. Stars are too sparse. Make more.

Photos of the sunlit Earth taken from orbit or the Moon usually show no stars (except sometimes the Sun). The Earth is just too bright.

Thanks for all of the replies. First off, thanks for those who defended me, and please don’t be too hard on those who had critisism. I take no offense to any of those comments. This isn’t my child, it’s only a render.
I’ve looked at this against real pictures of the Earth and it’s “pretty close” , which is exactly what I was going for. Here are some points.

  1. Stars- When seen in Nasa pictures, you never see stars, but I decided to put some in. Since this is for a sci-fi video, stars are expected. It’s the way Hollywood has conditioned people, so now they expect it.

  2. Atmosphere- If you look at Nasa pics where the atmosphere is visible, it’s mostly always on the night side. This is because the light of the Earth reflecting the sun makes the Atmosphere harder to see on the day side.

  3. Bump mapping- You can see detail of elevation in nasa pics although I do admit that I may have gone a little overboard, but not by much.

  4. Reflections- I know it’s hard to believe but, the sun does reflect off of the ocean.

I honestly just posted this to see what comments the picture would get. What I got was about what I expected, having seen some similar posts.
Since I am making tons of models for this short movie, I am not going for perfection. Being a musician also, I know that after a certain point, the average Joe doesn’t notice the subtle details anyway.
For all of those that are critical of this I would suggest to be just as brutal with all pics, because if new artists get used to it now, they will develope a thicker skin when it counts. It’s good training.
Thanks again for all of your comments.
data65