It’s the simple things that somethimes make you struggle 
What do you think could be improved?
4 Likes
nice work !!!
Nice start! 
Looking at some references here, I’d say you need the surface to be slightly rougher and also, try adding a bit of sss.
I thought about sss too, which could be missing… Don’t know why I haven’t tried it yet. I guess because an egg shell doesn’t seem to be translucent, but I might be wrong
I found references with varying roughness, color, forms…but in general a bit more roughness should be doing good.
Thanks a lot mate
Turn down the lights – eggs aren’t shiny. They don’t reflect much light at all. Grab a dozen out of the fridge and have a look.
I love the overall shape its a good shape (they can vary slighting from one egg to the other). I find some of the top freckles could be maybe a bit bigger. Overall its a nice looking egg. If it wouldn’t float in dead white space it could fool some 
Also find that your surface irregularities are too even in height (The bumps is too much at the same height throughout, some spots should be a tad more elevated some less).
Btw, on a side note:
SSS has nothing to do with translucency in general. Translucency is see through but blurry and yes, generally translucent objects usually also have SSS.
But Sub surface scattering is about light rays getting inside an object, bouncing around inside some and getting back out.
An egg shell most definitely has SSS! If you look at a real egg in front of a light, you’ll see the yolk shadow, which means it has Sub surface scattering.
Also recently saw in an article that eggshells have pores, basically that is how the ambrosia (yolk) inside breaths to mature up and become a chick, and there is a membrane that links the surface to the yolk (very tiny, but actually visible when you look in an egg you just cracked in good light conditions).
So if you could even kick it up a notch by perhaps adding a yolk inside and a membrane with subtle veins that links to the yolk. That way if you put a light behind you see the shadows of the inside thus would technically looks even more realistic maybe?
Enough of my nonsense! Yolk! Yolk! Yolk!
Egg-cellent work! Pun intended 
It’ll make a nice trompe-l’œil.
Thanks a lot for thar detailed reply!
Blockquote Also find that your surface irregularities are too even in height (The bumps is too much at the same height throughout, some spots should be a tad more elevated some less).
Yes I agree, I was also not perfectly happy with the bump and think it can be improved
Blockquote SSS has nothing to do with translucency in general. Translucency is see through but blurry and yes, generally translucent objects usually also have SSS.
Actually it is the same. Physically in the real world there is light going through the object surface, scatters inside and travels out at another place. Both translucency and sss describe this, they are just different ways to approximate it in a renderer. The difference of blurryness (“see-through”) comes from the scattering amount. The more clear the volume, the less blurry. So the most physical correct way would actually be to render a volume.
2 Likes