Three Roses

Hi All,

after months of messing around with Blender and Yafray in my rare spare time, here’s my first work I dare to share with you. Any suggestions mostly welcome! Especially, I am interested in the question, wether I am supposed to give the scene a more dramatic touch by using e.g. DOF or using a WIDE-LENSE instead of a tele… or would that be too much?

And I think, I am not quite satisfied with the light. I use typical 3-Point light with an additional one pointing to the background in order to illuminate.

Anyway, thank you in advance.



Very nice glass material, if you’d like to share it many would be happy. The modelling is clean. I’d like to see som e thorns. It could use something in the scene however I’m short on ideas for what.

looks lovely. I too would like to know the material settings :slight_smile: (if you wouldnt mind sharing)

just one thing, whats going on in the background?


Thank you for your suggestions. Here is the glass-material I used:

The Yafray-Code:

<shader type="blendershader" name="MAScarletGlass" >
		<color r="1.000000" g="0.777148" b="0.898677" />
		<specular_color r="1.000000" g="1.000000" b="1.000000" />
		<mirror_color r="1.000000" g="1.000000" b="1.000000" />
		<diffuse_reflect value="1.000000" />
		<specular_amount value="0.957129" />
		<alpha value="1.000000" />
		<emit value="0.029859" />
		<IOR value="1.500000" />
		<reflect value="on" />
		<reflect_amount value="0.317937" />
		<fresnel_offset value="1.000000" />
		<reflected r="1.000000" g="1.000000" b="1.000000" />
		<min_refle value="1.000000" />
		<matmodes value="traceable shadow" />
		<diffuse_brdf value="lambert" />
		<specular_brdf value="phong" />
		<hard value="511" />

They’re all the same, only the color- and emit-values (0.0-0.05) differ.

@code_astro: The background? Do you meet the red and white spots? They’re from a photon light. You think I should loose them?



the spots just look a little out of place…there isnt really anything there for them to be on…if there was another object, I think it would be ok.

see what it looks like without…:slight_smile: but at the end of the day, its your piece, so if you like them there, then you should keep them :slight_smile:

Very sweet. Rather overexposed, but that’s very easy to do with transparent materials … in classical photography or in CG.

Let’s talk studio photography for a sec. When you are lighting glass, what you want is the suggestion of transparency. Otherwise, you light it just like it was an opaque object. So the most important lights are the ones in the front; not the one in the back. As long as you can see some light “through” the material, it will look like glass. But otherwise all of the definition, everything that will make it look 3-D and not flat, comes from the front. It’s ideal if you can arrange for the light which shines “through” the object to come from the rear side, say ten o’clock or two o’clock, so that no light goes straight into the lens.

Specular highlights on the front of the object are absolutely critical. (And almost completely missing here.)

The backdrop, in particular, needs to be fairly contrasty but not strongly-lit. It’s almost impossible to nail a shot where the backdrop emits light from behind. A velour or similar material works very well.

You’ve got a very nice model of glass roses. The lighting situation is what’s difficult. You can make it easier, and make the shot better.

What’s hurting the shot right now, imho, is a natural loss (or diminishing) of the “3D illusion.” The brightness levels of the background begin to match those of the object.

Dear sundialsvc4,

thank you so much for taking the time to explain all those important details to me. Things are much clearer to me, now. Especially, your remaks dealing with the specular highlights on the front were mostly useful, I think, this was the main problem I’ve been searching for.

Await my next step in this work.