winter


(Blenderist) #1

hey everyone.

today i have for you a winter blizzard image.
made it in about 10 minutes or 15. :stuck_out_tongue:

http://i12.photobucket.com/albums/a206/sigudig/winter-blizzard.jpg

real easy… hope you like it… :wink:


(vliegtuig) #2

lol

Dang ma! Where my goggles at?
P


(Mystery) #3

Took you 15 minutes for that? Damn your slow :stuck_out_tongue:

Mystery


(kit89) #4

10minutes for making and then rendering.

Thats okay if he took a 5 minute break in between :wink:

Not much to say about it but, add some penguins.


(Blenderist) #5

heh, penguins.

the snow is made with particles. most of the time it took me to mess with the particles to get it right and the lightning. %|


(thelonesoldier) #6

It looks like you drew a white blob in Photoshop and then used a filter to make something vaguely snowy looking in the air. I’d say it needs more detail. The mound shouldn’t all be one solid color. The particle work looks pretty decent, actually, but a little too thick.


(Blenderist) #7

i just wanted to make it thicker. before it was 2 thin so that it seemed like strars or sth like that :expressionless:


(Ronson2k3) #8

Dang if I can’t see those awesome polar bears in there?

Not a bad a scene. A couple of ideas though.

The snow should be of different sizes and strengths. Try making a few snow flakes (this could be as simple as a plain with a drawn snow flake with an alpha mask. You could also add a bit of bump to the that to give it a bit of a crytal look to the flake. Then you can place a bunch of planes in the pic at various places. With snow like that a bit of wind would be good (not to much though - everyone will begin to hate winter then).

Some clouds aswell. Snow comes from clouds if you exclude the drifting that always happens afterward. It’s usually overcast when it snows but there are exceptions. Just a bit of textured sky will give the sky a greater seperation from the ground aswell as a bit more depth. This would be in addition to the added variance in flake size.

Winter is one of my favourite seasons. Although I don’t ski. The snow has to be around for some time though before that feeling sets in.

If you don’t want to draw the flakes yourself you can use a snow flake font. Easy and quick. You may already have some but I found a site that has a few…

http://moorstation.org/typoasis/seasonal/xmas/fsxmas2.htm

Just pick a good size for the font

Make a good black back ground (multiples of 64 pixels eg: 128x128 and so on) and then add a white flake (positve). Be sure to turn on both COL and Alpha in the texture controls when you add the image to the plain. This will give you only the flake itself. If you want to add some procedural bump to the flake then you have to have that under the image (the alpha will cut out the procedural texture aswell on the flake).

If you are using PSP (Paint Shop Pro) ver 6 and up there is a tutorial on making snowflakes using the kolidiscope effect built into PSP. It’s kinda cool. I’ve just been horsing around with it myself.

http://www.geocities.com/pixel_tickler/snowflakes.htm

You can download a PDF version of the tutorial at the bottom of the page…

You can make different flakes or come up with some of your own. You could even make your own Chistmas cards this way… It would make a pretty good tutorial?

I know that blender would be a bit of an overdue to make cards this way but. You could wish everyone a new blender for Christmas… (bit of a double entandre joke). Be sure to telll them the card was made with a blender though as they may not get it…?

Ronson2k

Edit: to add link to dingbat.


(Blenderist) #9

i said that its a pic of a blizzard. and usually in a blizzard you cant see further than a few meters… :expressionless:


(Ronson2k3) #10

That doesn’t mean you can’t see things in the snow just that you have a hard time seeing them in the snow. I live in the snow belt in Canada (great lakes basin). We don’t get blizzards an a regular schedule but they do happen from time to time.

The closer the object is to your face (camera) the clearer it will be. For a blizzard. It’s not all snow it’s blowing and drifting snow. You can show that with a variance in the snow that you see. The density would be different at different distances. So not only do you have snow falling but you also have snow blowing from the ground. It’s a rather nasty thing to be out in.

In order to see the verocity of the blizzard you need something in back to show what’s happening out front. Some trees or buildings. This will give the depth of the snow as you see it. This could also be sky (in the previous post). It’s a bit of contrast thing. If you were to show a pure white picture and call it a blizzard that would work too but not a great way to show one even though your correct in the visibility department. The contrast gives you a perspective on what your trying to show (a sence of scale or depth in this case).

I’m not trying to say you should go for photo realism but you could even use a picture and then add this overtop if you wanted. The more depth you have the greater the snow will look.

With weather or any other image. It’s a good idea to build from the back to the front. Layering things will give you nearly total control of the image. You have done that to a point with the hill in the back ground but the more layers you have the greater the depth and you can make the storm look more and more intence with the added distance in it. Also the snow doesn’t just stop at the edge of the hill. You would see the snow in front of the hill. So the hill should be behind the snow (this is a depth thing). If you have your “snow” on a plain then add that in front of the hill and you will see what I mean.

Things don’t become invisable in a blizzard just hard to see. You won’t know that if they aren’t there at all. Your image could be the effects of snow on a window looking out (with the snow piled up in the corner). If you have something to draw the eye into the image then the snow in front will have a greater prominence. You can do this a few ways. Either by adding detail to foreground (the snow - previous post) or adding in more detail to the back ground (trees buildings - perhaps a bit of a texture to the hill itself or sky). You could of course do both. This would make the image more and more impressive.

To some extent you have to model the things that are hard to see to see that they are hard to see… Kind of a circular logic to be sure but you could end up with a really great image when your done.

http://www.mrjumbo.com/contents/new_york/blizzard.html

Just trying to be helpfull…

Ronson2k


(sprinkles) #11

Well… I’m sure it’s blender… but it could pass for 2D :slight_smile:


(Socksy) #12

To me, the snow looks like scrunched up paper. Other than that, it’s really good!