HOME | DD
Moffata β The hornets nest.
#3d #aircraft #boeing #hornet #lightwave #maxwell #model #render #sunset #f18hornet
Published: 2015-02-09 02:41:09 +0000 UTC; Views: 2067; Favourites: 75; Downloads: 7
Redirect to original
Description
Just a quick render to test this model out. Thanks to Roen for his help with the model and repaint. Lightwave, Maxwell and Gimp.Related content
Comments: 23
This looks like Microsoft Flight Simulator.
π: 0 β©: 1
Its not, its a 3d render
π: 0 β©: 0
I can see that you have no experience in rendering this model, but what is it with you vehicle modellers/painters and obscuring any potential design details with dark? I'm going through the "undiscovered" section of DA's main page since a couple of days and this is about the fifth vehicle that got the obscure with dark treatment. The brightest spot here is the sun, it directs the viewer's attention there, but what for? What's so interesting about it? Does the viewer come to look at the sun? No, they want the vehicle, but they get a 90% silhouette of a vehicle with barely any details. Too bad, because based on the lit elements it could've looked neat.
I get that you tried to create atmosphere with the sky and sundown, but guess what - at least three of those people that did those vehicles did that too.
Since I can't say much about the plane, do you want me to comment on the sky? The sky looks great.
π: 0 β©: 1
Im going to address this from 2 angles. First I dont know how your monitor is set up so I dont know what you are looking at. I view my works on at least 3 different displays before i post them online, one of which being an Ipad so has no adjustment, simply a hi res display. In all 3 monitors I can see plenty of detail on the aircraft, the insignia, markings, details of the front nose gear. From this angle, there is not much detail to be had, it is all about the silhouette of the aircraft. Tell me, what percent of the model is at a 30 degree angle or greater? I would say 95%. At that angle detail becomes irrelevant as the natural fresnel effect of a metal surface starts to take over gradually, and detail is also at an angle too oblique for the viewer to distinguish and identify. Second of all, from what I can see in your gallery you have no experience rendering whatsoever (please, correct me and link some of your work if i am wrong). I am going to explain some things to you with this in mind. Getting detail is easy. Painting lines, insignia and other thing onto the surface of an aircraft isn't difficult. It takes a long time, depending of the level of detail, but it isnt super hard. Rendering a surface on the other hand, is monstrously difficult to do in an accurate manner. Sure you can set up a render with a basic single light setup pointed directly at a surface (as if you would have cared to look through my gallery you would have seen I have done many times before) but you would NOT see fully the effort that goes in to set up the bump, specular, fresnel, diffuse and adjust the 50 or so individual settings to create a great surface. Set the light at an extreme angle to the aircraft and run the light along the aircraft to see the reflections and bump and diffuse and specular in all their glory as I have done here however, and you do see that effort. You see something realistic, because that is what I am trying to achieve here, realism. Let me tell you a little story. I show my brother most times I make a new piece. Every time he says its good, but not really realistic. I showed him this one, and for the first time ever he said he actually thought it was a photo for a few seconds. So before you say that I'm hiding details with dark, im not. Im showing them off. Those reflections are better details than the paint itself in my opinion. Now your rant, sounds like it should be better posted on your own page then as a critique of an artwork, as it barely addresses my work at all. Β And as for you wee wisecrack about no experience rendering this model, ive been doing stuff like this for 7 years now. I may not have been very good for most of that time, but I still know what I'm doing now, i don't need experience rendering the model to know what looks good to me. Please dont bother commenting on my work again unless it is only about my work, and you have some proper constructive criticism (look it up, what you posted was not) or congratulations to give.
π: 0 β©: 1
Got a little angry here, huh?
OK, first off, there is a remote chance it's my monitors fault. I'm going to temporarily increase brightness.
OK, it was set at 15 - pretty low, I admit. Now that I've increased it all the details really are there. I don't think I even noticed the person standing next to it.
Second, I accept your argument about fresnel effect, metal surface being hard to render. Most of the works I saw simply used textures, so I didn't know it was that big of a deal. Now that I look at the surface of the front, it does look really convincing, not like plastic at all.
You are right that I should have looked, but I assumed that since it's your newest work the problems you haven't resolved in your past works carried over to this one. I saw the wrong focus with my monitor settings and commented on that from a painterly perspective.
I admit that the wrong settings made me too sure about what I see and I have come off as rude and disrespectful. I can only say that my intention was to help by pointing out the focus and tendency to obscure details. I promise to raise the brightness if I ever see a pic that's too dark. I had no problems with it so far, colours look really vibrant with this setting. One brightness point more and it all starts to look pale.
I came here from dA's undiscovered tab on its main page. This pic was the only pic I saw. I comment on everything I can say something constructive or positive about (and I do say a lot of it, most of the time). It's not like I picked your work to attack you. You obviously put a lot of work into what you did and to good effect. I understand why you got angry when an ignorant such as myself came over and started to bash on it. I apologise for my ignorance and for my behaviour, though I'm sure it's not enough to make things right. But I think I know what might.
Again, thanks for explaining 3D modelling stuff to me.
π: 0 β©: 0
Great looking render! You used Maxwell render for this?
π: 0 β©: 1
Thanks, and sure did! Lightwave is good, but I am finding the capablities of the physical render engine to be so much better for what I am trying to learn and create.
π: 0 β©: 1
Agree on that! Maxwell is really great delivering realistic renders easily. Which version do you use? And how did you setup the background sky on this one?
π: 0 β©: 1
V3.0.1 with the lightwave plugin, and its just the default maxwell sky simulation (Not IBL) with some tweaking of the sun size. Clouds were all added in post
π: 0 β©: 1
Β The clouds made me thinking! Nice work adding them, looks just right.
π: 0 β©: 0
