Development > Artwork
Renders
Winter:
--- Quote from: sitters on December 02, 2007, 06:23:45 pm ---Yea with this sizes (The Carrier is between 200 and 300 metres in diameter (i.e. from launch bay to launch bay), so call it an even 250.) you don't see any shadows.
But earlier they say to me that the carrier size is 1/4 of the moon ( or even 1/4 of the earth ).
so we can trow the render in the trashcan. :(
--- End quote ---
I don't know who told you that, mate, but it wasn't BTAxis or me. I do apologise for the confusion, but a ship even 1/4 the size of the moon (much less 1/4 of the Earth) couldn't crash land on Earth, which has been a feature in our story from when we first invented the Carriers.
. . . Well, it could crash land, but that would be kind-of game over for the human race . . .
--- Quote from: Destructavator on December 02, 2007, 06:15:08 pm ---Actually, if you really wanted to be accurate (or downright picky), our moon does have an atmosphere, it's just extremely thin because of the much lower gravity (Another thing I learned in the same class at college). Even space between solar systems isn't completely empty, there are occasional particles of various junk that are microscopic.
--- End quote ---
I know that, I just didn't think it was important enough to bring up.
--- Quote from: Sean_E on December 02, 2007, 06:23:26 pm ---Winter: How High-res of an image would you like dimension wise?
--- End quote ---
I'm not sure what size our loading screens are usually done at, but I assume it's the usual 1024x768.
This is one of those difficult situations where we have realism conflicting with dramatic visuals. I agree that it would be a real shame to bin the render, because it's beautiful, but we are still trying to aim for accuracy. To that end I think that Sean_E's suggestion of using a large asteroid as the backdrop instead of the moon would make the best compromise, because to throw away all of sitters' hard work at this point would be highly uncool. That latest video easily rivals professionally-made game animations from even a few years back.
Regards,
Winter
sitters:
Read page four winter, there was a small discussion, and you also talk about shadows on the moon from the carriers.
When it make shadows, it is gigantic ( mate ) !!
I have make an other clip, more realistic.
The clip :
http://www.md2.sitters-electronics.nl/render/moon9xvid.avi
This one is not the final because i use an static background.
But first want to know if this is the one, it cost every time 25 minutes for rendering 800 frames.
Willem
Mattn:
i suppose this was my fault - i'm very sorry. i confused this with alien mothership. sorry for the extra work sitters
sitters:
--- Quote from: Mattn on December 02, 2007, 10:00:24 pm ---i suppose this was my fault - i'm very sorry. i confused this with alien mothership. sorry for the extra work sitters
--- End quote ---
That's no problem, but winter cant turn his head the other way.
Its just an misinterpretation from us all.
Winter:
--- Quote from: sitters on December 02, 2007, 10:03:48 pm ---That's no problem, but winter cant turn his head the other way.
--- End quote ---
Eh? All I said was it wasn't me who gave you the wrong size. My mistake was in making a bad guess about the size of the shadows that would be cast on the moon.
I like your new render, by the way, it still gives the impression of size on the Carriers. Do you think it would be possible to pan the camera at the end and show the Carriers heading towards Earth?
Regards,
Winter
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version