Here's some crazy clouds I made as a variant of VanLippe's clouds, of course... Great mats, I almost always start with them and start tweaking sliders and options when I'm trying to make clouds. Some color balanceing done with KPT EQ, and Melancholytron. This image is the 100DPI version, .jpg compression is pretty low, but I really wanted more detail...

And here's the 300DPI version. I dont' know if it will fit, hope it doesn't ruin anyone's web page! The actual render turned out clean enough for my tastes, but at the previous image's .jpg compression level, it would have been 700K+, and too big for the forums... So I compressed it down a bunch. I use a program called Riptide for image converting, it supports any and every image-file type, ever. It also let you reverse-compress (mathematically) images, meaning I can set the desired Kb range and it will compress it to that exactly. Unlike many programs, it actually has a full 8-bit slider (256 levels) for .jpg compression, a useful tool at times. But where's the happy medium? To bring out the material details, should I just take a different shot completely? Or perhaps a more-foreground rock structure? It's not going to be a gallery image for me, just a large panorama print for my bathroom, but I'm wondering if even 300DPI is enough...? Or too much...

I really like your cloud work on this SDL, but IMO the horizon seems a little too stark and well-defined. Maybe just a little haze to give the scene more depth? Just my cranky opinion FWIW.

(note to self : images of this size do NOT view on my Explorer, I hope SOMEBODY gets to see the 300DPI version besides me!)

wow, awesome work, the clouds are perfect. i can view the 3000dpi version, its just not great quality. excellent job still.

Aye, it views just fine here at work (T1 line), but I'm not sure I ever want to look at it again! The compression really muddled it, although I knew that would happen...

makes note to try and not read all the scrolling from left to right ummmm looks kewl SDL...(have to use th etop pic as a reference cause the second one is ummmm wayyyyy to wide for my lil screen...lol)

I think that beyond the compression artifact problem is the issue of the current state of monitor technology. Web(monitor) resolution is 72dpi, printing(medium resolution) is often 300dpi. It seems beyond the ability of our CRT and flat panel monitors to display the finer resolution. Someday we'll have sub-pixel displays that will show such detail.

I think that beyond the compression artifact problem is the issue of the current state of monitor technology. Web(monitor) resolution is 72dpi, printing(medium resolution) is often 300dpi. It seems beyond the ability of our CRT and flat panel monitors to display the finer resolution. Someday we'll have sub-pixel displays that will show such detail.

OOoops! I think my evil-twin just posted the same reply!

Um could you post this just a little bigger I can't see it very well on my 50" Plasma screen TV!!!

Yeah, I agree with Vile... a little larger and we could print it out for wallpaper for our kitchens! ;o)

(grins!) I wasn't sure if 'Rosity would allow an image at 3000 wide, figured I'd give it a shot. This one is just for my bathroom, 300DPI = 10" x 5". I like to look at water when, uh, well, you know... (grins)