Nice picture, btw. :-)

Seems you have no trouble manipulating the scene...

Mazak

Very cool! Looks nice without the starfield.

The render size of the moon picture is 1024x10024px. You went quite to the limit with it.

Nevertheless I`m impressed by how faithfully the original render is reproduced in Vue.

Yes I use texture anti-aliasing and texture filtering to reduce jagging around the planet.

Mazak

 Another helpful advice, thanks :-)

Loads and renders beautifully in Vue 7 Pro Studio.

Hope to become even slightly as accomplished as you are.  Thanks!

The clouds are amazing, but for me its the space scenes, hands down.

Charles

Glad you like it, Charles.

So the scene works in Vue 7 Pro Studio also. That`s good news.

Opens and renders fine in Vue 7 Complete 64 bit Vista
Doesn't open in Vue 6 Prostudio, but that's because it's been saved from 7 and .vue files aren't backward compatible.

I unchecked the billboarding on the nebula as it gave me more rotational range, then duplicated  it twice and recolored. My final on this is very large so I had to do a tiny bit of postwork on the planet edge to get rid of minor jaggies.
Click for the full size version

 Nice, Timspfd!

You gave the scene a completely different look. Thanks for the details.

Great to know it worked with Vue 7 Complete. Well, I expected the file to be incompatible with Vue 6...

It satisfying to see those results und to feel that this concept is useful.

Can`t wait to see what you guys come up with once the space pack is out :-)

applaud wooo hoooo!!! :)

 Heya, Steve.

I hoped you would like it :-)

You may have noticed the metanodes generating the starfield. One is for the overall field, the other one provides the foreground stars. 
The naming of the parameters will be a bit different in the final versions. Also I will probably remap some values so the sliders are less tricky to use.

Metanodes are amongst the things I really love most about Vue. Extracting just the relevant parameters saves you from having to deal with the complexity of the original function tree (which is sometimes hard to see through, if it has been created by someone else).

Hello again!

I wanted to give you some news on the Vue Space Project as well as some cool discoveries.

First, I am REALLY happy with the render speed improvement of procedural terrains  in V7I 7.4. 

Now for the project itself, there have been some changes.
The more I`m working with Vue the more I tend to create the elements needed directly in Vue.
No need to mention that this way they (I am speaking of stars, nebulae, moons, planets etc) can be edited and there is no limitation when it comes to render size.

The basic concept is still the same: The starfield (and some nebulae) is projected onto a sphere. Elements like nebulae, suns, galaxies are projected onto planes, which are facing the camera.
The planets moons are now 3D object and are lit by a directional light source.
Apart from skies and sky elements I also spent quite some time experimenting with terrains, especially infinite terrains.

Now I would like to show you some renders along with some comments.

:woot: My jaw drop to floor. :thumbupboth:

Mazak

Currently I`m trying to create some decent infinite terrains ( mainly alien worlds) for use with the sky pack.

Quote - :woot: My jaw drop to floor. :thumbupboth:

Mazak

I love to hear that :-)

Fantastic work. Congratulations!

Quote - Fantastic work. Congratulations!

Thanks!

I really like that last nebula.
Those terrains look fab

Great work!

Can't wait to buy this.

Quote - I really like that last nebula.
Those terrains look fab

Glad you like those.

With  procedural fractal terrains it`s impossible to exactly control how the terrain will look like because you deal with randomness. But I do not see this as a negative aspect.

What`s important is to spend time with the function so the terrain gets its desired characteristics, and when those are defined you can explore the terrain, simply by offsetting the whole function or by exploring it with the camera.

The same applies to nebulae (funny that the same fractal nodes which work for terrains also work for nebulae or for clouds.

Quote - Great work!

Can't wait to buy this.

Thanks!

I cannot really say when it will be available. Would love to offer it right away but more testing/development needs to be done.

Also I want  to make certain that it`s easy to handle (within certain rules), while offering a great amount of flexibility, so that when an artist is using the pack he gets the chance to give the skies,/scenes his own personality/expression. 

O M G....!!! another jaw hits the floor :p
Well done mate!!! :)

ringed planet, and "testing terrain and sky" look bloody awesome! wow :)

Quote - O M G....!!! another jaw hits the floor :p
Well done mate!!! :)

ringed planet, and "testing terrain and sky" look bloody awesome! wow :)

Oh...another dropping jaw...that`s quite an acknowledgement :-)

I think I have found a viable way to solve this planet/moon contrast problem (artifact where the light reaches it`s maximum). I had almost given up on moons and planets because of this.
...then I gave it a last try. Tried to use Angle of Incident to drive the contrast...and it worked.

See comparison below.

Contrast set to 56%.

Beyond the angle where the light reaches it`s maximum you get

an unnaturally overexposed texture.

This is best visible when using a simple color with no bumps.

Sphere B:
 

Here the contrast is driven by "Angle of Incidence". What it does is provide you with a relatively sharp contrast around the terminator while getting smoother near the 

edge of the sphere.

Of course additional nodes can be added to the function for finetuning.

This function is not needed in any case but it`s useful for moons/planets with a sharp terminator.

 Stunning work! Can't wait to see more. Very impressive :-)

 Hey thanks, Chipp!

Things I learned from you and some other experts here made my Vue life a lot easier :-)

Vue, despite some bugs, is a phenomenal app.

Quote -  
Vue, despite some bugs, is a phenomenal app.

nods vigorously!! :)

If you strive for realism, don't go overboard with contrast in gas giant atmospheres.

The pictures people see are the result of image processing which enhances sharply the contrast.

If you have a look through a amateur telescope at Jupiter, you might have troubles even detecting the Red Spot (for a real example, see http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ExHaVZIeiwo). The images you uploaded look right as they are now.

Bye!!!

Quote - If you strive for realism, don't go overboard with contrast in gas giant atmospheres.

The pictures people see are the result of image processing which enhances sharply the contrast.

If you have a look through a amateur telescope at Jupiter, you might have troubles even detecting the Red Spot (for a real example, see http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ExHaVZIeiwo). The images you uploaded look right as they are now.

Thanks for the hint.

Well, its certainly true that Jupiter, seen through an amateur telescope (and the earths atmosphere) will always appear blurry and wont reveal a lot of detail. Hubble shots show a lot more detail because the telecope is  more powerful and it is located outside of the earths athmosphere.

To pick up the example of the gas giant. What you see on the picture I posted is generated by a Metanode with some parameters extracted.
If anyone finds there are too many details he simply decreases the contrast parameter slider.
If he wants to change the hue, the tweaks the hue offset slider. 
As simple as that.

I am heading for realism to a certain degree. Maybe credibility is a better word. I want some elements to be credible enough to create an illusion. 
However realism for the sake of realism is not my thing.
In the context of art, realism is just an asset. Something which artists can use to give their art the appearance of being real.