Jonj1611 opened this issue on Jun 23, 2009 · 23 posts
Rutra posted Tue, 23 June 2009 at 7:17 PM
Your river does seem wide, like Bruno said, but there are really wide rivers in nature, much wider than 18 meters, so I wouldn't say your river is necessarily wrong.
There's nothing like looking at the real thing. Did you do that? If I'm after realism, I always do a research before. I look at reality around me and I look at lots of photos. I found these ones:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/stephengg/2972470054/sizes/l/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/apailthorp/17838631/sizes/l/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/gee_bee/2791463628/sizes/o/
Comparing these photos with your images, I'd say:
a) Your image has very little haze. Either increase the haze percentage or increase the aerial perspective.
b) The grass and river margin are too smooth and uniform, with no details. Details are important to give the notion of scale and realism. There should be bushes, areas without grass, etc.
c) Your trees end too soon. There's no background, only foreground and midground. To give a sense of scale, the trees should fade away in the distance.
Not regarding scale but rather realism only:
Just my two cents. :-)