Clay has a link to update QT on the page.

Clay, as usual this is fantastic work. I only found three things that I thought could use some improvement. The scene with the probe emerging from the fog; the action seems to abrupt. The wall of the fog object is too distinct. The scene of the fighter craft w/ contrails; two things here... 1) the contrails don't curve with the path of the flight. They are always sticking straight back from the ships. I know this would be a difficult fix but it would add a ton of realism to the scene. 2) the stars can be seen through the moon in the distance. I hope these are seen as constructive comments. The amount of detail and the beauty of the scenes is something I can only hope to acheive someday. Thanks for sharing this with us.

If you need to ever remove the gel, set the material to all white. This will eliminate the hassle of having to change the gel everytime. I agree it's a pain, but at least there is a work around.

It all depends on what you want to do and how "easy" easy to use is. I tried Amapi 4.whatever and it was all right. I don't like the interface and I was thoroughly unimpressed with the mess it would make of complex booleans. But, you can get Amapi free if you know where to look. (Sorry I can't direct you). I've since switched to Rhino. It might not be the easiest to pick up, but it only took me a week of constant tinkering to get fantastic results. The best thing about Rhino is that it can do just about anything I can dream of. Heck, there are lightwave and Maya users that would rather model in Rhino. If you are looking to make some vairly complex shapes but are willing to leave much of the detail in the texture then a cheaper modelling program will likely suit. Like I said, it really depends on what you intend to use it for. Just my $.02

I usually don't way in on discussions like this, but here goes... Renderosity is a fantastic sight mostly because of the freedom of expression allowed. Yes, if nudity is present in the image, it should be labelled as such and the thumbs should not have nudity. But, I would rather be forced to take the bad with the good, then lose the good in an effort to keep out the bad. I do not endorse the two minute nude, but where does one draw the line. Composition time? Hand placement? Camera angle? Should we ban all nudity and place a fig leaf over every genital currently displayed in the renderosity gallery? The naked human form, either male or female, has been for millenia considered the epitomy of beauty. It is only a recent occurance in the grand scheme of things, that we have made to feel ashamed of our bodies. The true test of Poser software is the naked form. Those who are offended by the appearance of nudity in the gallery are offended only because the programmers and modellers got it so right. Your offense should be the highest compliment. Then again, just remember that everything you are looking at is a combination of ones and zeros. Why should you be offended by "00001101100011101000010111110101010010..." ?

Render to disk is not quicker but it will allow you to create images more then 5000 pixels in height. I discovered this method due to storm season in North Carolina. I had an image that was very heavy on the volumetrics and it was taking forever to render. I lost power four times throughout and finally managed to salvage two halves. I've invested in UPS since then. I hope I never have to use that method again. :)

There is a way, but I don't recomend it... Turn off your computer during the render. Don't shut down, turn off the power. When you reboot, the partial file will be found and created by your OS. Now, re-open Bryce, make sure the sun is not linked to view (in either stage), and flip the camera 180 degrees so that your scene is upside down. Render to disk again and when the readout reaches the proper precentage, turn off the computer again. You can then splice the two images together in a photo program. This will not always have the desired result. Many times the hues will be slightly wrong at the split and will make an obvious line but AFAIK, this is the ONLY way to salvage a render to disk.

The feet are made from point manipulation on spheres. The rest is lofted cross section curves and then point manipulation of the resulting surfaces. The biggest pain was getting the hip and shoulder joints to blend properly.

Terminal velocity is a relative term. It is the speed at which wind resistance directly opposes acceleration. The speed would depend upon atmospheric density as well as the geometry of the object in question. Terminal velocity would therefore be much greater for a rock versus a feather. This is also the reason that a skydiver can slow themselves by spreading their arms and legs or increase their velocity by pulling their arms and legs in.

Attached Link: http://www.deeptextures.demon.co.uk/B3DModel/Leafmod.htm

I stand corrected on the terrains and lattices and I thank you. I just did some experimenting w/ metaballs and it seems to be hit or miss as to whether they will accept a volume material. Preset intersteller nebula doesn't work, but the nebula does. Clay's volumetric fire works, but Luna (additive) will not render as additive. There seems to be no logic as to how metaballs will or will not accept special materials.

Volumetric materials do not apply to metaballs, terrains or lattice. I wish they did. And if I'm wrong, please tell me how. Depending on the density of the fireballs, making many into one could help. It mostly depends on the detail you'll lose. I like the way you've wrapped fire around the falling stones. The problem I find is the overlapping edges of the smoke spheres are interacting with one another and you are getting some sharp edges. The fire spheres bland pretty well.

Attached Link: http://www.renderosity.com/messages.ez?Form.ShowMessage=715421