Nice work!

I do think this image is more realistic than the first one. I think you're right in saying there's not enough light in the scene to show up much.

I haven't done much 3d compositing like this but I've done a bit of 2d work. Little things like the direction of the shadows (a difference of 10 degrees will stand out) or the position of a highlight in comparison to other things in the scene determine whether an image is real. In compositing 2d images even getting the quality of the light to match for the two images is important in making the final image believable. Many people wouldn't be able to tell you what's wrong with a scene but their experience of the real world will let them understand intuitively when there are mistakes.

Of course if you are creating an art work this is of lesser importance and you use what you need to produce your final effect. However, you did say you wanted to achieve realism, and I think that's much harder.

Fran,

If you haven't already, take a look at this thread

http://www.renderosity.com/mod/forumpro/showthread.php?thread_id=2658298

There's lots of links on where to find good tutorials and info on the interface. In particular, I found this link to a PDF Blender course most useful.

http://www.cdschools.org/54223045235521/blank/browse.asp?A=383&BMDRN=2000&BCOB=0&C=55205

I could print it out and then use the programme. Doesn't show how to model, but how to use blender to model.

 

I think there's a problem with the direction of the area light shining "through" the right hand window. Note in the photo the light (and shadows) from that window are parallel to those from the other window. You have the light at near right angles to the left one. This makes the highlight and shadows of the sphere different to the rest of the room. Hence it's not believable.

Nice first try though, scale and position seem OK to me.

Have a look in the Backroom in the banner at the top of this page!!

Thanks, an interesting concept for the structure. What about the light? (I'm using C1.1 - see comment on budgets earlier) Do you think a series of bulbs or DCG's tube lights would be a better go. I can see lots of playing around with this one

Attached Link: http://www.planit3d.com

You can also check the attached link. They have some nice models and textures.

Have a look in the Carrara/Raydream Backroom

Attached Link: http://www.nme.de/CGI-SHL/NME/VIEWPIC.CFM?ID=717

Hi macaddict! I'm assuming you read litst's ideas for a wake on water in the ealier post (30 October 2001). You can animate that wake by changing the coordinates of the rectangular layer in the bump channel. It's very tricky to get right. Another way is to make a wake object, small plane or rectangular prism with the wake waves either as geometry (again difficult to model) or as a bump map as per litst's ideas. This object should have the same water shader as your ocean. Moving the wake object gives you the animation From your comment I take it you are talking of an aircraft or ship flying close to the water. Have a look at the picture of the low flying B1 bomber at the link. Looks like you'll need to animate som particle systems as well. Have fun.

My understanding of frame rates is as follows NTSC video 29.97 fps (close enough to 30) PAL video 25fps Film (as in movies) 24fps Hope this helps

I've noticed changes in colour from my posted images in the last couple of contests as well. The JPEG's look OK on my machine (a Windows box) but are darker with less contrast when viewed from the web. Anybody know why is it so? Is it a Mac/Windows issue? PS Nice model!

Thanks guys. It seems form your comments the duals are the way to go. Brenthomer, I had already planned on a dual monitor setup as well!! Now if only C2 makes full use of SMP!! Bye

Thanks litst! The water tutorial and your solution are very impressive! Not sure I understand the ins and outs of your explanation but I'll get there by playing around with it. Thanks again.