I rather like the blue mist, but I have 2 versions one with more mist than the other.

Any thoughts anyone?

Here's the first, more misty one:

Is this one better?

the first seems better..because the ships are also in the haze..if you prefer the ships out of the haze then I think you need to make the mist look more like it is blanketing the city.Maybe get it closer and thicker to the ground and graduate it more so it goes from thick to thin.

ok, here's an idea..

How about.. you render the city once with the great amount of myst. and render the ships once with less. then use masks to combine.

If you want to keep more sense of depth and shape within the mysty area's you could also make a grey render of the city without any mist, kinda like a GI-render. Maybe a nice hdri could help for that. Then overlay the gi-render in blender or photoshop or paintshop or whatever u use. The GI-shadows will give extra definition to the shapes in your render which would otherwise be significantly less tactile looking due to the amounts of mist.

--
Ray

**Incognitas,
Mist from thick to thin - graduate, okay can do.

Rayraz,**

"If you want to keep more sense of depth and shape within the mysty area's you could also make a grey render of the city without any mist, kinda like a GI-render. Maybe a nice hdri could help for that."

Grey?  What, turn off all the textures in the city and replace them with a flat grey material???

What sort of HDRI would I need for that?

When you say overlay in PhotoShop, you mean paste that grey image into a new layer on top of the original and then reduce the grey one's opacity?  Yes?  No??

nice concept, i like seeing cityscapes develop (am i to blame for this one?) have you used mirrors? hahah. 
i use mist to hide the extents of the city, making it seem it stretches further, awaiting further developments.

Quote - nice concept, i like seeing cityscapes develop (am i to blame for this one?) have you used mirrors? hahah. 
i use mist to hide the extents of the city, making it seem it stretches further, awaiting further developments.

Mirrors?  Why would you be to blame?

If you want some blame, I'm sure I can find you some... gg

I was creating this about a year ago, when my car got broken into, I have now lost all the original wings models - barring one which DvLenk6 has just gone to immense trouble to fix for me, and I'm so very grateful to him for that.

Unfortunately all the rest of the models are I fear too big to sort out in that way.  (or too complex I expect) So they are permanently locked inside Bryce.  So I thought I may as well do a render with them as there's not much else I can do, I can't go back and refine the models anymore (apart from the DvLenk6 fixed one). So there we are.

I am however creating a new city block, hopefully with a nice dome in it.

I would like to refine my method of creating the floor - or ground surface of these blocks.  I'm not really happy with the... well, squareness of the edges.  I want them to be more random than that.

That, I'm working on.

Bryce atmospheres are very dependant on scene size (dimension). The density of the fog is based entirely on unit size, if the scene's objects cover more units, then there can be a greater difference in 'fogginess', depending on how close the objects are to the camera.
If you select everything, group it, and scale it up to larger size, then the atmosphere can have more depth. The near objects can be barely fogged out, but the far away objects can still be heavily enshrouded.
Don't worry about grouping, Bryce does sub grouping very well.

EDIT - Put the camera in the group before rescaling. Saves you from having to move it.

He he, critique is a strange thing, everyone becomes an expert  suddenly LoL!

dhama,

It's great isn't it?  I love it, you get all these lovely opinions and all this great advice - there's no place like it.

DvLenk6,

I presume that applies to haze as well.  I don't often use fog or haze and I've set my default scene to load up without either.

Camera... Hmmm. I mostly use the director view not the camera, it's so much easier to control.

I'll give it a go. 

I was also experimenting with a more distant view, - but unfortunately this showed up the square nature of my city blocks, which is my next job on the 'to do' list, make un-square city blocks for the exterior city limits.

I didn't think to try something closer to the camera/view, I must try that too, thanks for the tip.

Quote - Grey?  What, turn off all the textures in the city and replace them with a flat grey material???

Yup :-)

Quote - What sort of HDRI would I need for that?

Whatever gives you nice lighting :) but probably something that sort of matches the colors of your scene.

Quote - When you say overlay in PhotoShop, you mean paste that grey image into a new layer on top of the original and then reduce the grey one's opacity?  Yes?  No??

Adding it into a new layer on top, then setting the new layer to "overlay" or "multiply" its a bit of tweaking to see which will get the nicest looking results. Keep in mind, in multiply mode, anything darker then pure white will darken your image. While with overlay, anything darker then 50% grey will darken your image and anything brighter then 50% grey will brighten your image.

If you have a photoshop version that supports layer grouping, you could use the following layer setup to control the effect even better:

• Bottom layer is your main render
• Above the main render, you place a layer group, use the groups blending mode on overlay, or multiply.
• Inside this group you put:
     * the greyscale render, set to normal blending mode.
     * a levels adjustment layer on top of the greyscale render, also set to normal blending mode

Now you can use the level adjustment layer to adjust the white balance of your greyscale render, without 'damaging' the actual greyscale layer itself (meaning you can tweak it over and over without losing quality) and use the groups blending settings to blend the entire group as if it were just one layer.

hope that helps

Right, I'm going to have to follow all that very carefully.  I'll get back to you after I've had some time to go through this.