Anyone interested in pushing the limits of the Tree Lab?

I am. This images uses trees to simulate waves. It's rough, but it works, and it can get so much better. The trunk is made transparent, and the leaves are set to Misty Afternoon cloud preset. You can see all the other settings in the pic, and you'll note that I flattened the tree pretty much on its Y axis.

This could also work for star fields, for fire works, for all sorts of things.

Anyone else have any ideas? Anyone want to put heads together to push the envelope a little and see what Bryce Trees can be? If so, post 'em. This could prove to be the symmetrical lattice of the new century... well, probably not, but it could prove to be fun.

Whaddya think?

Now I could really use this. Thanks!

Cool, what a great idea, in fact I'll give ya the best idea of the week award. lol

Stephen Ray

Heh, I read the title and thought "ah, here's someone else who is trying to make a forest out of lots and lots of trees"... but no... lol, that's a pretty ingenious use for them.

Dreams are just nightmares on prozac...
Digital WasteLanD

Great use of the tree lab! :-)

excuse language....bloody brilliant!

this is a fantastic idea!! I love it, thank you!

I actually posted an image a few months ago that had something like this; the size at which I posted here it made the effect fairly invisible (it was not as central to the scene as your splash), but it shows up pretty nicely in the poster-size render. The problem: I think it was that nice water-tree that made that render take three weeks! I think this is a great idea, and I intend to get back to it, but I'd be interested in hearing from others how it affects render times.

Addendum: Of course, your tree is set to a cloud texture, while mine was water. Your mileage probably definitely varied. Perhaps I should re-render my image with a non-water texture, eh? Thanks again for your efforts in pushing the envelope!

Well, there are 8 identical trees in that render. 2 have a water texture, the other 6 have the cloud texture. And even just one tree makes render time sky rocket. But as fas as I know, you can't make splashes in the foreground without adding a ton of render time anyway. But is render time what's important, or is it the finished render? I guess that depends on the artist and the scene. For me, I don't care if it takes a month to render, I just care about my finished image.

WOO HOO! it's like a new toy! Just in time for some pics I've been working on!

I know this isn't quite on topic since it definitely doesn't push the envelope as mush as you did but... In a series of jungle images I created a couple of months ago, I used a date palm tunk with large gingko leaves to make a pretty convincing flower. Boring but it worked. :) On the topic of render time versus final image, I've discovered recently that it doesn't nescessarily depend on the artist. Sometimes it can depend on the client as well. If you are making an image for publication and you have a deadline, some sacrifices may need to be made. Just my $.02

Betty came up with an idea to invert the tree and ditch the trunk (transparency) a couple of months ago. Here's what I put up on 3dcommune a while back. Yes, you can get some interesting effects.

Right on, Eric. Nice work! It's really amazing to think of what else the tree lab might do.