Who ate Nessy 2 by JesterCGI

Lightwave • (none) • posted on Apr 28, 2001

Open full image in new tab Zoom on image

Hover over top left image to zoom.
Click anywhere to exit.

Members remain the original copyright holder in all their materials here at Renderosity. Use of any of their material inconsistent with the terms and conditions set forth is prohibited and is considered an infringement of the copyrights of the respective holders unless specially stated otherwise.

Description

Main Creature from upcoming release of "Beneath Loch Ness" People say that I never post anything... Well, here's my second. Enjoy

Comments (15)

pawdk

12:27PM | Sat, 28 April 2001

Think I'm gonna wet my bed tonight... :) Awesome loch beast... :)

chromecafe

1:09PM | Sat, 28 April 2001

Very cool dont go fishing boys and girls (all hum the jaws theme)

Curio

2:30PM | Sat, 28 April 2001

Excellent modelling and texture!

RadArt

5:44PM | Sat, 28 April 2001

cool monster! ;-)

nick2k

6:14PM | Sat, 28 April 2001

Argghhhhhhhhhhh big scary monster thing noooooooooooooooooooo its trying to eat me, huh what do you mean its not real? ;) Great work. one thing bugs me just a little whats up with the background gradient being so blocky?

Narkro

6:49PM | Sat, 28 April 2001

"gulp"

pnevai

7:52PM | Sat, 28 April 2001

Kill the specular highlights. It does not exist underwater. The dispersal qualities of water and light refraction. kills almost all specular highlights from al ut the most reflective objects. Go to a local aquarium and check out the UW critters. You will find no specularity in natural organisms, especially UW. Even Alligators, seals and penguins that can appear shiny out of the water loose all specularity when UW. I know it kils much of the texture detail but thats life.

JesterCGI

9:09PM | Sat, 28 April 2001

Your right. And that's true in the real world, but NOT in Hollywood. Here, whatever looks best is whet goes on screen. On this one in particular, the director actually said, "It's not shiny like the dinosaurs in the museum. Can you fix that?" Thanks though.

KiDAcE

9:59PM | Sat, 28 April 2001

I think it's pretty much perfect. Like you said it "kills almost all specular highlights" well I don't see anything shining. If you were down there to see this thing you'd have to have a light of some sort, no? Also it depends on how deep in the water you are...it's not named creature of the deep...or something. Only thing that keeps it from being perfect is gradient. Still 10 for realism.

JesterCGI

10:06PM | Sat, 28 April 2001

Thanks! Everything under water for the movie was shot on Mini DV then blown up to film res. It caused this horrid gradient. We couldn't see it when projected, so we try to ignore it. (BTW, this is only under about 3 feet of water in Lake Castiac, just north of LA.)

snipey

12:55PM | Sun, 29 April 2001

cool stuff, nice textures on the beast :)

)