View Full Version : Quick Pre Verbalization - Space Explosion
This is a quick Previz i tried for a Space explosion concept.Critics welcome..Thanks a lot :)
High Resolution (http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-v-GB_c1_4xQ/T4RTL_VvdsI/AAAAAAAAANA/cUp0ze09ln0/s1600/Explore.jpg)
Hi ! As i'm learning everyday new..I 've updated and changed the composition.Please give some advice how to improved more .Thanks for your time :)
Updated Render : (http://1.bp.blogspot.com/--f9gVpsl_BM/T4WLkGVpQFI/AAAAAAAAANY/FfoQIs-qrLg/s1600/Explore.jpg)
04-11-2012, 10:33 PM
It's not bad... but where do you want your viewer's eye to go? What do you want to concentrate on? As of now you can't really decide between the ship or the explosion.
If you want to focus on the ship, make it larger in the frame. Push the composition more. As of now it's still a bit bland with no point of interest.
Thanks a lot Kelly ,I got the point now.Well, yes totally understand now that the point of interest is not working.I think i should keep the ship a lot more darken and smaller to blend with the background more, because the subject is the explosion.Thanks again.:)
Hi! I just made a quick change in composition.Hopefully this is better now in-order to read the subject.Thanks viewers. :)
Updated Render: (http://http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-crLPUyh3BaY/T4YBZyhP0iI/AAAAAAAAANk/Bn3SjpU8xxA/s1600/Explore.jpg)
04-11-2012, 11:41 PM
Was that an asteroid that blew up?
The explosion looks strange in that you have a couple of things going on that don’t contribute to an overall effect. You have motion blur on the side spray blasts. Then you have those sharp focused rocks that, in contrast to the motion blurred parts, look like they are floating statically and are not part of the explosion.
What is that thing in the upper right, streaking into the picture?
Your space plane(?) looks too similar to a conventional airplane, a Lear jet to be specific. It even has the rear mounted turbojets. Turbojets running in the vacuum of space?
Hi! man..Thanks for your reply and thoughts..Yeah even i also thought about those points before.But,I wanted to create something unusual.
Well, the explosion looks strange because that's a gigantic supernova explosion.It tends to explode massively with awkward volume.
Yeah i totally agree with the stones motion blur issue.But I intentionally kept it like that.
That's the jet designed to carry four passengers into space. EADS Astrium space jet by Marc Newson,2007
That's a "Falling star" top right heading towards the explosion.I used that to make viewer's eye to flow in frame.so, that direction will never go out of the frame.
Yes I'm learning!! Thanks for your time and critics :)
04-12-2012, 06:34 PM
Ah, the Astrium. What’s a suborbital vehicle like that doing in what appears to be deep space?
The blast doesn’t present like a supernova blast if those rocks are supposed to be a part of it. Nothing from that blast would be near that plane. At that distance scale, an exploding star would be a very slow process as the shockwave travels around 10% the speed of light. At the viewer’s distance you certainly wouldn’t capture motion blur, unless your camera shutter speed was set to days or weeks instead of minutes. The fleeing space plane has nothing to worry about for a while, or if ever, depending on the blast stage. That thing could have the radius of the solar system already.
Right now the plane looks a bit too soft. It needs some bright highlights from the luminous explosion as well.
If the ‘shooting star’ is actually a meteoroid or asteroid it wouldn’t be glowing/burning as it travels through the vacuum of space. It needs atmospheric friction to burn up a glow. Nothing about this scene suggests the plane or ‘shooting star’ are near a planets atmosphere, let alone a planet.
04-13-2012, 07:07 AM
Compositionally, if you want the spaceship's contour to read more clearly, I suggest you actually overlap part of the bright explosion with the spaceship, which will create a strong silhouette for the spaceship, as well as increase the illusion of dimensional space in your scene.
Thanks Robert & Bill,
Yes i totally understand the fact.Thanks for your suggestions and i will keep those things in mind and start my next concept.You guys are awesome!! ..thanks again :)
Regarding the 'Shooting Stars'..I'm doing more study and found some information regarding the three stages.Those are meteoroid, meteor and meteorite.
A meteoroid is a sand- to boulder-sized particle of debris in the Solar System. The visible path of a meteoroid that enters Earth's (or another body's) atmosphere is called a meteor, or colloquially a shooting star or falling star. If a meteoroid reaches the ground and survives impact, then it is called a meteorite. Many meteors appearing seconds or minutes apart are called a meteor shower. The root word meteor comes from the Greek meteo¯ros, meaning "high in the air".
04-13-2012, 11:46 AM
This thread has been automatically closed as it remained inactive for 12 months. If you wish to continue the discussion, please create a new thread in the appropriate forum.
vBulletin v3.0.5, Copyright ©2000-2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.