View Full Version : My 3D effort

02-15-2002, 08:10 AM
Well, this was my first visit to this site and I spent ages looking through all the excellent images - truly amazing work here. Almost embarassed to post this but what the heck.

I don't work in the business (graphic arts, that is) but have long dabbled in computer 3D work and my real love is Photoshop.

Comments appreciated.

The title is "Getting a Jump on Summer"


02-15-2002, 10:17 AM
Well don't be embarassed. I like the character's pose, the whole thing has a dynamic feel to it. I've got a couple crits for ya, if you want 'em. First of all, it looks like you might have run into some problems using a bump map for the ground. Along the edge of the wall it looks like you touched up by adding some snow after the render so that you didn't have a hard sharp line. It looks a little fuzzy. Bump maps in general can be dangerous when they get to the point that they are trying to make up for missing geometry. I don't know what software you are using, but if you can use a displacement map instead, that might be an option. It is a nice looking texture, though. The other things that seem strange, there is what looks to be like a bright light source in the background, but it isn't really apparent in the way you lit the scene. Another little nitpick--if you are going to have motion blur on the ball, you need it on the ball's shadow, too. And finally, lense flare = blah. Good job, though. What software are you using by the way?

02-15-2002, 03:47 PM
...i love that snow on the ground ! Is this only textured or modelled ?!
The whole scene has a nice athmo - the only thing that needs some work-over is the character: face, arms clothes ! These three parts should be retouched and it will push the whole image a bit closer to reality ;)

And maybe you can slide down the lens-flare a bit (just my opinion)

Keep up the work !

02-15-2002, 06:10 PM
Good work!
Scene compostion is kind hazzardous but I believe u can fix that.

02-16-2002, 05:14 AM
Thanks for the replies, people. The critique helps if even to just point out that other people can see the "errors" I knew existed.

Gilgamesh: The snow was touched up. I don't know how to use displacement maps so maybe I should make the snow up against the wall harder edged as the rest of it is... The bright light source in the background is the sun reflected off the windows of the building and the lighting on the boy is the direct light from the sun... The lens flare thing; I know that it has tended to be over-used somewhat by many people but as a former photographer I know that if this were a real photograph then there would most certainly be a lens flare in this position - bit of a quandry then was faced by me as to whether or not to put it there... Motion in the ball's shadow? Hmmm, I debated that and didn't really convice myself that there should be one. It is, after all, more of a blur caused by rotation of the ball. Not sure on this one... Software: Poser 3, Vue d'Esprit 2, and Photoshop 6.

BASSit: The snow is textured although from the above you can see that maybe it should be modelled :( Character work-over; if you'd seen my original model you'd see the work I did on it, ha ha. It was a solid one color imported to Vue d'Esprit from poser then retouched in Photoshop. Granted, though it could use more work, I guess... Lens flare: See above.

Raul-Reznek: Scene composition hazardous? Not quite sure what you mean other than perhaps Gilgamesh's comment re lighting since it may not have been apparent to him where the light source actually was.

Thanks to everyone.

02-16-2002, 07:55 AM
Ah, yes. The sun reflection makes sense now. As for the ball's motion blur, it seems to be more blurred on the bottom edge than anywhere else, so I get a sense that it is travelling up. I don't think that blurring the shadow is all that important, but I thought I might as well point it out. About the lense flare, I think one of the problems with the computer generated ones is that they look really sharp and clear and colorful and bold, and more often than not they just distract from what is going on in the scene. Compositionally, it seems like they rarely compliment the modelling and the lighting and the feeling of the scene. Anyone can press the "lense flare button," but not everyone can model a scene like this. I am not saying that it wont help the composition of your scene. (all of this is just the opinion of a lowly student) The glow is rather necessary to show that there is a light source. But maybe if you tried to customize the secondaries or made them more subtle, it would fit better. I have another suggestion, too, about the reflection. I don't know if it is possible, but it would be a neat effect if you faked a caustic from the reflection off the windows. That would definately help suggest that we are actually seeing the reflection of the sun. Hope that was helpful. And entertaining.

02-16-2002, 08:39 AM
Gilgamesh: Thanks for the additional comments. A caustic from the windows, eh? I should have thought of that at the time of modelling; would have made it a lot simpler now since I could have just put in a secondary light source to simulate the reflection of the sun off the windows. Too late now and I don't want to fake it with a cr***y retouch in Photoshop.

So you're a "lowly student"? Of computer graphics? If so I envy you. None of this was available when I was in school and it is what I love to "mess about with"

02-16-2002, 02:49 PM
Well unfortunately my school doesn't have much in the way of computer graphics. I take the classes that I can, and try to learn as much as possible on my own.

CGTalk Moderation
01-13-2006, 01:00 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.