PDA

View Full Version : Harrier Comp

fxthemind
10-20-2002, 06:51 PM
here is my Harrier all finished and composited into a live action background of the Vancouver airport. I tracked the shot in Maya and exported the camera motion into XSI so I could render light animate and all that other fun stuff, then Comped it in Combustion, to mach the CG to the live action. that should sum it all up.

what ya think?
NemesisFIN
10-20-2002, 07:16 PM
Sweet!!!!! :beer:
Tumerboy
10-20-2002, 07:38 PM
nicely done, give us more angles, and closer, I want Details damn it!
stephen2002
10-20-2002, 08:29 PM
looks very good. I wouldn't say it was CG if I saw it by itself.
stephen2002
10-20-2002, 08:36 PM
looks very good. I wouldn't say it was CG if I saw it by itself.
PureFire
10-21-2002, 03:33 AM
kewl...great work...excellent model...but the lighting to me makes it look cg....sorta reminds me of thunderbirds
Kyser_Sosai
10-21-2002, 06:42 AM
Nice model...

The missles are a bit to shiny, it would be nice to darker shadows under the wings.
fxthemind
10-21-2002, 08:06 AM
well the Missile is White so there is not much I can do to make it less shiny, I am using a lambert shader on it and all.

as for the lighting, any tips to make it less CG and more photo real I kinda lost my lighting knowlage after school ended a year and then some ago so if you have any tips to light it better I would be more than grateful.

thanks for the input and glad you like it I will try and get some other angles renderd out when I get some time.
STRAT
10-21-2002, 08:18 AM
i think the model and the backround just dont match. it looks like an Airfix model suspended infront of a postcard.

the constrast, lighting, bluryness/sharoness etc all need equalising to make it realistic.

the harrier model could do with some shape tweeking too.
Mylenium
10-21-2002, 09:00 AM
Hi there,

Well, with all respect, by far this doesn't look like any Harrier that ever has been flying. I think it is supposed to be an GR. 5 but it's really a wild guess. Any efforts you make the shading look "real" will be blown away by the model.
aazimkhan
10-21-2002, 10:31 PM
nice comp....good shadows....just need a lil motion blur on the jet...
piajartist
10-22-2002, 05:42 AM
Do you have a wireframe? If so post is to our liking.
fxthemind
10-22-2002, 05:07 PM
here are some wireframe shots of the harrier
fxthemind
10-22-2002, 05:12 PM
another
fxthemind
10-22-2002, 05:17 PM
and another
HapZungLam
10-22-2002, 07:12 PM
that's looks simple on the wire frame.

when i read your first post and open up the image that you did, i was going to ask you : hey , dude, don't tell me it is a CG?

then i look at the wire frames. it was :eek: :eek: . can i look at your textures as well. it must be fantastic....

:thumbsup: :thumbsup:
Dj Petro
10-22-2002, 07:56 PM
You need some heat refraction between the aircraft and the ground. In your picture you have the background between the aircraft and the ground as clear as any other spot and I don't think it would look that way. Great Job!
vbstudios
10-22-2002, 08:08 PM
nice one...
fxthemind
10-23-2002, 09:02 AM
well there is heat dispacement in the photo but it is a lot more visable in the movie because the dispacement is moving, it is very subtle in the photo as you can see.
T0BER
10-23-2002, 09:18 AM
So there is an animation? I would be interested in seeing it move.

As far as the compositing goes I agree that the shadows from the wing should be a bit darker and the one on the ground should maybe be a bit lighter given the overcast conditions. Difficult to tell though.

Overall a good job. :)
typeA
10-25-2002, 05:49 AM
looks realy nice man
:thumbsup: :buttrock:
fxthemind
10-28-2002, 10:57 AM
Well here is the animation of the harrier taking off.
I hope it works.

http://www.geocities.com/cp_studios/HarrierMovie.rm
fxthemind
10-28-2002, 10:59 AM
PS...
Right click and save movie. otherwise it wont download properly

thanks
Tumerboy
10-28-2002, 01:26 PM
tain't workin for me.

Btw, I just took another glance at the still though, and I think (one thing) that's throwing your Photorealism off is the DOF. You have too little Depth of Field. When you have that little DOF, it makes your model look small, like, well. . . a model.

If the camera was that far away from the plane, then the background would be much clearer as well.

Anyway, I'm looking forward to the animation.
H3X4D3CiM4L
10-28-2002, 03:02 PM
i'm no expert but does a VTOL craft reallyreally rise that steadily? in your animation it's parallel to the ground all the way...
Skyraider3D
10-28-2002, 03:03 PM
It does look rather photorealistic, but not real. The Harrier model is inaccurate in shape (stretched/squashed), and somehow it appeals to me as if you photographed a plastic scale model on a rope... A pilot would be nice too ;)
Perhaps change your camera angle so the plane appears to be bigger and thus loses its toy-like feeling.
Kaz
10-28-2002, 03:15 PM
Looks good.. but i'd suggest adding dust & the illusion of wind. I mean, to get that plane off the ground there has to be a lot of force. Right now its just too clean to look realistic.
MikaelPersson
10-28-2002, 09:42 PM
With a little post production work it would look really good. Right now itīs a CG model pasted onto a grainy background.
If you were to add the same amount of grain onto your plane and blur it. You would have a lot better match.
Right now itīs to bright, the light in the background is a lot softer compared to your plane.
Not forgetting the colour correction. Your plane is blue, the background is green. Just tiny adjustments would do the trick.

These things are not that obvious in the animation, but it screams in that pic you posted.

Hope these insights will help you towards perfecting your skills.

:wavey:
facial
10-29-2002, 12:33 AM
Well done, well done. :thumbsup:
fxthemind
10-30-2002, 07:22 AM
all right I did some tweeking in Combustion to get the harrier a better match hopfully I am closer to the compleation of the shot.

I colour corected, blured, distorted, tinted, etc... but it is all the fine tuning that is the key. after starring at this shot for so long its hard for me to see if I have improved the shot or sucked away hours of work by bad judgment. any recomendations on the colour corection, etc.

thers only one way to find out good ol' fasion critz.

PS. youd be surprized how stable the harrier is at taking off.
and the harrier was but to scale from blurprints and a handy dandy plastic scale model as well for the shape of things. I just gata point that out.

with all said. lets here what you guys have to say.
doggjaww
10-30-2002, 07:53 AM
it looks great.. one small item i noticed in the animation, the light source appears close to the jet... as the jet rises, the shadow treks accross the ground, giving away that the light source is close to the ground.. otherwise, i'm thinking your scence is complete... :beer:
STRAT
10-30-2002, 08:19 AM
i think the model and the backround just dont match. it still looks like an Airfix model infront of a postcard. the DOF's are wrong. and as Ronnie pointed out - a pilot???
MikaelPersson
10-30-2002, 09:53 AM
Much better. The colours are quite ok now. But the airplane is still too sharp compared to your backdrop. You need to destroy the image of the harrier more. Larger grain flakes, little more blur.

The real problem I think is the qualtity of your backdrop. If you want a match you will have to ruin your render so much as to achieve VHS quality.

You need to adjust the light somewhat in the render. Right now the shadows look way to black compared to the lighting conditions judged by the background.

Lessen the contrast in the harrier too, it is to much CG right now.

Hope this will help. Good Luck.

:wavey:
Tumerboy
10-30-2002, 01:36 PM
I'm with strat, and that's what I've been saying, your DOF is messed up,

the background would be nearly as sharp as the plane. I don' tknow if you purposely blurred it, or if that's the way the photo came, but I would either use the original if you changed it, or find a new one which isn't as blurred, or if you like everything, then move your camera in and give it a reason to have that little DOF.
Skyraider3D
10-30-2002, 11:54 PM
STRAT you welsh sheepman, who is this Ronnie you're talking about? ;)


fxthemind, you will only get such a strong depth-of-field effect in the distance if you use a very strong telezoom on a reasonably nearby object. In this case your background is wide angle and your object is not that near. In other words, everything behind the plane should be fairly sharp.
BiTMAP
10-31-2002, 12:16 AM
well the actual movie shot is much too still, you need the whole scene to feel alive and moving, have the camera shaking and such, as well as the plane is way to steady and doesn't feel like there is any air acting on it, you need to have an extreamly (as in over exagerated) visible jet trail from the nozzels into the ground blowing up dust and the likes, have something infront of the plane as well perhaps some landing crews moving about.
just give it more depth
as well as the lighting and quality diffrences people talked about.
CGTalk Moderation
01-13-2006, 07:00 PM
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.