Bad to the Bone

[dandavis]

Heh heh, fun stuff. I think the motion blur is throwing this render off. I couldn't put my finger on what I didn't like about it until now and I think it's the blur. Looks like Photoshop work (which isn't a bad thing). I'm not so hardcore that I can't be down with a little post work :thumbsup:

dano

[Emberghost]

Heh nice looking pic. My suggestion is that you blur the tires and everything behind them. There is no reason to blur in front of the tire, kinda funky, but it is a fully little pic :applause:

[dg3d]

about bluring only the back is making sense.

yeah really bad to the bone *music*:airguitar

[dandavis]

No, I think it makes sense to have motion blur on the wheels (at least the parts that are moving rapidly). I would use the actual motion blur in C4D though for a more realistic effect.

[miketche]

Funny you should say that Dan, this is pure C4D. Some photoshop color adjustment.:wip:

[dandavis]

HA! Goes to show you how much I've used C4D's motion blur, now, doesn't it. Sorry. I still think something's just not quite right about it.

[miketche]

@ Emberghost and dg3d - This is suposed to be motion blur, not DOF. Like he's moving really fast.

I'll try non motion blur to see if it looks better.

[dg3d]

I understand what you mean but both tires seems to have a blur like DOF. I don't know really but i new at C4D, got it only 3 days ago. but learning. Anyway its always looking except something nagging at the tire effect.

[flingster]

now that is to cool...


(would like to see a bit more widescreen at edges...same size bike placement etc...but a bit more of landscape at the edges)

post it in the gallery...or wip...v cool.

[That Adrian Guy]

Very cool

You may want to work on the lighting... maybe a stronger "main" light will help it look more realistic

[artemesia66]

funky image.

re: the motion blur: since the bike and the rider are travelling at the same speed, I think they would have to have the same blur. in your pic, the wheels are blurred but the forks, engine and the character are not. the exception i guess is the spokes, since they're turning as well as moving forward. If it's only the bike and rider that are moving, the blur would mostly be behind him, not ahead. If it's the camera that's moving, then the whole scene would be blurred except anything moving at the same speed as the camera (this is one way they do glamour shots of cars--matching the vehicle speed so the car is in focus, but the bg is blurred).

also, there doesn't seem to be much ground shadow for a sunny day.

IMHO

[JoelOtron]

I like the motion blur--it really pulls the bike forward for me. I think what it really needs is a shadow on the road directly beneath the bike to ground it a bit. It looks a bit dissociated from the road without it. Maybe some wispy "motion lines"

This might be a bad example of motion lines, but maybe just a hint of something like this:

http://www.ralphmcquarrie.com/rjart/paint/09.html

And definitely some dust and smoke being stirred up on the ground and behind the bike.

Great work!

[miketche]

First, thanks eveyone for the comments.

OK, a question on motion blur.
The camera is following the bike, therfore the ground and near background would be blurred, and the bike should be clear - the sky is too far away to receive any blur, it's not moving in front of the camera fast enough.

The tires are spinning very fast as the bike moves forward, thus they receive blur as well. Is this not how motion blur would work?

I'll also work on the shadowing and maybe add some dust effects.

(Side note): To anyone who may be interested. I did a double post of this image in both the WIP forum and here. To date, the image in the WIP forum has had one reply and is already on the seconed or third page. While here I have received over 9 replies. Go figure.

[squidinc]

Originally posted by miketche
First, thanks eveyone for the comments.

OK, a question on motion blur.
The camera is following the bike, therfore the ground and near background would be blurred, and the bike should be clear - the sky is too far away to receive any blur, it's not moving in front of the camera fast enough.

The tires are spinning very fast as the bike moves forward, thus they receive blur as well. Is this not how motion blur would work?

I'll also work on the shadowing and maybe add some dust effects.

(Side note): To anyone who may be interested. I did a double post of this image in both the WIP forum and here. To date, the image in the WIP forum has had one reply and is already on the seconed or third page. While here I have received over 9 replies. Go figure.

hehe cool, nice one Mike

I agree with you on the blur, he should be clear and wheels and background should be blurred according the direction they're going, it may be worth rendering the bike and background seperately and then stick them together in photoshop and add the blur in post work as well, at the moment it looks a little odd on the wheels because the centre of the wheels don't like they're spinning

great image so far though, very nice modelling on the bike and ogre :thumbsup:

[artemesia66]

motion blur is all about motion relative to the camera. so if the camera is moving @ the same speed as the vehicle, the wheels could have motion blur, but it would be circular, since that's the direction they're moving relative to the camera. the wheels would only have lateral blur if the whole vehicle did too. also, motion blur is fake in 3d--it's an artifact of shutter speed in traditional cameras when an object moves while the shutter is open, so if your shutter speed was fast enough, even the wheels wouldn't be blurry--but you don't want to hear that: what we're looking for here is coolness, not crispness ;)

i've attached a pic that shows what i mean.

[JIII]

that motion blur looks a little funky dude, like everyone has said play with it a bit.

and if you could make it look like the pic that was just attached that would be uber cool.

[miketche]

Ok, I've done away with the motion blur entirely. More of a beauty shot than an action shot now. (I guess) Couldn't get it to work right.

Let me know if this is better or worse.

http://home.flash.net/~miketche/wips/ogre_harley2.jpg

[AdamT]

I think you could use the motion blur, but you'd have to have some on bike and ogre as well. If the camera lens was fast enough to freeze the bike it would also be fast enough that you wouldn't get so much blur on the wheels and tires. So I think to make it look realistic you should animate the thing moving forward and the tires spinning accordingly and then render out enough frames to get some scene motion blur.

[dandavis]

I think the chrome on the front wheel is too reflective, it needs some dirt or bump. My eye keeps going there and it's a bit confusing (for me anyway). I like the beauty shot.

[AdamT]

Yep, and the brakes should have some radial anisotropic action. And some cross-drilling! And a subtle bump on all the shiny bits. And and and bedtime.

[miketche]

Ok, here's the latest. I had been using object motion blur, but now I'm using scene motion blur. I think this looks a lot more realistic.

http://home.flash.net/~miketche/wips/ogre_harley3.jpg

[AdamT]

Much much much better!! Object motion blur sux.

[artemesia66]

Yeah, looks *much* better.

[Halogen]

That looks so cool, even the reflections are blurred. Great job :thumbsup:

[JIII]

Talk about improvments, whoa that is nice looking.

however I do agree with the previous statement about the chrome.

[CGTalk Moderation]

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.