BUZZ LIFE, Andrea Bertaccini (3D)

Become a member of the CGSociety

Connect, Share, and Learn with our Large Growing CG Art Community. It's Free!

THREAD CLOSED
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  03 March 2006
Smile

Originally Posted by roqsteady: how did you do this id like to see a wire frame my self this is amazing


I post the wireframe, you can find it in the first page.
 
  03 March 2006
Originally Posted by Disney: I know this is very popular and everyone is 'WOWing' over it but there are some things very wrong with this image. I also appretiate that you have worked from the original magazine cover so I guess this isn't a secifiic crit about your work, more so on the image as a whole (including the original).....

I had heard people saying that the moon landings were faked but never listened and never really looked at the pictures until this one, but if the other original shots show similar discrepencies, then no wonder there is a conspiracy thoery.


Eeze up Disney! Are you criting the CG image or Neil Armstrong's bad photography. I'm sure he'd scoot off for a reshoot, but for the fact the guy is pushing 75.



Great job Andreai!!! You've blown us away again. Brilliant work.
__________________
For Editor and features writer, CGSociety; Global Artist Liaison, Ballistic Publishing. Freelance writer, media consultant & digital producer.
 
  03 March 2006
Smile Answer

Originally Posted by hmedia: Eeze up Disney! Are you criting the CG image or Neil Armstrong's bad photography. I'm sure he'd scoot off for a reshoot, but for the fact the guy is pushing 75.



Great job Andreai!!! You've blown us away again. Brilliant work.



Thanks Paul for your answer to Disney, but I have not answered because it did not seem me the place where to discuss of the reality of the mission Apollo, the mine it was only a reproduction based on collected elements, I’m not place the problem if these elements were true or not.
 
  03 March 2006
it's great to see what it is possible to make, when one thinks there's little one can do (in 3d) - thank you!!
 
  03 March 2006
Thumbs up

Hahahaha! it was a good laugh. Great work! 5 points.
 
  03 March 2006
Simply blew me (and my collegues) away!
__________________
3D - World of the dreamer.




 
  03 March 2006
Hi, Sorry, I didn't mean to rain on anyone's parade or try to spark some debate over weather they actually went or not. I guess my point was I've never really looked at photo's taken from the Apollo missions until this one, I know its a re-creation, and I appretiate it came from an original image but after casting a critical 'CG' eye over the piece (original and this new one) I never realised how many discrepancies there were.

I guess I can see both sides of the argument for and against the conspiracy thoery, though I suppose we'll all just have to waint until we can get up there our selves for a couple hundred bucks each and take look around!

Nice Job Man.
__________________
Disney
www.timothydisney.cjb.net
 
  03 March 2006
Talking Great job!!

Amazing what close to reality we can get to.
abit annoying that the model is too clean comparing to the real image.. but still, outstanding job !
5 stars !
 
  03 March 2006
so cool

very good!well done!
__________________
Give me a chance,I want fly!
 
  03 March 2006
this is an outsanding piece of work
__________________
Monologue
Mr.T Prodz
 
  03 March 2006
Thumbs up Great work guys!

Realism is the key word for this effort and I must say, you know your onions! I don't think anything can be better than this representation! The env maps and reflections are spot on not to mention the modelling of the space suit itself! Five!
 
  03 March 2006
Originally Posted by Disney: I have sat looking at the image for a little while now and im strugling to work out who or what took the photo. As far as I can make out there is nothing in the reflection of the visor at the right angle or distance to take the image.


Look more closely at the reflection in the visor. You see the other Astronaut dead in the center? Appears to be holding something directly in front of him like, perhaps, a camera?

Secondly the DOF and 'Realism of the moon surface is off compared to the astronaught, (more so I have to say in your version) making him look super imposed on the background.

Quote: Lastly what on earth (or moon! ) is going on with the lighting? The astronaught is clearly lit from the side, on the right out of shot somewhere, however the refelction shows his shadow directly in front of him.


The sunlight is coming from above, behind, and slightly to the right (from the photographers perspective) of the astronaut. Not directly from the side, or else there would be more light on his front. The shadow of the rocks in the back all go towards the photographer, and slightly to the left, as you would expect given that angle.

The shadow of the astronaut in the reflection is in-front of him, and slightly to the left, which is precisely what would be expected if the sun was behind, above, and slightly to the right.

Quote: Behind the astronaught the sky is clearly black however, there is no light source.


There is no atmosphere on the moon. The blue color of the sky during the day is a result of the refraction of the light through the atmosphere. From space the sun would simply appear to be a bright sphere in an otherwise black and empty space. Since the sun is not in the shot, all you see is the black sky.

Quote: What ever light source there is, is to the side of him, lighing the front of his suit.


Except the front of his suit is not particularly well lighted. However there is enough reflective and ambient light in order to make it visible. Look how bright the suit of the astronaut in the reflection is, since the sun is more directly shining on that side of him. Compare that to the brightness of the edges of the main astronauts suit, where the sun is once again hitting more directly.
 
  03 March 2006
Both sides?

Disney wrote: "I guess I can see both sides of the argument for and against the conspiracy theory." You have got to be kidding. Conspiracies are only kept alive by desperate writers trying to sell lame books... and the idiots who entertain them.
 
  03 March 2006
An Idoit huh!?Look, my point is this:

Purely from a CG point of view, (which is what we are here to discuss no?) the image aint right. Any artist worth his two cents can see the shadows dont line up, the lighting is wrong etc etc, if this were a preview still from some production company heading up to the art director, it wouldnt make it into the final cut until those issues were fixed. Simple as that.

Im not suggesting any thoerys as to why they are wrong, they just are. The whole point of this forum is to crit CG work along the giudes of CG criteria. Now this piece of work is good, there is no argument there, but there is also no mistaking the elements I mentioned previously, from a CG point of view, are wrong.

I know this piece has been taken almost directly from an original so i'm not saying any of these issues are unique to this CG render or the fault of the artist. However they are still there.
__________________
Disney
www.timothydisney.cjb.net
 
  03 March 2006
Smile

Quite please,

The world is beautiful because anyone can have a different point of view, anyway for all who want to see some good image about the Apollo 11 (enclosed some grate Qick time VR), must visit this site:

http://www.panoramas.dk/fullscreen3/f29.html#Apollo-11

Thanks At all
 
Thread Closed share thread



Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
CGSociety
Society of Digital Artists
www.cgsociety.org

Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2006,
Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Minimize Ads
Forum Jump
Miscellaneous

All times are GMT. The time now is 09:35 AM.


Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.