Hi guys!
Today I had a little of free time so I painted.
It’s supposed to be sunrise above the city destroyed in the night.
It’s just a concept for future matte painting. Not sure if I’m gonna do the matte the exact same view as this concept.
I was playing with ideas right through the process. It needs changes, but I’m quite pleased to have this done at once.
I would love to hear suggestions, crits and comments.
Hope you like it!
cheers
hi pavel nice sketch so far, talking about the matte painting exposure the first buildings need a darker look , also some higher buildings in the background would help the composition as wellhaving a lot of dust with the sunset some nice volumetric light beams would hel to add drama to the image
Thanks for the suggestions, James. There is a problem with the taller buildings… unfortunatell they have all been destroyed at night…
So I was thinking that view from higher hill might help… to see whole city collapsed might be better. But a lot harder to do too…
Thanks for the light beams tip.
You’re right, the exposure is wrong.
Thanks again
cheers
I didn’t have much time today… Just made very little adjustments and replaced sky.
crits and suggestions very appreciated
bye
I painted some more details. Tried to make the city look bigger.
Thanks Jamie for the light beams tip. I think it helped.
What do you think, does it need those smokes in previous images?
Hope you like it
cheers
Hey mate, looking good as always. A few thoughts:
The tree and grass, would they still be there if everything else around was destroyed? I think you need a little more defiintion to the forground, where the grass is, i’d be temped to replace the grass, with bent steel, ash, stones, bricks etc … oh and not to forget the classic half burnt human arms sticking out with complimentary skull and bones 
It needs a few persective elements to lead the eye down the scene. Something simple like a path, road, steel fence of something.
The sky feels a little seperate to the ground, maybe if you painted over the sky in the same style as the lower half it might marry together more.
Overall great, nice colours.
I’d love to see you start using more 3d if only to setup the basic shapes for compositions, it helps me a lot with perspective.
Though i’ve just noticed in the last post there’s no smoke, which probably means the tree and grass have grown since the event itself, that probably makes sense. Nature repairing tiself so to speak.
Thumbs up
Hi David,
thanks for all the suggestions, very inspiring… I’m glad you like it.
About the foreground, I’m still not too sure. I think in the script of the Domination project there is that the final sequence is on some hill (?) maybe some park, I don’t know…
But that’s easy to change…
About the use of 3D… I don’t like 3D very much… But you are right… some boxes and stuff to help with perspective…
And no, the tree didn’t grow since the event itself…
I know, it might look strange… but anyway…
…I have prepared animated version… Still needs a lot of work though…
I hope, you guys like it. I know of some problems, but I would love if you told me some more.
cheers
Hey Kutkin, 3D can be our friend But yeah even for simple perspective setups it can be a good aid. I sometimes do this even when i don’t have any 3d in the final image, i’ll create basic layout with really simple geometry and paint over the top of them.
Looks a nice cap but i when i downloaded the clip it hanged my machine, can you save it with a different format/codec maybe?
If you’re using the forground figure then you really need the forground to be photographic, ie the grass. The background will pass well but not the grass mate.
The highlights on the figure, top of head and shoulders need to have an orangey tint i think.
Maybe drop the contrast down on the figure, look at the exposure of the shadows on the tree when compared to the figure, the figure looks a little dark maybe.
If it’s animated a little subtle smoke and moving clouds could add a lot of depth.
What’s this Domination project?
Over all it looks really good and can’t wait to see the animated clip, but you REALLY need to get the grass more photorealistic 
to match the figure.
Can’t wait to see more.
Hi David,
It’s sad you can’t see the video. I used standard QuickTime codec (H.264).
I’ll change it in the morning…
for the grass… Yes, you are right… the grass is bad. But one can call it stylised:D.
I just thought it would be good thing to do the city first and then the foreground, since I don’t know how the foreground should look…
But yes, I’ll try to make it look more real.
Well, Domination is short movie.
The synopsis:
It is year 2142 [color=Gray](so much? Anyone didn’t tell me… I thought about tens of years in future… never mind) [/color]and vegetation is almost completely perished all over the world. (so much for the tree and grass :D)
A police team has just followed a suspect to a roof. (you remember the rooftop night shot?)
There, they will learn a bitter truth that will affect all human race. (well, the truth is destroying human civilisation…)
[size=2]____________________________________________________________________________
I’ll make another version of the video. Watch it [color=Gray](wanted to say tomorrow:D) later in the morning.
cheers, Pavel
[/color][/size]
I have been messing arround with codecs for a while now and couldn’t get good results…
but anyway…
http://www.rybarstvi-hodonin.cz/kutkin_web/domination_sunrise_anim1b.mov
An update here.
Replaced the foreground with stuff from destroyed buildings, steel and concrete.
Hope you like.
And horizontally flipped one:
Which one is better?
suggestions and crits still appreciated
cheers
Yep, the forground look a MILLION times better!
I still like the first angel.
Hope you get to post the video clip again, can’t wait to see.
What kind of photographic references are you using? can you post these up also, be nice to see a break down.
A few of the painty buildings need tightening up but other than that no really issues, just keep on doing what you do well
I just saw the clip.
The push in is too dramatic, i’d only push in about 10-20% of what you currently have, adding to this i’d then have the camera pan from left to the right. Subtle movements work far better.
The trouble is at the moment the camera pushes into a point where the buildings end up looking too 2d looking and lose scale.
Hope that helps
Yes you’re right. I tested the camera movement, to see how far I can go with it.
It’s supposed to be just very slight camera movement.
Yes, still some work to do in the city…
As photo references I use photos of destroyed buildings from earthquakes and in the foreground there is a lot of stuff from crashed WTC…
http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/photos/gzexcav1.html
I like more the flipped angle, but it may be because of me looking on the original image for too long now…:D,
cheers
Emmmmmm, not quite sure,:shrug: i think they work equally as well, one could argue that the direction the figure is looking could me a metaphorical reference to looking forward in the future or back into the past, but other than that, your choice.
I get that, look at something for so long and the slightest hue shift of 5% can have me stumped for hours on end.
Thanks Matt!
So keeping things up…
Tried to enhance the animation… Tightened up some buildings.
Watch the video HERE
Hope you like it.
Cheers
great secuence , very dramatic , eventhough I think the camera is too exagerated for a 2.5D matte painting you can see the trick in some foreground buildings easily
great job man
Thanks, Jamie!!
You are right. I have to do something with it…
I’ll keep you posted
thanks
