Mini challenge: Create a landscape in EI

#11

Excellent Aziz!

The light rays are a great touch. Your water is perhaps the nicest I’ve seen that uses the crumple shader. I wonder how it would look from the water level… :wink:
The only crit I have is that the mountains seem a little (and I mean a little) smooth… Take a look at the Noise Factory, it’s the best damn shader that comes with EI and it can be useful for getting rid of that smooth hill look…

For some reason I think that Mordor map is the first one everyone goes for, It’s the one I choose too :wink:

Although, I have now switched to a mountain one. I’m using runwave for the water although my water plane is close to a million polys at the moment in order to get the wavelet scale right… I’ll try to post soon.

I’m also using I2M, I’ve found (I’ll prepare myself to feel the wrath of the Igors here) that the Erosion plug-in is great on it’s own but when I add a weight map I simply cant get predictable results… I also get a lot of file write errors when using a map that has already been put into the Erosion_Maps folder…

I’ll post some screenshots tomorrow.
Thanks Aziz!
Ian

#12

hi,

finaly i kicked myself to actually start this today. seems like i missed a criteria, my mountains are hills, at best :slight_smile:

now my setup:

first i looked at your highmaps, ian, but there was no nice bay, so i painted my own :slight_smile: .
erosion was my first try, but like ian mentioned, it is pretty unpredictable. either i use it wrong or erosion is not doing what i want.
i2m to rescue! great tool! fractal noise and noise factory for breaking it up a little. my sand texture from project phoenix and a custom painted footstep for the foreground.
color is only a gradient in Y direction from dark blue for the water over azure, sand, brown, green and grey. yah, that simple.

the water is a ĂĽberplane (about 600 divisions - in camera :slight_smile: ), deformed with runwave (2x) and the good old crumple shader. it is about 30% transparent to give it a little depth (see gradient on landscape). the foam is some simple luma-maps set to screen mode to better blend together. some power particle basic emitters for the fun of it placed around some ĂĽber-rocks. two ĂĽber-rocks for the distant clouds.
i think thats all in eias.
a little photoshop aftertouch - level adjustment, desaturation, highlight blurring and darkening of the edges. and ready.

edit: if this was a real project, there would be much more work needed, around the waterfront for example, but for a few hours work i am pretty happy with this.
second edit: no GI on this, because i wanted fast test renders without adjusting the lighting or diffuse values at the end. maybe i’ll do one tomorrow and edit it in here.

have fun, i had it!
uwe

#13

Good lad Uwe!

Thanks for taking the time, I really like your foam and spray!

In your GI version (that you ARE going to do :wink: I would up the AA sampling to 2x2 to get rid of the jaggies on the crumple shader (I’m sure you would do that anyway though! :slight_smile:

Great stuff, just a little further to go!
Ian

#14

Hi Laurent,
Nice of you to share and good work!

I’ve found when rotoscoping that you need one of two things to guarantee a match, either:

  1. The exact camera location in 3D (provided by accurate context information).
    or
  2. The correct focal length.

Of course, both of them would be best.

When you panorama images you lose the focal length, so the camera position becomes really important… But doing it by GPS!? That’s great! I wish we could do that!! :slight_smile:

Ian

#15

Aziz, Uwe, you made great images. Really love the colors in your image Uwe.
Congrats both fo you. This challenge is interresting I hope to find some time to participate.

#16

Uwe, Aziz, Laurent & Hans, :thumbsup: thumbs up to you all…

I hope i can participate in this challange too! but not now… back to work…

:slight_smile:

#17

Uwe, what a nice image! Really like the colors and distance fade.

Tim

#18

to complete for Richard

Ok, I send 3 days ago an illustration of a project I just finished. Here’s some clips from the movies I made…

http://www.caperaa.com/01-BridgeAerial.mov
http://www.caperaa.com/02-TotheBridge.mov
http://www.caperaa.com/03-AftertheBridge.mov

The quality is weird (color?) and is due to the H.264 compression in Quicktime I suppose. Maybe some people will find that the lanscape is poor resolution, but that was the best we can find for that region (5 meters precision). The grayscalemap is 2000 x 2000 pixels… after Image2mesh, the weight of the mesh was 142 Mo… After a lot of manipultions I reduced it in 3 parts (differents resolution) for a total of 40 Mo. The Texture Map is about 373 Mo for the high density mesh and 35 Mo for the low density Mesh.

The purpose of one animation is to simulate a car on the road. The road have a lenght of 9,75 Kilometer. The total sufarce of the mesh is 10km x 10 km. I said to the client that we will have a problem of quality, but he doesn’t want a final movie quality, but just a simulation. The duration of the road movie is 3 min 20 sec (speed of the simulation is about 200 km/h). A lot of frames… The road movie is very boring but that’s what he wants… ???

It takes 18 hours to compute the movie on 19 slaves camera (mix of G5, G4, iMac and one MacMini)… I used some client’s cumputers over the internet with renderama and everything works great. If I remember, there’s a total of 4 millions of polygons… The total space on my Hard Drive for that project is 57 Gig after a good clean :wink:

I really like EIAS

Laurent Capéraà ing.
Images et Technologies
Québec, Qc, Canada

#19

Just because Ian asked so nicely :slight_smile: one from the water level (with a drop of NoiseFactory on the terrain. Too little?).

http://www.geocities.com/aziz_cg/terrainchallenge/bythewater2.jpg

Does anyone have a good recipe for a waterfall - from a distance and close-up? Sometime ago I attempted one using power particles basic, but I could never get enough particles to make it look convincing. I tried combining a textured plane with power particles but it looked odd. Should I get Wondertouch’s ParticleIllusion instead?

#20

hey aziz! very nice!

for a distant waterfall power particles basic works quite well (i think). quick test:

this will not work for close-ups.
for stills the setup is quite easy, animations would need a layered setup.
ok, what i did was this:

easy as cake, but very limited. if you are after more complxity you can always add more emiters.

again, eias buildin particle system is not up-to-date!

#21

Brilliant Uwe! Thanks for the tip and images of your settings. They’ll live in my harddisk now :slight_smile:

#22

Hi Laurent, that’s an amazingly huge project. Looks great too. Could you post some wireframes? Thanks.

#23

Mornin all,

So… I have been sent something to share from a user who will remain anonymous. Dun dun duhhh.


They are just tests by the way…
Ian

#24

Hi Ian,
Could you ask our mystery artist how the second landscape was textured? Thanks.

#25

ohoo, now there are mysterious men n the dark? :wink:
i like the second better, the first somehow reminds me of bryce, don’t know why, hehe.

#26

Yes, but I would be shot If I posted the response :wink:

Er, now, back to the challenge at hand… Aziz! Nice render… now for the waterfall… Speaking of which, very cool tip Uwe! And I agree completely, the built in particle system is a little skeletal. Perhaps it’s time for Dante Lite?

Ian

#27

Hello all!

Here is my graphical contribution, I’m happy with everything but the Lighthouse beacon. If I have more time to play I’ll add some spray.

GI
Skylight: 0.3 (deep blue)
Sun: 0.5 (yellow-orange)
Environment dome: 0.67 Luminance (Overcast sunset image).
1 bounce.
100 primary rays.

Render time: 23mins @ this size. Could be faster if I hit some check boxes (I think the water is shadow casting which isn’t good).

Photoshop work was Levels and Brightness/Contrast.

Right, I’m away from my Mac until Tuesday, so, feel free to talk amongst yourselves :slight_smile:
Ian

#28

Here is a little test, extremely disregarding the current season! However, growing up and living in Norway is all about learning to love snow :slight_smile:

http://privat.bluezone.no/reidar.richardsen/RiverSnow.jpg

I am experimenting with the gradient shader, and using a light to color it, with the purpose of leaving snow where there is relatively flat, and make it rocky elsewhere, using reactive shaders on top of the gradient. I haven’t found any obvious way to hide this light from anything else. If you tick off both “Illumination” and “Highlight”, the light fails to drive the gradient shader. I wish it didn’t!

I used the Erosion plug-in with height-maps from Photoshop. Two instances, one close, and one far away. This gives enough polygon-density without running into the millions. Approx 800K polys in this scene.

Water is deformed with 3 runwaves, increasing in amplitude towards the middle. There is also a besier on top to bend the river along the landscape.

Lighting is GI Sky at 0.4 and one “Moon” at intensity 0.6. The combination GI+DriverLight for Gradient+SSS gave me unexpected results. The snow parts blew out. It looked like the DriverLight participated in this somehow. I haven’t had the time for any deeper investigation yet. Snow looks much better with SSS!

Regards,
Reidar

#29

Hi Reidar,
SSS for snow. Good idea!

Just wondering about the water edges - where the river meets the snow. There seems to be a slightly darker area, as if the snow is wet. Was that achieved using a texture map or am I seeing things which aren’t there? Thanks.

#30

I got something similar with a gradient map last night… Very cool water/ snow in that image Reidar.

Was Power Particles Basic used for the spray?

Lots of detail in it, and very sharp too. Kudos!
Ian