Show Us Your Bryce Renders! Part 9
This discussion has been closed.
Daz 3D is part of 
Connect
DAZ Productions, Inc.
224 S 200 W, Suite #250
Salt Lake City, UT 84101
Licensing Agreement | Terms of Service | Privacy Policy | EULA
© 2024 Daz Productions Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Comments
Art - the second does look better
Horo - thanks
I agree, imagine leaving out center alignment too. Imho it's a must in all text editors.
HTML 5 does not have a centre code http://www.w3schools.com/tags/tag_center.asp
New technology moving backwards....... It's difficult for golden oldies to catch up; we just need to move with the flow.
@Fencepost52: The new render is indeed even better than the first one. It does, however, make the mountains suddenly look like small hills. Did you consider using this tower, but a bit smaller?
@StevesArtGallery_571b74b7cb: Great space scene!
Great stuff, Art...perhaps, you played at one time, as it has got that kinda feel about it.
Jay
Playing around with stars...oh, and a planet, too - a Pale Blue Dot (YouTube link, and some wonderful words by Carl Sagan RIP ~ 3.30 mins long).
Thanks, Horo, Hansmar, and Jamahoney!
@Jamahoney: Oh, yes, played Myst quite a bit back in the day. Was just reminiscing with my son about that game the other. Funny how you bring it up. Sure wish it was still around.
Nice space scene. I've been to that little pale blue dot a time or two! LOL
@StevesArtGallery: Nice space scene.
At the suggestion of Hansmar, I rendered another mountain cathedral scene, but this time the cathedral is a little smaller. Also added a few flowers near the cathedral, although they are tiny.
@Jamahoney: I like your concept. Endless space.
@Fencepost: The smaller cathedral looks more convincing. Maybe I am wrong, but I think, it is hovering (the shadow looks a bit strange)
Yeah, Art...the follow-up, Riven (YouTube link), was great, too...though, what with all the super 3D animation options available now...both look a bit lame-ish
Okay, Art, so where is the first clue to get into your the building...hmmm...I bet I have to turn some handle hidden under the bridge, then dot in some cryptograms at the door, and voila 
Cheers, Elvis...I think, sub-conciously, the star render and the Pale Blue Dot arrived out of viewing on TV the other day the 70th Hiroshima/Nagasaki anniversary (August 6 1945). Sagan's words still echo such wiseness today in these times we live in.
Jay
I agree with both comments. Very nice space and the cathredal is just taking off to get to that space too
Mermaid and Pam - yes, HTML 5 misses a couple of codes like center and align. They can be set as styles either on the page header or in an external style sheet. It makes some sense to have styles outside of the HTML but it is less flexible. HTML 5 has been standardized only last year and I doubt that every document available on the Internet will be rewritten. I rather think that web browsers will keep compatibility, else expect the world wide web as we know it to disappear. My old 1998 vintage HTML DTD v.3 documents still display on the newest Firefox and Chrome browsers. Naturally, new pages should be written with the newest standard in mind.
Jay - cool deep space image. Ah yes, Myst and Riven are great games. I still have them CDs. It's them games that brought me to 3D art and Bryce.
Art - the smaller cathedral would look better if electro-elvis were wrong. But he isn't, the cathedral is floating.
Here is a simple panorama render I call From the Dark Side to the Bryce Side.
Horo
That is a nice panorama render
@Horo: Wonderful render!
Here is a new one from me. Basically an abstract with spheres and multireplication. And I made a group of a positive pyramid that is partly 'eaten' by quite some negative pyramids. Plus a Mallard duck. Funny how one realistic element makes an abstract into a weird landscape!
Light is from a Dome light, a Spotlight (only on the Mallard Duck) and an HDRI (abstract) from which a specular map was made (I had to try that once). I also added an orangy haze, which has quite an effect on the colour. There is a surrounding sphere around the scene, which is something I like to do often. In this case it is 100% transparent and 100% reflective. I think that this is not really logical in real life, but, who cares. Finally, I noticed that in this case there is quite an effect on the atmosphere and colours if the 'max. ray depth' is lowered from 6 to 4. So, this time I kept 6.
@Horo: That is a beautiful render!
@Hansmar: I love the abstract. Abstracts are so much fun to play with. I need to do it more often. I agree with your assessment "Not logical in real life, but who cares".....That's what 3D is all about!
Ok, somebody posts renders of flying dragons and everybody gets all excited, yet I post one with a chapel floating off the ground and everybody is confused! LOLOLOLOL Thanks for catching it. Funny, no matter how many times I looked at the render before posting it, I never saw the chapel off the ground. Thanks for pointing that out. Here's the revised render.
Art...the floating chapel was just a MYSTery occurrence...heh he
Nice one Hansmar...very surreal...but you'll get sick if you keep eating too many magic mushrooms
That's gorgeous, Horo...would have wished if it were bigger to get a closer view as the sky looks super dramatic. I happened to be messing about with the panorama thingy also, to see if one could have both the Moon and the Sun at extreme ends in one view. Think I read that the Sun is always opposite the Moon in Bryce, so best attempt below...Moon can just about be seen on the left.
Jay
@Fencepost52: well, dragons are supposed to fly, chapels not. Maybe that confused us. I have the same issue very often. Trees hovering, people with feet IN th ground, etc. After hours of rendering: "Hé, what is that ........"
New render looks very good.
@Jamahoney: Isn't it fun. Just enough magic, that's the trick. How odd that we cannot put the moon close to the sun in Bryce. Well, we can, but we then have to make our own moon! Disadvantage of these panoramas, I think, is the enormous distortion. At least, If that is the moon to the left, it is enormously distorted!
I don't think I'm doing panoramas like Horo is...I'm new to it. Yes, I've set the doc settings to panorama, but I've also made the camera at 180 degree look-around...hence the distortion effect.
Mermaid - Nice looking fractal renders. It makes me want to do some as well.
The two desert scenes look spectacular. I prefer the one with the dark sky
StevesArtGallery - Beautiful work
Fishtales - Very nice wet knight. I feel your pain with 37 hours to render.
StuartB - Impressive car renders.... I would have said they are photos.
Tim - Beautiful underwater scene
Jay - Interesting eye experiment.
Electro- Elvis - Never made rocks using lattices. Must try they look quite natural.
Fencepost - The name of the product says it all . Fantastic Skies. As for your second ruins render, I am amaze at the realistic look of the grass. How much do you charge an hour for private lessons LOL
Laura - High street looks very nice. You certainly have put a lot of work into it.
Horo - I was playing with panorama renders just this week.. Nothing as dramatic and well done of course.
Sandy - thank you.
Hansmar - thank you. Great meatballs render, nice colours.
Art - thank you. Well, you know, flying dragons we see all the time, flying chapels much less. Looks better now.
Jay - thank you. Yes, though the stars in Bryce are astronomically correct, the Sun/Moon relationship is not. The Moon should be separate, not only its position, its light as well. Of course, we can make it with spheres and distand lights if we want a Sun-Moon conjunction. My pano is a simple 360°.
If you render as 360° Panorama, never mind the camera FOV, it can be 1° or 180°, there's no difference. However,
the aspect ratio does. The vertical lines are always at the same distance from each other. The horizontal lines get stretched. For a 360° pano render, the aspect ration of 2:1 is recommended, which gives you vertically +/- 60°, which is already much. +/-40° is nearly perfect and ou get it with an aspect ration of 4:1.
For a perspective render, 180° FOV at scale 100 gives you about 150° and the horizontal lines are bent. You can set Scale lower, but you never get fully 180° horizontal. The FOV is defined for an aspect ratio of 4:3 and measured in the diagonal.
The example renders use a 5° rib-cage in the world centre, the camera is also at the world centre. Backdrop and light from a fully white HDRI. Panorama renders - first: aspect ratio 1:1, second 2:1, third 4:1, last is a perspective render, FOV 180°, Scale 100.
Vivien1 - thank you.
Ah, thank you, Horo, and very informative. It's a pity we can't get both Sun and Moon in the sky at once (naturally, and not faking them...etc., in Bryce), as I'm sure most of us have seen them both in the sky at one time or ever, which can produce some interesting effects, and make for wonderful photographs if a camera is handy too.
You probably have this software already, Horo, however, if anyone else is interested in visual astronomy, for the effects above, of the Sun, Moon planets and stars etc., for your local sky, I highly recommend the free opensource Stellarium (click one of the top icons that suit your OS to download).
Thank you again, Vivien
Jay
After seeing Mermaid's fractal, I decided to make a Bryce rendered fractal as well.
I used Frax on my phone to make the fractal and imported it as a material for the top sphere, the rest are torus and squares for decoration.
Chohole and Horo – thanks for the additional info on Html 5.
Jay - both your renders are nice, thanks for the link
Horo – wow awesome panorama. Thanks for the info on panoramas.
Hansmar – beautiful abstract, I agree with Art, abstracts are fun but very addictive.
Art- the chapel render is very nice. I didn’t notice it was floating till I read the comments.
Vivien – thanks. The fractal is very nicely done. I must have a look at this app.
Been insipired to look at trying to use Bryce as a "fractal engine". Here's my first experimental results. And process
@Horo: Thanks. Getting the colours as I like them was one of the things that took some time! And thanks for the explanation on panoramic rendering.
@mermaid010: Thanks. And I agree too; lots of sleep lost!
@vivien1: Great render of this fractal. I should do more fractal renders myself; it can be so much fun!
@David Brinnen: These are wonderful. I most like the green one, because of the more varied lines.
Mermaid - thank you.
David - looking great. I've got to play with that once I can manage the time.
I played a bit with Moebius objects I had made some time ago in Wings3D following one of David's videos.
And for those with red/cyan goggles the same in 3D.
Thank you Mermaid - I think you would enjoy Frax, not as complex as other fractal programs but the results are quite nice
Hansmar - Thanks. I do agree that fractals can be fun to make.
Horo - That is such a great looking object. I never attempted Wings 3d. It looks hard.
David - Wonderful results on the bryce fractals. I particularly like the flow of the green one. I couldn't wait to watch the video. So this is the result. I experimented on changing the angles of the planes and put a sphere on top of the second plane. The possibilities seem endless .
@Hansmar, thanks!
@Horo, also thanks, got my red blue glasses out and yes, super anaglyph exposes the complex geometry of these shapes nicely.
@Vivian, great results, indeed so good, I went back and put in some spheres of my own!
David - thanks for the video I've been playing with fractals in Photoshop. Awesome renders
Horo - beautiful renders, love the anaglyph
Vivien - wow, awesome results following David's tutorial.
Nothing spectacular, fractals done in Photoshop rendered in Bryce now to watch David's video
Eta: Vivien Wings 3D is not so difficult. I followed all David's tutorials and made cool objects. It's the only other 3D program I use.