ohohho, I couldn't sleep at night, all I could think of was an idea with the merge shaders. So I opened up terragen and this happened. Finally, the first time ever I actually managed to create a rock I imagined. Rocks, sand dunes, dirt, cracks , everything.
I will copy these node networks and create some size- colour variations, then use it on a world machine terrain with flow and slow and deposite maps. I think with the WM makro- and terragen's micro abilities it'll be quite nice!
Those are terrific! Are they a fake stone population or Terragen rock object? You are on a great track here!
Quote from: luvsmuzik on December 04, 2016, 11:23:09 AM
Those are terrific! Are they a fake stone population or Terragen rock object? You are on a great track here!
Thanks!:)
And they're Fakestones- never used populations before.
You definitely came up with a winner !
Oh dear...Is there a limitation with the node network-node number in Terragen?
I made different kinds of rocks, and dirt types(I like creating worlds that are working both in micro-and macro scale and I can "explore" them- and when I switched on the terrain-mountains it went nuts...spikes everywhere.I have a compute terrain after the base terrain -before the rock displacements- and after them-before the planet node. Do I need new compute terrains etc before every displacement node?
The thing is the node networks's getting quite a bit...extensive
Also, I tried to use a warp shader after some voronoi noise function. Didn't work, I just cant find out how can I warp it a bit.
Also I tried to mix multiple masks- like I have a mask for one type of rock distribution, then I use the same mask with an invert colour function and use it for another type of rock-plus smaller masks inside that mask for the actual rock masking- I tried to subtract them from each other but it wont do what it should do.
So the usual problems...
I am definitely not the person to ask this, but I am sure someone can help you here. Dune, mhaze and others use surface layers and other ways of transferring displacement to the area desired. There are ways to group those displacements into an addition to your node networks as well. It's all magic, but they do it well. Good luck!
Nice experiments.
Merge shaders do some great things but merges are kind of a slow process. Having a great many is probably going to slow down the render.
Extra compute terrains slow things also. Usually it is better not to add any extras.
Might be better to separate special displacements by having them be connected to the child layer attachment of a surface layer rather than having all of them stacking up on top of each other. That way you can isolate and perhaps choose how much of that layer you want to use with the coverage slider.
Quote from: fleetwood on December 04, 2016, 03:26:47 PM
Nice experiments.
Merge shaders do some great things but merges are kind of a slow process. Having a great many is probably going to slow down the render.
Extra compute terrains slow things also. Usually it is better not to add any extras.
Might be better to separate special displacements by having them be connected to the child layer attachment of a surface layer rather than having all of them stacking up on top of each other. That way you can isolate and perhaps choose how much of that layer you want to use with the coverage slider.
To be honest all of the displacement is a child layer of the rock surface layer. plus there's a base dirt surface layer- the sand dunes, dirt, cracks, etc are all merged together to one layer. So no stacking.
I don't think I can make it more simple- every node is useful, they're cross wired so no unnecessary copies.
I will rename the nodes so it will look more orginased.
By the way, is there a smooth function in terragen? The voronoi cell scalar is really useful, but it causes stretching in the procedural texture. Is there any way to get rid of that ? Like a new get coordinates node after the displacement?
Nice rich tones here, agree your network seems very heavy for whats going on in the images you are posting. You'll sort it out. You are on a great start for your first few images
Here's a few pictures I've made, I'd like to update them with better details on the ground. I still have the flow maps ,slope maps, deposition, wear maps, so after I get these rocks and dirt layers right, I can sort them out . After that, I can zoom in or out and it wwll still look good.
Quote from: Martin on December 04, 2016, 04:10:48 PM
Quote from: fleetwood on December 04, 2016, 03:26:47 PM
Nice experiments.
Merge shaders do some great things but merges are kind of a slow process. Having a great many is probably going to slow down the render.
Extra compute terrains slow things also. Usually it is better not to add any extras.
Might be better to separate special displacements by having them be connected to the child layer attachment of a surface layer rather than having all of them stacking up on top of each other. That way you can isolate and perhaps choose how much of that layer you want to use with the coverage slider.
To be honest all of the displacement is a child layer of the rock surface layer. plus there's a base dirt surface layer- the sand dunes, dirt, cracks, etc are all merged together to one layer. So no stacking.
I don't think I can make it more simple- every node is useful, they're cross wired so no unnecessary copies.
I will rename the nodes so it will look more orginased.
By the way, is there a smooth function in terragen? The voronoi cell scalar is really useful, but it causes stretching in the procedural texture. Is there any way to get rid of that ? Like a new get coordinates node after the displacement?
Those are some very cool renders.
In your network I noticed at one point three fake stones stacked directly one above the other at one point and leading to a fourth fake stones layer that is a child of a surface layer. That will make some of the first stones grow directly on the surface of the next stones etc. In my experience this can be useful but the displacements tend to not just add up, they can behave somewhat as if multiplying instead of just adding. That is why a typical way of putting multiple fake stone sizes together is to merge them two at a time with a merge highest. That way they do not grow on each other.
Depends on the effect you want, but that keeps them clean and not interacting. A tree structure of merge highest is the fastest (rather than simply merging in each new one) to process by actual test, so for example, if you used 8 stone sizes and want to keep them separate, the eight would be merged into four (4 merge highests) at the top level, then the four results would be merge highest into two and two into one.
There is a variable smoothing function which can be turned on in the smoothing tab of every surface layer node, also a smoothing function box in the compute terrain.
Quote from: fleetwood on December 04, 2016, 06:23:49 PM
Quote from: Martin on December 04, 2016, 04:10:48 PM
Quote from: fleetwood on December 04, 2016, 03:26:47 PM
Nice experiments.
Merge shaders do some great things but merges are kind of a slow process. Having a great many is probably going to slow down the render.
Extra compute terrains slow things also. Usually it is better not to add any extras.
Might be better to separate special displacements by having them be connected to the child layer attachment of a surface layer rather than having all of them stacking up on top of each other. That way you can isolate and perhaps choose how much of that layer you want to use with the coverage slider.
To be honest all of the displacement is a child layer of the rock surface layer. plus there's a base dirt surface layer- the sand dunes, dirt, cracks, etc are all merged together to one layer. So no stacking.
I don't think I can make it more simple- every node is useful, they're cross wired so no unnecessary copies.
I will rename the nodes so it will look more orginased.
By the way, is there a smooth function in terragen? The voronoi cell scalar is really useful, but it causes stretching in the procedural texture. Is there any way to get rid of that ? Like a new get coordinates node after the displacement?
Those are some very cool renders.
In your network I noticed at one point three fake stones stacked directly one above the other at one point and leading to a fourth fake stones layer that is a child of a surface layer. That will make some of the first stones grow directly on the surface of the next stones etc. In my experience this can be useful but the displacements tend to not just add up, they can behave somewhat as if multiplying instead of just adding. That is why a typical way of putting multiple fake stone sizes together is to merge them two at a time with a merge highest. That way they do not grow on each other.
Depends on the effect you want, but that keeps them clean and not interacting. A tree structure of merge highest is the fastest (rather than simply merging in each new one) to process by actual test, so for example, if you used 8 stone sizes and want to keep them separate, the eight would be merged into four (4 merges) at the top level, then the four results would be merged into two and two into one.
There is a variable smoothing function which can be turned on in the smoothing tab of every surface layer node, also a smoothing function box in the compute terrain.
Ah Thank you! For some reason I've never used the merge highest option. I will try it!
Also I bought a new workstation last month, So I'm actually rendering two pictures at once -testing new rocks, and it takes...20 minutes? It still blows my mind how much faster it is now than on my old laptop.
I use the demo version so 0.6 is the max detail though.
Nice examples.
Quote from: Kadri on December 04, 2016, 06:34:33 PM
Nice examples.
Thank you :)
Also forgive my typos , it's late here.
Cliff shader with some grass.
well, I tried to use Voronoi cells -criss-crossing eachother as a displace, and it looks amazing!
Also , this cliff shader I just put together makes the base terragen terrain look great:)
Many of your images are very interesting. My preferences go for clouds 12-15 and wm dessert 12. :)
One question not answered is about warping. I noticed in your network you use the 'get position', replace that by a 'get position in texture' and you can warp.
Amazing results! nice!
Quote from: Dune on December 05, 2016, 01:50:16 AM
One question not answered is about warping. I noticed in your network you use the 'get position', replace that by a 'get position in texture' and you can warp.
Ah Thank you! It would've taken forever to find that out jut by myself!
Quote from: Jo Kariboo on December 05, 2016, 12:18:19 AM
Many of your images are very interesting. My preferences go for clouds 12-15 and wm dessert 12. :)
Thanks! I try to make them interesting:)
Ive studied geology, and now I'm a freelance artist so Terragen is a dream come true really :P
Wow! Stunning results here 8)
A few more renders. The merge highest thing with the fake stones sadly messed up thing and the typical 30 minute render became 6 hours. I'm organising the node network in that scene right now with groups .
One better as the next... very good results!
By the way your images do look a little on the dark side (no pun intended).
Is there any postwork?
Quote from: Kadri on December 05, 2016, 01:07:08 PM
By the way your images do look a little on the dark side (no pun intended).
Is there any postwork?
ON some of them yes-I have to convert the tiff files to jpg-s so I can psot them here.But mostly brightening...I use terragen's tone map sliders -I usually put the contrast higher than 0.5 and I lower the gamma to 2, or 1.9, as I like using denser haze- it gives a nice light effect, and makes most of the pictures more realistic but also more washed out colours.
Maybe my big monitor is a little bright compared to others. My laptop was dark and a bit bluish...So I know that sometimes what looks nice here, it looks dark or over-saturated etc on another computer.
Quote from: Martin on December 05, 2016, 01:11:36 PM
Quote from: Kadri on December 05, 2016, 01:07:08 PM
By the way your images do look a little on the dark side (no pun intended).
Is there any postwork?
ON some of them yes-I have to convert the tiff files to jpg-s so I can psot them here.But mostly brightening...I use terragen's tone map sliders -I usually put the contrast higher than 0.5 and I lower the gamma to 2, or 1.9, as I like using denser haze- it gives a nice light effect, and makes most of the pictures more realistic but also more washed out colours.
Maybe my big monitor is a little bright compared to others. My laptop was dark and a bit bluish...So I know that sometimes what looks nice here, it looks dark or over-saturated etc on another computer.
My monitor is bright too i think. But still your images look dark to me. Subjective too of course.
I export as EXR and postwork on them later mostly.
Quote from: Kadri on December 05, 2016, 01:18:16 PM
Quote from: Martin on December 05, 2016, 01:11:36 PM
Quote from: Kadri on December 05, 2016, 01:07:08 PM
By the way your images do look a little on the dark side (no pun intended).
Is there any postwork?
ON some of them yes-I have to convert the tiff files to jpg-s so I can psot them here.But mostly brightening...I use terragen's tone map sliders -I usually put the contrast higher than 0.5 and I lower the gamma to 2, or 1.9, as I like using denser haze- it gives a nice light effect, and makes most of the pictures more realistic but also more washed out colours.
Maybe my big monitor is a little bright compared to others. My laptop was dark and a bit bluish...So I know that sometimes what looks nice here, it looks dark or over-saturated etc on another computer.
My monitor is bright too i think. But still your images look dark to me. Subjective too of course.
I export as EXR and postwork on them later mostly.
hmm, I will try to render slightly brighter images then. Also is there a way to save EXR files in the demo version?
I organised the Mossy rock scene nodes. I mean kind of.:)
Hmm not sure but only the professional version i think:
https://planetside.co.uk/terragen-product-comparison/
Don't know if there is a difference in the demo version or free version.
Have a look at the render saving options.
Quote from: Kadri on December 05, 2016, 01:46:30 PM
Hmm not sure but only the professional version i think:
https://planetside.co.uk/terragen-product-comparison/
Don't know if there is a difference in the demo version or free version.
Have a look at the render saving options.
Oh well, not even the creative version is enough for that. Well I don't think I can afford buying the professional version for...just my art stuff.
Quote from: Martin on December 05, 2016, 01:54:33 PM
Quote from: Kadri on December 05, 2016, 01:46:30 PM
Hmm not sure but only the professional version i think:
https://planetside.co.uk/terragen-product-comparison/
Don't know if there is a difference in the demo version or free version.
Have a look at the render saving options.
Oh well, not even the creative version is enough for that. Well I don't think I can afford buying the professional version for...just my art stuff.
I had a closer look. There is a "16bit/compressed image load+save" feature in all of them.
So you could use 16 bit tiff too i think. Have a look and see if it helps Martin.
Quote from: Kadri on December 05, 2016, 01:57:45 PM
Quote from: Martin on December 05, 2016, 01:54:33 PM
Quote from: Kadri on December 05, 2016, 01:46:30 PM
Hmm not sure but only the professional version i think:
https://planetside.co.uk/terragen-product-comparison/
Don't know if there is a difference in the demo version or free version.
Have a look at the render saving options.
Oh well, not even the creative version is enough for that. Well I don't think I can afford buying the professional version for...just my art stuff.
I had a closer look. There is a "16bit/compressed image load+save" feature in all of them.
So you could use 16 bit tiff too i think. Have a look and see if it helps Martin.
Thank you! Though I can manage with simple tiff files. I'm thinking about getting the creative version later on, because the higher image resolution-and micro detailing.
Okay, the merge higher thing didn't work. Something went wrong and its a bit spiky, messy, and took 9 hours to render. Btw, this is the mixed Voronoi cell displaced granite stone I made yester day. still ,doesnt work the way I imagined, I will tweak it later today.
And I made a planet object with a new better texture- again merge layers.Though those cliffs should be tweaked as well to look right on close up too.
Also about compute normals. How often should I use it? Maybe it can solve these smaller displacement errors?
Okay, found something.
I have all the fakestone layers as child layers on separate surface layers. 3 or 4(bigg mossy rock surface layer, small rock surface layer, sand crack dirt surface layer etc)
I switched them off except the granite layer- to see if the problem is with the granite rock displacement itself. Well There's this small spiky error and I don't know where it comes from. All the displacement on that layer is some voronoi soft cells. And it's masked by some big voronoi -with adjust colour.
Nothing should cause this...
The granite surface layer is a child layer of another surface layer named "granite distribution" with a mask that masks big parts of of the terrain so there are sand dune only parts.
I tried to change the mask seed to see if that's the problem but no, the spikes remained the same.
Also I made some purple coloured meadow -rock scene with green atmosphere and a big moon.
I saved the nodes as a clip file and started a new world. Tweaked the settings a bit and it seems I managed to put all these terrains together. The render will be done in a few hours.
Also made a new planet object, using references- Io , Europa, Ganymede, Callisto etc.
I want to put more Europa like canyon displaces on it, but I'm a bit stuck how to mix displace maps together with the colours- as the planet 2 object only have one 'surface' input.
Update:got it! When I use the merge shader with the mix colour option unchecked, it will use the first input's colour but mixes the displaces. Neat.
Hard to tell from the node view what the spikey problem is, but it could either be a smallscale mask or smallscale displacement. Also; sometimes you need to unclamp colors, sometimes you need them clamped. If converting (negating, complementing or inverting, dividing!) unclamped colors you can get strange things to. So you really need to build up carefully and check each step for (unwanted) changes.
The compute normal should be used as sparingly as the compute terrain, as it takes render time (unless that's no problem). Once for large displacements and following laterals is often enough, perhaps one more if you want the newly created overhangs to further displace by latera/normal for more detail. Tex coordinates from XYZ is also very handy to use.
Quote from: Dune on December 06, 2016, 02:16:00 AM
Hard to tell from the node view what the spikey problem is, but it could either be a smallscale mask or smallscale displacement. Also; sometimes you need to unclamp colors, sometimes you need them clamped. If converting (negating, complementing or inverting, dividing!) unclamped colors you can get strange things to. So you really need to build up carefully and check each step for (unwanted) changes.
The compute normal should be used as sparingly as the compute terrain, as it takes render time (unless that's no problem). Once for large displacements and following laterals is often enough, perhaps one more if you want the newly created overhangs to further displace by latera/normal for more detail. Tex coordinates from XYZ is also very handy to use.
Thanks!
I tried unclamped colours in the past, but this time, with carefully adjusting everything, I didn't feel the need-and I was worried it will cause unexpected problems-the node network is complicated as it is to find a problem if something goes wrong- Is it useful with displaces for example?
The thing is about those spikes, even when I switched off everything (plugged the base colours to the compute terrain) there was this error in places on the flat terrain. So I saved the important nodes as a clip file and started a new file- and it worked. But I have to remake that granite rock. I have to smooth the terrain bellow it I think. I will make a printscreen of it's node network tomorrow.
Didn't use overhangs or lateral displacement this time at all.
Also never used tex coordinates from XYZ, when is it a good choice to use it?
The new node network is ready to use on a worldmachine heightfield I think. I hope it will look good with the flow map masks etc.
Thanks for the tips!
Try a power fractal with colors on and feed that into a displacement shader. The planet will look a bit spikey, due to the smallest scales. Now if you up those scales you can get decent displacement, but the tops are flat. Then unclamp the white color and the displacement will rise. You can also add a dark color; try a negative black (-10 or so).
The XYZ shader gives your next node the latest XYZ coordinates, so if you want say a XZ stretched fractal to displace some sort of ridges (like strata), it won't work without the XYZ shader.
Quote from: Dune on December 06, 2016, 02:38:05 AM
Try a power fractal with colors on and feed that into a displacement shader. The planet will look a bit spikey, due to the smallest scales. Now if you up those scales you can get decent displacement, but the tops are flat. Then unclamp the white color and the displacement will rise. You can also add a dark color; try a negative black (-10 or so).
The XYZ shader gives your next node the latest XYZ coordinates, so if you want say a XZ stretched fractal to displace some sort of ridges (like strata), it won't work without the XYZ shader.
Ah thanks! I didn't know I need an XYZ shader before stretched fractal displaces.
Here's the test render for all the shaders in one scene-
and the next step- applied to a WM generated terrain. Needs tweaking but looks nice.
And the new moon I made.
Hesitant to comment, but what progress in just a couple of days! Great stuff!
Okay, made a solar eclipse render, some lush tropical like environment, a closer look at the sand dunes shader(realised It wasn't visible in any of the previous renders)
Good progress...Keep On Tweakin'
Quote from: luvsmuzik on December 06, 2016, 07:50:58 AM
Hesitant to comment, but what progress in just a couple of days! Great stuff!
Thanks! I've been playing with terragen for a few years now, but this is the first time(after getting use to a node based workflow in world machine) that I used merge shaders ,colour adjust, etc properly. Works like a charm!
One of the simplest things are still not clear to me.
For example , I have a base terrain with extensive displacement(dirt, grass, cracks etc) and I'd like to put some big fake stones on top of it, how do I smooth it out for the stones? I mean sometimes it's fine, but this time, when I tried to use the paint shader to mask a stone circle and use the previous rocks with 4-5x tallness, they've became ...this strange exploded mess.
The node network for the fake stone layer is_
Big mossy rock surface layer with the basic distribution mask- this time the paint shader
A child layer with a merge highest- merged with smaller fake stones- but the main rock layer is a bigger fake stones layer-
There's another surface layer plugged in to it's surface layer input
the big mossy rock texture layer- with the colour layer input is the texture mix and the displacement input is the displace mix.
Do I need to switch on some smoothing in a surface layer? or Do I need a new compute normals somewhere?
The ground is mainly grass here with one mm small grassblade displaces- the rocks are 2 meters big with 3-4-6 tallness.
What's your typical way to get rid of this excess displacement , and messiness?
Quote from: Martin on December 06, 2016, 02:48:35 PM
One of the simplest things are still not clear to me.
For example , I have a base terrain with extensive displacement(dirt, grass, cracks etc) and I'd like to put some big fake stones on top of it, how do I smooth it out for the stones? I mean sometimes it's fine, but this time, when I tried to use the paint shader to mask a stone circle and use the previous rocks with 4-5x tallness, they've became ...this strange exploded mess.
The node network for the fake stone layer is_
Big mossy rock surface layer with the basic distribution mask- this time the paint shader
A child layer with a merge highest- merged with smaller fake stones- but the main rock layer is a bigger fake stones layer-
There's another surface layer plugged in to it's surface layer input
the big mossy rock texture layer- with the colour layer input is the texture mix and the displacement input is the displace mix.
Do I need to switch on some smoothing in a surface layer? or Do I need a new compute normals somewhere?
The ground is mainly grass here with one mm small grassblade displaces- the rocks are 2 meters big with 3-4-6 tallness.
What's your typical way to get rid of this excess displacement , and messiness?
You have to enable Smoothing in any Surface layer that interacts with the Fakestones I've found in order for them to keep whatever colour/texture you've applied.
Quote from: bobbystahr on December 06, 2016, 03:45:24 PM
Quote from: Martin on December 06, 2016, 02:48:35 PM
One of the simplest things are still not clear to me.
For example , I have a base terrain with extensive displacement(dirt, grass, cracks etc) and I'd like to put some big fake stones on top of it, how do I smooth it out for the stones? I mean sometimes it's fine, but this time, when I tried to use the paint shader to mask a stone circle and use the previous rocks with 4-5x tallness, they've became ...this strange exploded mess.
The node network for the fake stone layer is_
Big mossy rock surface layer with the basic distribution mask- this time the paint shader
A child layer with a merge highest- merged with smaller fake stones- but the main rock layer is a bigger fake stones layer-
There's another surface layer plugged in to it's surface layer input
the big mossy rock texture layer- with the colour layer input is the texture mix and the displacement input is the displace mix.
Do I need to switch on some smoothing in a surface layer? or Do I need a new compute normals somewhere?
The ground is mainly grass here with one mm small grassblade displaces- the rocks are 2 meters big with 3-4-6 tallness.
What's your typical way to get rid of this excess displacement , and messiness?
You have to enable Smoothing in any Surface layer that interacts with the Fakestones I've found in order for them to keep whatever colour/texture you've applied.
Hmm.When I switch on smoothing on both surfacelayers I get a really strange artefact, doughnut shaped fake rocks...
Update- after switching one of them off and playing with the patch size I get usable results!
"Dad!Can I go over to Billy's house? I finished my homework, and fed Mr. Whiskers!
Oh, and one of Saturn's biggest moon has deviated from it's orbit and will collide Earth in minutes"
Very good, glad you figured it out...a quite strange image, big LIKE
Jesus...found the problem with the grass layer's displacement error. Forgot to switch off the displacement on the colour node's fractals. Ugh.Obvious mistake...
Sadly I lost a few renders because my pc just froze during render(I was rendering 4 scenes at the same time)
So I made a few fake stone trees. The thing is when I switch on the limit maximum slope on the main surface layer(the fake stones layer is it's child layer) I get properly distributed fake stones but mostly without colours. How to solve this?
This is some old basic problem but sometimes it gets really bad.
Usually I use separate layers for shading terrain and adding fake stones. You can....use the child but uncheck the color of that surface layer to keep the color you designate in your fake stone shader. You can also make an independent fake stone shader in shaders and hook a distribution shader to that.
When you are experimenting also check out effects....intersect underlying, favor rises or depression...neat stuff there too.
A very useful tool is the search tool too Martin, just give it the basics and usually get great results, although a personal reply is always great.
Quote from: luvsmuzik on December 06, 2016, 07:54:24 PM
Usually I use separate layers for shading terrain and adding fake stones. You can....use the child but uncheck the color of that surface layer to keep the color you designate in your fake stone shader. You can also make an independent fake stone shader in shaders and hook a distribution shader to that.
When you are experimenting also check out effects....intersect underlying, favor rises or depression...neat stuff there too.
A very useful tool is the search tool too Martin, just give it the basics and usually get great results, although a personal reply is always great.
Of course I use the search tool here, but lot's of several years old unanswered questions and threads with not working links.
And sure, I used to use the intersect underlying a lot.
I tried to use a distribution layer to mask the fake stone layer itself but I get the same results.
Update: sorry for the question flood, it's just sometimes when I finish a complicated picture and then getting stuck with the simplest things are the worst.
I realised I have to use the terrain normal and it works.
http://www.planetside.co.uk/forums/index.php/topic,20665.msg205605.html#msg205605
This thread may help, but you may have it done already.
Quote from: luvsmuzik on December 06, 2016, 08:45:46 PM
http://www.planetside.co.uk/forums/index.php/topic,20665.msg205605.html#msg205605
This thread may help, but you may have it done already.
Thanks! I've seen this thread before though, they're talking about a population not fakestones.
But I have the solution - the terrain normals button ,that's all, it fixed the problem.
I have to tweak the colours etc, but I don't think I will use vegetation at all.
And the procedural monoliths are not really working. Chopped of top halves etc(WHAT were you thinking, terragen?! lol)
But I have the basalt- granite stone layer. Finally it works.
And with this I've done everything I had in mind with the merge shader last week:)
I was referring specifically to the discussion pro/con rock pop and fake stones where Dune suggested smoothing terrain to obtain proper coloring. sorry I am sure I misunderstood the content and conclusions discussed there.
Very nice results!
Quote from: luvsmuzik on December 06, 2016, 11:59:53 PM
I was referring specifically to the discussion pro/con rock pop and fake stones where Dune suggested smoothing terrain to obtain proper coloring. sorry I am sure I misunderstood the content and conclusions discussed there.
Very nice results!
Thanks! Its coming together:)
oh and sorry, its just I don't really use populations.Smoothing was already switched on, so really, the problem was solved with the terrain normal option:)
I had this problem 1-2 years ago when I was doing some pictures in terragen 3, but totally forgot about this solution.
I added some bigger sized colour variation and big crack textures to make it look less uniform in greater distances.
Such an amount experimentation going on here, interesting results.
Quote from: AP on December 07, 2016, 12:51:10 AM
Such an amount experimentation going on here, interesting results.
Yes AP, I immediately thought of your ground cover displacement clips with the wonderful plant simulations when he did the fake stone trees. :)
Yes, the pace of experimentation and iteration is really something! :D Reminds me of when Chinaski was active...
Martin, to fix the tops being cut off of large displacements, you can try increasing Displacement Tolerance in the Planet node settings. A value of 2 should fix it, or at least significantly improve it. It does increase render time though.
- Oshyan
Quote from: Oshyan on December 08, 2016, 01:37:19 AM
Yes, the pace of experimentation and iteration is really something! :D Reminds me of when Chinaski was active...
Martin, to fix the tops being cut off of large displacements, you can try increasing Displacement Tolerance in the Planet node settings. A value of 2 should fix it, or at least significantly improve it. It does increase render time though.
- Oshyan
Oh Thanks! I will check it! I didn't even think about to check the main planet node.
They were smaller, 4-5 meter tall boulders but yeah, with a lot of displacement. It was too much for terragen it seems. I remember having problems like this when I made big km tall rock formations in the past.
I have to work now so I render random pictures in the backgrounds. I mixed together all these shaders I made, so on the planet there are part of big sand dunes, dry carcked dird plains, forests and grassy hills, different types of rocks and cliffs. So I just go around on the planet and when I find something interesting I render it. I will post some pics later.
I think this is the fun part in terragen- to make entire worlds you can explore. I love the procedural workflow. It gives you freedom! :)
remade the cliffwall shaders-
in one node network there's a voronoi diff mix based displacement, simple perlin billow based displacement, voronoi cell mix displacement, and voronoi diff mix colour-adjusted to look like cracks. And then these are all mixed together with big masks.
I made a few different renders with only one of them switched on- on the same hill. Plus lateral only and normal displacement versions.
Strangely when the Y coordinate is stretched, it doesn't show up in the displacement. I mean no vertical like displacements. I don't really understand why. The x-z stretching work
Don't forget that the vertically displaced fractal are like pillars, not like long walls, so on a sloping ground, you wouldn't see the stretching. If the ground were near 90º then you'd see it alright.
Quote from: Dune on December 08, 2016, 10:49:40 AM
Don't forget that the vertically displaced fractal are like pillars, not like long walls, so on a sloping ground, you wouldn't see the stretching. If the ground were near 90º then you'd see it alright.
Hmm, even if I use lateral only displacement? It worked last time. Probably it was a really steep hill.
Here's all of the different displacement masked into one.
See it as a white column vertically transecting the sloping mountain; it will only displace lateral where the white hits the ground, so yes.
digging this tread, nice work man !
Some nice experimentation and interesting results.
Thanks everyone!
Didn't have much time for further experimentation, so I just shot a few renders with the existing shaders on some random tower structures.
Also a question:
I know it comes up frequently, but what's the reason behind not having different types of voronoi noises in terragen yet? Like manhattan, f1-f2, Chebyshev. I saw them in different programs, and they're probably 3d noises, so is there a problem implementing these in terragen? Or you have to pay for the use of these equations in a software?
More renders after some tweaking.
(Interesting thing has happened- I use the same 25 inch monitor for drawing on my laptop and for rendering on my workstation. Just checked terragen and how's the newest render is coming and noticed that the same picture I posted here looks darker on my laptop- but on the same monitor. So probably there's some colour scheme on the win10 on that pc that makes everything a little brighter.
So yeah, I think it's more than likely that my renders are a bit too dark on other machines.
and the rest
This last series is great! Did you throw some strata in there? Are you displacing a WM load or a TG fractal terrain from scratch? Looks good.
Awesome work...next some context as you seem to have your tool box working well....
Quote from: luvsmuzik on December 10, 2016, 11:52:14 AM
This last series is great! Did you throw some strata in there? Are you displacing a WM load or a TG fractal terrain from scratch? Looks good.
No, actually it's the same voronoi cell displacement as before:) Just stretched in the x-z coordinates to make it look like strata, and 4 different scales of noise is mixed together to make a "fake" fractal.
The terrain is a reallly simple one- the base terrain with smaller lead in scale, that's all.smallest scale is 20 mters, so every detail is the displacement. But I used the old rock texture- shader I made for the smaler rocks, so I will make a new one more "cliff" like.
Well, the new texture is ready. I used those famous Chinese mountains as reference. Also it seems Christmas has arrived in terragen haha
Quote from: Martin on December 10, 2016, 10:56:01 PM
Well, the new texture is ready. I used those famous Chinese mountains as reference. Also it seems Christmas has arrived in terragen haha
these are IMHO, your best yet. I know of those mountains and they're a great source of inspiration for sure.
Quote from: bobbystahr on December 10, 2016, 11:05:49 PM
Quote from: Martin on December 10, 2016, 10:56:01 PM
Well, the new texture is ready. I used those famous Chinese mountains as reference. Also it seems Christmas has arrived in terragen haha
these are IMHO, your best yet. I know of those mountains and they're a great source of inspiration for sure.
Oh thanks! But I only made these mountains to have something to render on my rendering pc while I'm working on my laptop.I'm rendering 4 pictures at once now, 2 of them will be really pretty as far as I can see now :)
I don't know what kind of horse you are rendering these on doing four at once, but amazing results. Terrain is awesome and clouds are almost stealing the show in these!!
Quote from: luvsmuzik on December 11, 2016, 08:30:39 AM
I don't know what kind of horse you are rendering these on doing four at once, but amazing results. Terrain is awesome and clouds are almost stealing the show in these!!
Yeah, to be honest I still can't get enough of the TG4 clouds,they're absolutely perfect!
Update:
Snowy crystal-world, tropical land, rainy sea, desert.
Sadly the crystal world render froze during rendering(after 4 hours) , so no proper AO and bloom on it:S
last bunch. I will spend the Christrmas at home so I won't be able to experiment for a while. Thanks for the tips you've all gave me in this thread!:)
The last few are very neat as well.
I'm back from my holiday- I had my laptop with me while I was away, so I could make some new shaders, but I had no computing power to make actual renders.
I tried to make new textures based on Iceland's volcanic landscapes. So darker, sometimes colourful basalt rocks , grey sandy parts, some snow, and mossy islands, greenish volcanic lakes and some magma.
(Still rendering the latest one with the magma lake)
I will ad some ground fog and better snow, and experiment with the lighting. There's a few layers of fakestones, but no displacement on them yet.
Topnotch!
Quote from: luvsmuzik on December 29, 2016, 09:02:21 AM
Topnotch!
Thanks!^^
Apparently the raytracing preview doesn't show iridescent materials. So this last picture ended up a mess-the lava- illuminated clouds are nice though!
Oh cool! Something absolutely different! I like it!
I'll work on this.
Quote from: Martin on December 29, 2016, 12:12:46 PM
I'll work on this.
volcanoes8jpg.jpg has real potential....keep on tweaking...
Nice renders. The glowing image kind of looks like some long exposure night photo.
I was experimenting with the terragen erosion, but this particular landscape was made in world machine(a 3x3 km height map)
I used the wear map for the lava mask at first- didn't really work
. Got these glowing mountains. So I made a terragen lava map, new texture, illumination map etc. sadly you cant really see the details, because all the little rocks etc(I used favour depressions)
Also, magma bokeh! :)
Wow! Especially 10 and 12 are working in my eyes! Cool!
I think I will scrap my voronoi cell based displacement node network ,and use the simple voronoi noise one.
It worked really well for smaller cliffs on earlier pictures, but whatever I do, these big rock towers look odd.
The vertical rock displacements are changed into horizontal rocks.
And a sea volcano. I'll update it soon
I tweaked that tower cliff too much, I just can't get good results anymore ugh.
Also night time and day time volcano
Tonight's renders.
All interesting examples.
Your texturing-coloring style looks kind of unique.
Quote from: Kadri on December 31, 2016, 04:59:10 AM
All interesting examples.
Your texturing-coloring style looks kind of unique.
Oh thank you!
To be honest, that's really good to hear! :)
Very nice examples of what`s possible in TG.
Your computer must be blanzing hot ;)
cheers, Klaus
You are very creative and productive. Many of your pictures have some new things in software exploration.
Thanks everyone!
A few other experiements
I like a lot of these, especially the towers. I hope you are saving versions of your scenes along the way so that you can reproduce what you create later on in other scenes. Your comment about "tweaking the tower cliff too much" makes me wonder if maybe you are just saving as a single TGD for some of these scenes and overwriting each time. TGDs are small so in my opinion it's best to save lots of them, with consecutive version numbers, and name your renders the same as the TGD so you can go back later and know exactly what TGD created each image. Hopefully you're already doing something like this. :)
- Oshyan
Quote from: Oshyan on January 02, 2017, 01:33:47 AM
I like a lot of these, especially the towers. I hope you are saving versions of your scenes along the way so that you can reproduce what you create later on in other scenes. Your comment about "tweaking the tower cliff too much" makes me wonder if maybe you are just saving as a single TGD for some of these scenes and overwriting each time. TGDs are small so in my opinion it's best to save lots of them, with consecutive version numbers, and name your renders the same as the TGD so you can go back later and know exactly what TGD created each image. Hopefully you're already doing something like this. :)
- Oshyan
Oh I have separate tgd files for every version!
What I meant is after hours or days of work and tweaking, sometimes I realise that the original version I made days ago was in fact better. But I usually save a new file even if I change the lights etc!
I went back to an older file and made some tweaking again and made one or two renders.
Originally I made several different types of displacements- voronoi cells vertically stretched mixed with horizontally stretched voronoi cell noice, mixed with simple voronoi nose vertically stretched mixed with horizontally stretched mixed with voronoi billows horizontal-vertical etc. So a lot of variety. But then I've got some errors so I ended up using just one type of noise. However looking back I like the variety so I will play with that old scene. Also This old file has the old Rock shader I made a month ago, while the new ones had a new shader I made based on those big Chinese sandstone cliffs.
Also made a Titan moon scene, but I realised this morning after 9 hours of render that I overdid the reflection on the rocks, and forgot to switch on the tiny noise displacement, so I will have to tweak this one as well.
Wow - the titan moon scene is great! Saw a documentations about this moon just a few days ago. Their animations could have based on your render ;)
Quote from: DocCharly65 on January 02, 2017, 07:21:16 AM
Wow - the titan moon scene is great! Saw a documentations about this moon just a few days ago. Their animations could have based on your render ;)
For some reason the science documentaries have really cheap visualisations when it's a moon- or exoplanet surface:S
Updates:
I forgot to click on the change view to render camera button so I accidentally made a random close up cliff render... and it's not bad! haha
Also fixed the Titan scene. Added some proper ground texture, orangish sand-dust on top of everything, fixed the stone sizes and distribution, no reflections, better displacement on the rocks.
Not sure if liquid methane looks like this but oh well...
Also a render with the new cliff textures(the over tweaked ) The detail noise displacement is a bit too strong, the clouds could be better, so it's not a very good pic.
update: I added the first titan render, for some reason the atmosphere didn't render properly (at least you can see there's a moon in the background)
Ah Still so many things to change. The Water - I mean liquid methane ended up looking really odd, the sand doesn't look right either, on the other render the top of the clouds are chopped off.
added some big ass rocks and ground fog to the Titan picture, tweaked the old rock cliff file, tweak the new cliff file, and made a monolith picture.
The monolith picture looks great.
Time for a progressive gallery. All fantastic stuff!
Slowly tweaking them. I usually render 4-5 pictures at once so it takes a while.
Added some space odyssey kind of ufos
Plus a more simple Titan render with normalised displacement and cliffs on big sloped parts
And trying to get interesting results with the Chinese rocks again.
The Titan landscape has some bluish sunset based on the real life blue Martian sunsets
It started as a marsh environment , but I think I'll but some canyons in the mix.
I love the low height base terrain fractal with extreme fractal warps. I get nice organic results.
New monolith renders ,and desert rocks with sand are in progress.
Quote from: Martin on January 03, 2017, 11:46:32 AM
Slowly tweaking them. I usually render 4-5 pictures at once so it takes a while.
Awesome machine you must have. On hour 26 of a 1920x960 render of my Fake Stone Island scene and it's looking like at least a 36 hour affair. Enjoying the progressions but you're way ahead of me re: TG4 technique so I've not really commented except that I like the stuff you do.
Quote from: bobbystahr on January 03, 2017, 01:54:22 PM
Quote from: Martin on January 03, 2017, 11:46:32 AM
Slowly tweaking them. I usually render 4-5 pictures at once so it takes a while.
Awesome machine you must have. On hour 26 of a 1920x960 render of my Fake Stone Island scene and it's looking like at least a 36 hour affair. Enjoying the progressions but you're way ahead of me re: TG4 technique so I've not really commented except that I like the stuff you do.
Oh my, not sure I get that. "On hour 26 of a 1920x960 render" ?
Anyway, thank you:)
Also: I just checked a cliff tgd file that was posted here in the file sharing section. Mind blown. So many different ways to get similar results. My brain hurts trying to understand why to use this and that. (voronoi vector instead of simple voronoi cell etc)
also I just realised that I wasn't using negative displacement recently...no idea why.The Transform input shader is amazing.
I see random text coordinates from xyz at random places, a bit confusing.
Also , I've been using really small displacement as a the fake grass shader, but I think it's better to use fakestones? Not sure if there's any difference though.
The sin , smooth step etc functions are too scary for me yet.
Quote from: Kadri on January 03, 2017, 05:49:34 AM
The monolith picture looks great.
Thanks.I like that movie. That simple form looks really sinister on an alien planet kind of environment, and it has an amazing contrast with the natural environment.
So I like using monoliths.
Quote from: luvsmuzik on January 03, 2017, 10:08:43 AM
Time for a progressive gallery. All fantastic stuff!
Is there a gallery part here?
I have a painting gallery on devart, some stuff on pixiv and tumblr,
And a gallery for my zbrush scultprs on cgsociety.
A few more.
Quote from: Martin on January 03, 2017, 03:04:03 PM
Quote from: bobbystahr on January 03, 2017, 01:54:22 PM
Quote from: Martin on January 03, 2017, 11:46:32 AM
Slowly tweaking them. I usually render 4-5 pictures at once so it takes a while.
Oh my, not sure I get that. "On hour 26 of a 1920x960 render" ?
Anyway, thank you:)
quote]
I was at that time in the 26th hour of a 1920x960 render...up to the 30th hour now doing the water.
Quote from: bobbystahr on January 03, 2017, 05:10:43 PM
Quote from: Martin on January 03, 2017, 03:04:03 PM
Quote from: bobbystahr on January 03, 2017, 01:54:22 PM
Quote from: Martin on January 03, 2017, 11:46:32 AM
Slowly tweaking them. I usually render 4-5 pictures at once so it takes a while.
Oh my, not sure I get that. "On hour 26 of a 1920x960 render" ?
Anyway, thank you:)
quote]
I was at that time in the 26th hour of a 1920x960 render...up to the 30th hour now doing the water.
Oh damn, I get it now! It makes sense, sorry, I was a bit tired...
Yeah, I had a 21 hour render yesterday. But oddly, most of these day long renders end up being the weaker ones!
Depending on what you want to share, you can add your gallery links to your profile or to each post, I think.
There is a shared file, Dune's grass, and a couple other methods for procedural ground cover. Complex to explain, for me; but I have used and they do work. However, you seem to have the hang of excellent terrain work, so do what works for you. ;D
Another monolith render.
also I started a completely new cliff scene yesterday night, but I stil have problems with it.The displacement just won't work the way I imagined ugh.
Heres a test render
And the titan picture with atmosphere.
This new cliff displacement doesn't seem to work right.
The secondary displacement won't show up even with compute normals.
I think I found the problems with the new cliff displacement. It look s a tiny bit better now.
Some previous renders:
Update:
Aah, I had to switch on the use final normal in the transform input node too. That changed the results completely !
Hehe....great stuff, but those clouds in "well it's something" are more to my liking than in the improved displacement one. I like both images, but I really want to dive into those soft thick ones, and I do not think that is what you were going for.
I am not criticizing, just do not want your terrain lost in the mist. Improved ground cover in titan, like the small stones added!
Quote from: luvsmuzik on January 05, 2017, 09:38:04 AM
Hehe....great stuff, but those clouds in "well it's something" are more to my liking than in the improved displacement one. I like both images, but I really want to dive into those soft thick ones, and I do not think that is what you were going for.
I am not criticizing, just do not want your terrain lost in the mist. Improved ground cover in titan, like the small stones added!
Oh well don't you use Terragen 4?
I mean with the new cloud system it literally takes 3-5 minutes of tweaking to get some amazing cloud effect. I'm in love with the T4 clouds really haha
now I see this, I aint been in here much lately......good rocks btw
Getting better, I have to fix a few errors here and there but it works now.
Did we find get altitude clip? Much better camera angle here. Very nice.
Quote from: luvsmuzik on January 05, 2017, 03:02:15 PM
Did we find get altitude clip? Much better camera angle here. Very nice.
Oh , what's this "get altitude clip" ? :O
I just used two strata layers with masks, so it's not uniform.
Quote from: Martin on January 05, 2017, 03:53:33 PM
Quote from: luvsmuzik on January 05, 2017, 03:02:15 PM
Did we find get altitude clip? Much better camera angle here. Very nice.
Oh , what's this "get altitude clip" ? :O
I just used two strata layers with masks, so it's not uniform.
I thought maybe you had flattened the tops of your displacements to avoid the spiking. This thread may or may not interest you. However the clip works if you want a level mesa. Since you have tower like displacements, probably not needed here.
http://www.planetside.co.uk/forums/index.php/topic,21784.msg219109.html#msg219109
Quote from: luvsmuzik on January 05, 2017, 04:43:18 PM
Quote from: Martin on January 05, 2017, 03:53:33 PM
Quote from: luvsmuzik on January 05, 2017, 03:02:15 PM
Did we find get altitude clip? Much better camera angle here. Very nice.
Oh , what's this "get altitude clip" ? :O
I just used two strata layers with masks, so it's not uniform.
Ah thanks! I'll check it out! I dont really need it now though, but it will come handy!
I thought maybe you had flattened the tops of your displacements to avoid the spiking. This thread may or may not interest you. However the clip works if you want a level mesa. Since you have tower like displacements, probably not needed here.
http://www.planetside.co.uk/forums/index.php/topic,21784.msg219109.html#msg219109
I can barely keep up with all of this. 8)
PLanet with lights, luminous clouds
Any tips how to use compute terrain- normal's patch size? I usually leave the terrain normal patch size at 20. But After making a new scene I realised that was the problem with a lot of the displacements. 2 works better. But I know that in the past small patch sizes also caused a lot of errors. If I have a displacement with small and big details as well...How to determine the right patch size? Guess? Tweaking? Smaller the better?
Also I'm still not sure how often should I use a compute normal node. After every bigger displacement? Like if I have a fractal noise as a terrain-I need a compute normal-terrain. After that I have strata. And voronoi billows displacement..Then Voronoi cell noise
Displacement. Should I put a compute normal after all of them?
The less compute nodes the better, they all take time. If you need lateral displacements or displacements that specifically act upon earler displacements a compute terrain or compute normal would be needed. It's easy to check out what the differences are, just add one of them where you would think it necessary, zoom in and 'd' (disable) the compute node; see what happens to your displacement.
Same with patch size; it's meters, so if you work in big displacements a small patch size is often overkill, but if you go small, a 1m patch size or even smaller would be needed.
With displacement intersection (and smoothing) the patch size also determines the calculated (averaged) smoothness, so with bigger values the (snow) fields will be smoother/grander.
Quote from: Dune on January 06, 2017, 09:25:07 AM
The less compute nodes the better, they all take time. If you need lateral displacements or displacements that specifically act upon earler displacements a compute terrain or compute normal would be needed. It's easy to check out what the differences are, just add one of them where you would think it necessary, zoom in and 'd' (disable) the compute node; see what happens to your displacement.
Same with patch size; it's meters, so if you work in big displacements a small patch size is often overkill, but if you go small, a 1m patch size or even smaller would be needed.
With displacement intersection (and smoothing) the patch size also determines the calculated (averaged) smoothness, so with bigger values the (snow) fields will be smoother/grander.
Thanks!
I've made some tests.
I think there are a lot of instances where I should've use more compute normals. That's why I have some random errors on my displacements.
Though when I tried to put 4 compute normals in my more complex scenes it slowed down the render a hundred times indeed. And because it was tweaked to work without the normals, I think I'l get a lot of new errors.
Using a smaller patch size is mainly useful for smaller detail representation. It should not hurt your larger features, in general, though they may be "negatively" affected by the smaller-scale features that show up when you reduce patch size. So basically the default of 20 is fine unless you're finding you're limited in how you're able to represent and/or act on smaller scale displacements.
As far as how many Compute nodes to use and where, as Ulco said, technically you should use one new one every time you modify the displacement *if* you want any subsequent displacement to be based correctly on the new displaced shape of the terrain. However in practice you can often use fewer Computes, and it is indeed desirable to do so to avoid high render times. There are a couple ways you can do this, for example combine your noise functions beforehand in color space, and find ways to get the shapes you want in a single displacement pass.
This can be especially effective if you break your workflow up into different scales, so the large scale displacement is created from a single displacement input that may be made up of the combination of several other shaders for example, but is only being displaced once. Same with the medium and then smaller scale displacements. This can allow you to get nice and complex shapes with overhangs and other unique and important features, without having to have a ton of compute nodes.
Sometimes it is not practical to do this and/or the result will be different from how it would be if you added one large displacement, then another on top of it, however subsequent large displacements can often cause overlapping geometry anyway, which is another problem that creates large render times and undesirable render artifacts.
So basically think creatively to try to create the shapes you want in as few steps as possible, especially when it comes to displacement. You can combine non-displacement data easier and "cheaper" than recalculating subsequent displacements with Compute nodes. So try to take that approach. And, as Ulco also said, when in doubt try adding a Compute node where you think it might make a difference and then see if you like the change or not.
- Oshyan
Quote from: Oshyan on January 06, 2017, 04:37:26 PM
Using a smaller patch size is mainly useful for smaller detail representation. It should not hurt your larger features, in general, though they may be "negatively" affected by the smaller-scale features that show up when you reduce patch size. So basically the default of 20 is fine unless you're finding you're limited in how you're able to represent and/or act on smaller scale displacements.
As far as how many Compute nodes to use and where, as Ulco said, technically you should use one new one every time you modify the displacement *if* you want any subsequent displacement to be based correctly on the new displaced shape of the terrain. However in practice you can often use fewer Computes, and it is indeed desirable to do so to avoid high render times. There are a couple ways you can do this, for example combine your noise functions beforehand in color space, and find ways to get the shapes you want in a single displacement pass.
This can be especially effective if you break your workflow up into different scales, so the large scale displacement is created from a single displacement input that may be made up of the combination of several other shaders for example, but is only being displaced once. Same with the medium and then smaller scale displacements. This can allow you to get nice and complex shapes with overhangs and other unique and important features, without having to have a ton of compute nodes.
Sometimes it is not practical to do this and/or the result will be different from how it would be if you added one large displacement, then another on top of it, however subsequent large displacements can often cause overlapping geometry anyway, which is another problem that creates large render times and undesirable render artifacts.
So basically think creatively to try to create the shapes you want in as few steps as possible, especially when it comes to displacement. You can combine non-displacement data easier and "cheaper" than recalculating subsequent displacements with Compute nodes. So try to take that approach. And, as Ulco also said, when in doubt try adding a Compute node where you think it might make a difference and then see if you like the change or not.
- Oshyan
Thanks for the detailed answer!
Combining the displacements into one colour map was the way I worked until now. But some of the bigger displacements has changed the terrain too much, so I've got errors. That's why I started using several displacements. One colour mix for the big displacements, one for the cracks, and one for the med-small noise.
Though after testing, I realised I get better results with only the original compute terrain normals. Maybe only one compute normal after the bigger displacement, but even that can cause more errors than what it fixes.
With the newest valley picture , a small patch size in the compute terrain have fixed a lot of odd displacement errors. but when I used the same smaller patch size for rocks earlier, it made the rocks into spikes. So it's a bit tricky for me to find out what to use yet.
I've always been mixing a lot of different maps into one displacement map:
self luminous alien plants, and planet with city lights.
A few night renders.
I made some Geonosis rocks from star wars- and ugh, the Rebels show just had Geonosis in it yesterday night.
Also another alien plant in the valley render , another planet with light render.
There are a few errors in these renders, but the new versions are rendering right now.
I just love terragen. In Attack of the clones , all of Geonosis was a miniature (the rocks, the sand, the arena etc) And now I can make them at home on my pc in hours: )
Also a tweaked basalt field render.
They all look very good, no doubt about it.
Sometimes I wish there would be some sort of real world reference sized object in the scene
in the pictures posted of others as well. Just to better understand how detailed - or not - those
structures are set up in Terragen. I almost always find it much harder to "construct" a terrain in
smaller scale with the camera close by and just 2m high above the ground.
Some of the shaders tend to break up on me and leave ugly artefacts behind I cannot get rid off.
For example the last one: basalt field.
I have trouble to tell if the camera was really close or rather far away pointing at larger structures.
Just so I know if I do need to try harder with my small scale scenery ;) Great work, anyways!
You know you`re way around in TG pretty well, I think.
Cheers, Klaus
I find I agree with KlausK re: reference objects. That's mainly why I often inject man made objects into my scenes.
Quote from: bobbystahr on January 09, 2017, 12:37:30 PM
I find I agree with KlausK re: reference objects. That's mainly why I often inject man made objects into my scenes.
But in my alien planet- ancient volcanic landscapes , a man made object would be ....odd. Not to mention terragen is not the best at rendering obj files.
ONe of the reasons I would never use obj trees etc.
Though I think I can put together some star wars style machinery in maya or 3ds max, but I'm not used to not using normal maps etc.
Also bad news. IT seems 5 renders at the same time was too much for my pc. win 10 don't get slow when you don't have enough memory...it goes gray. So I can see the cursor but everything has been gray for an hour now. I think I lost 5 6 hour renders:S
Quote from: Martin on January 09, 2017, 02:02:47 PM
Quote from: bobbystahr on January 09, 2017, 12:37:30 PM
Not to mention terragen is not the best at rendering obj files.
ONe of the reasons I would never use obj trees etc.
Though I think I can put together some star wars style machinery in maya or 3ds max, but I'm not used to not using normal maps etc.
au contraire..I use many .obj files in my renders (it's polygon handling a noted strength of TG) and have little if any problems and they render at least as good as any other renderer I've used and better than most. Doesn't have to be man made, could be an actual alien wandering along the ridge of a volcano basking in it's warmth....
Quote from: bobbystahr on January 09, 2017, 02:19:27 PM
Quote from: Martin on January 09, 2017, 02:02:47 PM
Quote from: bobbystahr on January 09, 2017, 12:37:30 PM
Not to mention terragen is not the best at rendering obj files.
ONe of the reasons I would never use obj trees etc.
Though I think I can put together some star wars style machinery in maya or 3ds max, but I'm not used to not using normal maps etc.
au contraire..I use many .obj files in my renders (it's polygon handling a noted strength of TG) and have little if any problems and they render at least as good as any other renderer I've used and better than most. Doesn't have to be man made, could be an actual alien wandering along the ridge of a volcano basking in it's warmth....
hmm not sure about that.Every model has spectacular maps, normal maps , bump maps, subsurface scattering, etc. How does terragen handle those?
And what about the proper GI? It seems to me it has a problem with small details. at least compared to other especially physical based renderes like Maxwell render.
TG is definitely not as good as something like Maxwell or Vray at rendering objects, but it does a decent enough job, especially for larger-scale scenes with many objects like trees in a forest. Subsurface scattering is not available at present, but there is a simple translucency function which approximates some of its effects and is valuable on trees and other plant life. Specular and bump maps can already be handled well.
- Oshyan
Tonight I remade the renders I lost yesterday.
More tweaked Geonosian rocks,
Another valley render,
voronoi cell cliff render(I need a new texture node network)
Made a simple sand dune scene, and saved the node network, so no I have quite a nice library of different rocks, sand, dirt, cliffs etc.It's easier to create new scenes:)
And a new terrain with a lot of fractal warp. That wall in the background is around 10 km tall.Using several big fractal warps as a terrain can create some really nice interesting and unique landscapes!
--the rest--
and the rest
You are remarkably prolific! It's almost a bit overwhelming. geonosis 9 and 10 j are my favorites. The "fluting" on the lower parts of those formations looks very much like erosion on hoodoos in Bryce Canyon, which is quite difficult to emulate I think.
I'm curious if you'll pick any particular image or scene to spend more time with. I know (if I recall correctly) that you are using the free version so you have some limitations, but still I think you could bring one of these to a more "final" state that would look superb. Many of them already look great, but perhaps lack a focus or "narrative", if you will. You could even consider rendering at higher resolution/detail on PixelPlow...
- Oshyan
Quote from: Martin on January 09, 2017, 02:02:47 PM
ONe of the reasons I would never use obj trees etc.
??? ??? ???
Hmm, as Oshyan said, there may be better and more specialised renderers for that, but if you take a look at all the images here that contain objects and especially trees, you might agree, that it can look very natural, if you spend some time tweaking the settings.
Quote from: Oshyan on January 10, 2017, 09:30:59 PM
You are remarkably prolific! It's almost a bit overwhelming. geonosis 9 and 10 j are my favorites. The "fluting" on the lower parts of those formations looks very much like erosion on hoodoos in Bryce Canyon, which is quite difficult to emulate I think.
I'm curious if you'll pick any particular image or scene to spend more time with. I know (if I recall correctly) that you are using the free version so you have some limitations, but still I think you could bring one of these to a more "final" state that would look superb. Many of them already look great, but perhaps lack a focus or "narrative", if you will. You could even consider rendering at higher resolution/detail on PixelPlow...
- Oshyan
Thanks!
I was surprised how well my idea worked on that geonosian spire. And it's really simple, just a perlin billow noise with no gully smoothing and low roughness stretched in the Y vector as a negative displacement masked by a voronoi billow noise! (plus another really tiny voronoi billow noise for detail)
For a narrative, maybe I can model a new spaceship and render it in 3ds max and composite it into a picture.I always try to find interesting compositions and cloud formations, etc so I'm not sure what else I could do. PixelPlow looks like an interesting idea. Never used renderfarms before but it might be a goo idea for one or two bigger pictures.
A few more renders, took a lot of time rendering them yet not the best results. No time for tweaking though.
I can't find out what's the problem with the organic land scene.There are 5 different "plants" in the scene. all of them has it' own colour shader and self illumination shader. BUT! When they're all switched on only 1 gives of light. If I switch of one another one start glowing. I have no idea what's going on.
Okay , I'm stuck with the organic land. The illumination just won't work. I have no idea what's wrong.
The warpland looks interesting though, totally forgot that terragen has spotlights(I've used them before though)
It gives a kind of "exploring an alien planet"atmosphere
A few minutes of post processing
This one reminds me of the forbidden planet
Quote from: Martin on January 11, 2017, 07:08:46 PM
This one reminds me of the forbidden planet
Yes it does.
Dropped the geonosian spire shader on the terrain.
I finally found out a way to make the self illuminated organic scene work, but sadly my pc froze for no apparent reason while rendering.(I still had a lot of unused memory so I'm not sure...sometimes terragen just freezes my computer.)
I like the old fifties scifi movies , those matte paintings and miniatures have a really nice other worldly feeling.
also my favourite write is Arthur C.Clark, his space odyssey books are amazing. And the movie 2001 odyssey is still the best at portraying the silent coldness and vastness of space. I think I will try to make a little short movie using terragen renders, and composite animation in a similar style.
woohoo @ organic!
organic 3j ist very good and intersting in my eyes!
organic 5j would be nicer if the background would have a less detailed look or without the mountains.
I will work on that organic picture. I was happy I could fix the problem with the self illumination, didn't have time to tweak it properly though.
Tried the glass shader:
Retextured an older world machine terrain.
I used the old volcanic sand shader
The last one looks like a photo.
Quote from: Kadri on January 13, 2017, 09:04:16 PM
The last one looks like a photo.
Well, thanks! haha
Artist of the Month award* goes to... Martin!
*We don't have an AOTM award, but if we did...
This last series is your best so far, the closeup details are stunning and the wide shots give a great feel for MartinWorld...
Quote from: Matt on January 13, 2017, 10:14:14 PM
Artist of the Month award* goes to... Martin!
*We don't have an AOTM award, but if we did...
aww haha, thanks! Good to hear people like my work!: )
Quote from: bobbystahr on January 13, 2017, 11:45:20 PM
This last series is your best so far, the closeup details are stunning and the wide shots give a great feel for MartinWorld...
I'm more proud of the chinese towers. but surely these pics has a special kind of atmosphere- literally haha
Just rewatched the forbidden planet two days ago, so the retro alien landscape was inspired by that movie:)
A few more renders.
Welcome to the Moon
Special moon render batch
Great thread, Nice classic Sci-Fi works
Lots to look at. Especially like warpland 21. :)
Quote from: Danny on January 14, 2017, 06:42:54 PM
Great thread, Nice classic Sci-Fi works
Thanks! I just love classic Sci-fi movies: )
Quote from: fleetwood on January 14, 2017, 07:32:29 PM
Lots to look at. Especially like warpland 21. :)
Yeah, that turned out pretty interesting! : )
And the last few.: )
Well, that's for today: )
Some very good extraterrestial renders!
Warpfield
Very interesting and a pleasure to see these. Good job.
Quote from: luvsmuzik on January 16, 2017, 08:26:04 PM
Very interesting and a pleasure to see these. Good job.
Oh thank you! : )
more
Very nice thread with lots of interesting and promising work, I especially like the lunar renders and how you dealt with the brightness/contrast there :)
These last renders remind me of a guy from the TG0.9x days, called 'martinjbirk' ;)
Quote from: Tangled-Universe on January 17, 2017, 07:41:47 PM
Very nice thread with lots of interesting and promising work, I especially like the lunar renders and how you dealt with the brightness/contrast there :)
These last renders remind me of a guy from the TG0.9x days, called 'martinjbirk' ;)
Thanks! :)
Found his work on other sites. Really nice photorealistic renders from all the way back in 2009.
Okay, I let terragen render last night, so I have a few new pictures.
well..a lot.
- More extraterrestrial renders
And World machine heightfields with terragen shaders.
the rest:
Sorry for the picture flood, I can't post them all in one post
....more
Make sure you check the rest above--I posted a lot today: )
Made a new rock formation from scratch, and more extraterrestrial renders
Now that's an interesting world to explore. Wonder what kind of vegetation would grow there. Wild twisty trees is my first thought.
Quote from: bobbystahr on January 19, 2017, 08:39:39 AM
Now that's an interesting world to explore. Wonder what kind of vegetation would grow there. Wild twisty trees is my first thought.
Which one? The desert? The warpfield? Or the forbidden planet?
Quote from: Martin on January 19, 2017, 09:45:34 AM
Quote from: bobbystahr on January 19, 2017, 08:39:39 AM
Now that's an interesting world to explore. Wonder what kind of vegetation would grow there. Wild twisty trees is my first thought.
Which one? The desert? The warpfield? Or the forbidden planet?
Uh, the most recent the Desert scenes. Ade made a Twisty Tree that is suitably barren and leafless to suit this environment.
But apparently he didn't share it here,
maybe on the FB Terragen Gallery page if you have FB access.If you want it he says I can share it. Was so long ago he no longer has it on his drive...but I like it as a well distorted tree. If you want it send me an email to:
bstar at mts dot net
and I'll send you a dl link
Quote from: bobbystahr on January 19, 2017, 09:51:44 AM
Quote from: Martin on January 19, 2017, 09:45:34 AM
Quote from: bobbystahr on January 19, 2017, 08:39:39 AM
Now that's an interesting world to explore. Wonder what kind of vegetation would grow there. Wild twisty trees is my first thought.
Which one? The desert? The warpfield? Or the forbidden planet?
Uh, the most recent the Desert scenes. Ade made a Twisty Tree that is suitably barren and leafless to suit this environment.
But apparently he didn't share it here, maybe on the FB Terrageb Galery page if you have FB access.
Hmm it's my simplest scene yet. Just some rock towers with 3 perlin billow displacement map.
I downloaded a free tree obj, I don't have time making my own model now, so I'll try a dead tree population.
Quote from: bobbystahr on January 19, 2017, 09:51:44 AM
Quote from: Martin on January 19, 2017, 09:45:34 AM
Quote from: bobbystahr on January 19, 2017, 08:39:39 AM
Now that's an interesting world to explore. Wonder what kind of vegetation would grow there. Wild twisty trees is my first thought.
Which one? The desert? The warpfield? Or the forbidden planet?
Uh, the most recent the Desert scenes. Ade made a Twisty Tree that is suitably barren and leafless to suit this environment.
But apparently he didn't share it here, maybe on the FB Terragen Gallery page if you have FB access.If you want it he says I can share it. Was so long ago he no longer has it on his drive...but I like it as a well distorted tree. If you want it send me an email to:
bstar at mts dot net
and I'll send you a dl link
Thank you! I'm trying to make a test render with the free tree obj I've found on the net , but the damn thing crashes second time in a row. Just lost 5 7 hours renders:S
Finally, my pc didn't freeze last night during render. ugh.
So here's the new bunch
Mars, dead trees etc
second part of the bunch:)
More.
Last renders for today. What do you think?
I lied, here's more
I like "newmars 14 j.jpg" especially.
The postwork on the images is a little too much for my taste. I feel like if i have a problem in my eyes even :)
Quote from: Kadri on January 21, 2017, 11:44:35 PM
I like "newmars 14 j.jpg" especially.
The postwork on the images is a little too much for my taste. I feel like if i have a problem in my eyes even :)
I echo Kadri, lovely renders, but the lens distortion/aberration is too strong, if it was barely perceptible it would become better (imho)!
Cheers
Jason
Many great renderings especially those with a vintage look, which is really my thing. Yes, there is too much depth of field which makes it look like a macro shot. Otherwise great work. :)
I think the NEWDESERTROCKS series are the best here. They look the most like a "final" scene. The others are interesting, often good, but look more like texture/material/displacement tests.
I also want to mention that when you render with objects, memory use will go up. So that may be why things started crashing, if you're used to doing *5 renders at once* (which, by the way, is very unusual; I'm not aware of anyone else who does that). If, for example, your renders each typically used 2-3GB of memory, that's 10-15GB. Adding objects will increase that by a notable amount, perhaps another 1GB, which could easily overwhelm your memory. So you may be better off doing "only" 3 renders at a time, for example.
- Oshyan
Quote from: Oshyan on January 22, 2017, 01:30:26 PM
I think the NEWDESERTROCKS series are the best here. They look the most like a "final" scene. The others are interesting, often good, but look more like texture/material/displacement tests.
I also want to mention that when you render with objects, memory use will go up. So that may be why things started crashing, if you're used to doing *5 renders at once* (which, by the way, is very unusual; I'm not aware of anyone else who does that). If, for example, your renders each typically used 2-3GB of memory, that's 10-15GB. Adding objects will increase that by a notable amount, perhaps another 1GB, which could easily overwhelm your memory. So you may be better off doing "only" 3 renders at a time, for example.
- Oshyan
Well, the best thing in terragen that I can create huge worlds and then explore it and find interesting landscapes to render. So I never use it to create one precise picture, more like flying around and snapping photographs. I will hold back with the post effects , it just looked good with the old retro styled extraterrestrial landscapes. MAybe if I could render in higher resolutions...but I use the free version. Maybe someday when I buy the creative version)
The last time it crashed I was only rendering two pictures (So I had a lot of free memory (I have 32gb, but I know that a lot of people are using 64 gb these days) It always crashes when I'm changing things on a scene, so...seems like sometimes terragen just crashes windows. Well it doesn't happen too often so it's alright.
A cloudy desert rock render, another alien night render and a scene I was trying to render for a long time but I gave up-
A spacelift- for some reason an object long enough to connect two planets is just too much for terragen. I've been rendering these pictures for more than 15 hours and it's still less than half way finished. also it doesn't look visually interesting so I won't work on it anymore. Not to mention that the whole idea is physically impossible of course .(even with a gravitationally locked planet -moon will have a slightly elliptic orbit)
Interesting.
I used a very big object (around 1 GB) without problem in Terragen (And there were other objects too).
Too much micro displacement and-or reflection on the object?
Quote from: Kadri on January 22, 2017, 02:20:22 PM
Interesting.
I used a very big object (around 1 GB) without problem in Terragen mre then once (And there were other objects too).
Too much micro displacement and-or reflection on the object?
That's the strange thing! No displacement or reflection on it at all. Seems like the fact that it connects two planets is somehow too much for terragen. Not sure why.
Strange indeed. You might have seen this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_k0kbj7QmvM
Have you tried to render the object separately?
Quote from: Kadri on January 22, 2017, 02:45:40 PM
Strange indeed. You might have seen this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_k0kbj7QmvM
Have you tried to render the object separately?
Oh wow, talk about physically possible things haha
Looks amazing. I've been neglecting proper hard surface modelling last year.
I've Never tried to render separate objects. Not even sure if it's possible in the free version.
Thanks.
What i mean is just disable all the planets etc. and leave only the sun and the object and render.
Should be no problem in the free version.
Quote from: Kadri on January 22, 2017, 03:06:41 PM
Thanks.
What i mean is just disable all the planets etc. and leave only the sun and the object and render.
Should be no problem in the free version.
But then there would be no interaction , shadow with the scene, clouds, atmosphere , GI etc. It would be easier to just paint it. I think I'll just do that.
I'm not sure if you were saying you were adjusting settings *during a render*, but if so that's definitely not something you should do. That's the one big error in the GeekAtPlay videos, and I hope they correct it in the near future. Although it is technically possible to change settings while rendering (i.e. the system does not prevent it), it definitely leads to instability and is not an officially supported action.
- Oshyan
Quote from: Oshyan on January 22, 2017, 04:14:44 PM
I'm not sure if you were saying you were adjusting settings *during a render*, but if so that's definitely not something you should do. That's the one big error in the GeekAtPlay videos, and I hope they correct it in the near future. Although it is technically possible to change settings while rendering (i.e. the system does not prevent it), it definitely leads to instability and is not an officially supported action.
- Oshyan
oops I knew it will be easy to misunderstand. No, I was rendering one scene while I was tweaking settings in ANOTHER terragen file.
I know it's not a wise thing to change settings during a render : )
More desert rock renders, with less post work. :)
It was silly to use voronoi cells as displacement in the past, colour adjust with simple perlin billow noise is an amazing displacement tool!
Yeah, I'm finally satisfied with my rocks. This is the kind of rock formation I was trying to do for a long time.
Very Nice!
Numbers 10 & 11 displaced with chess pieces, right? Those are awesome. Good job!
Quote from: luvsmuzik on January 23, 2017, 09:03:43 PM
Very Nice!
Numbers 10 & 11 displaced with chess pieces, right? Those are awesome. Good job!
haha they do look like chess pieces! lol
Yes, the last three.
NEWDESERTROCKS5 trees 18 j / 26 j and 27 j are my new favorites :) very cool!
Rocks!
By Jove, I think you've got it too! BTW #19 has great lighting, ground terrain, and love the mist cloud? layer.
I have to say I was wrong. You can get nice results with obj trees in terragen.
The latest with the trees are a welcoming addition. The previous seem reminiscent of Wadi Rum in Jordan.
Quote from: AP on January 24, 2017, 10:14:04 PM
The latest with the trees are a welcoming addition. The previous seem reminiscent of Wadi Rum in Jordan.
Wadi Rum is amazing, though I kind of had enough of it, they basically used it as the environment in every single martian movies. I want proper Mars landscapes god damnit! haha
Rainforest and winter spires
Quote from: Martin on January 25, 2017, 12:37:42 PM
Quote from: AP on January 24, 2017, 10:14:04 PM
The latest with the trees are a welcoming addition. The previous seem reminiscent of Wadi Rum in Jordan.
Wadi Rum is amazing, though I kind of had enough of it, they basically used it as the environment in every single martian movies. I want proper Mars landscapes god damnit! haha
Agreed, however what you have achieved is something I have been attempting.
little upgrades, tweaks.
Tried a close up, it works:)
And a floating rock:)
This is just personal preference, but I really like NEWDESERTROCKS forest closeup 4 j.jpg
Yes, very realistic! Keep it going!
Grassy towers:)
Quote from: masonspappy on January 25, 2017, 11:43:18 PM
This is just personal preference, but I really like NEWDESERTROCKS forest closeup 4 j.jpg
I second that, very nice.
Also like 6 j very much, getting Avatar like.
These grassy towers are really cool!!
Thanks everyone! :)
More floating rocks
These grassy towers are absolutely fabulous!!! Cinematic!!
more.
Cool! Pandora feeling! :)
Quote from: DocCharly65 on January 27, 2017, 03:23:09 AM
Cool! Pandora feeling! :)
It wasn't my intention but true, its really Pandora like! Especially the floating rocks:)
Quote from: Martin on January 27, 2017, 09:56:03 PM
Quote from: DocCharly65 on January 27, 2017, 03:23:09 AM
Cool! Pandora feeling! :)
It wasn't my intention but true, its really Pandora like! Especially the floating rocks:)
They look really good when there's no floaters...these new ones seem to have that solved. Well done.
Nice. Misty mountains (and images :P ;D ) .
A few more experiments. Heh I actually like how terragen renders trees. I'm surprised. Most of the renders I see on the net are ...well really unrealistic. But with just a tiny bit of tweaking t4 does a great job!
It's great to see where your project started, and see how far you progress now!
EDIT: Are you still using the free version?!
Quote from: Ariel DK on January 28, 2017, 09:08:56 PM
It's great to see where your project started, and see how far you progress now!
EDIT: Are you still using the free version?!
Thanks! Yeah, I'm getting there^^
Also yes, only the free version:) That's why the resolution is not the best.
oops, I just watched Total recall. Amazing movie, so much better than these new remakes :S
So- a little old fashioned Mars landscape:)
Convincing "Total Recall ambience" :)
Cool!
Wow, Martin. Very good renders!
Quote from: DocCharly65 on January 29, 2017, 09:12:56 AM
Convincing "Total Recall ambience" :)
Cool!
Thanks!
There's more!: P
The high are level, nice. 8)
Quote from: bla bla 2 on January 29, 2017, 03:59:23 PM
The high are level, nice. 8)
Sorry , not sure if I understand:O
Holy cow, using a spot light with a bigger aperture etc makes the rendering time 5 times as long.
Rocks.
terragen is amazing.
The geologist and the sci-fi fan in me is happy.
Oh ,The wonderful green meadows of Mars
WAIT WHAT....
I have a problem with the glass shader. I put a glass dome over the martian trees (would've been cruel to let them die in the harsh martian atmosphere)
But...it's either black or the inside is oddly reflecting something... it's just odd
UPDATE: Well..Getting there..The refraction is still strange though
Any tips ? I looked at other threads about glass, but I can't find the problem.
NO idea how to make that glass dome work.
So here's a few rock renders
Looks like you took TG's sphere object for the dome, if so try an imported
sphere, that should give better results.
Quote from: j meyer on February 01, 2017, 01:08:32 PM
Looks like you took TG's sphere object for the dome, if so try an imported
sphere, that should give better results.
Thanks, that worked! :)
If I use an obj file without proper uv s, can I somehow tell terragen to use simple word coordinates to put procedural textures on it?
Sigh...I had to texture the damn thing. Anyway, here's the render.I made a sphere in 3ds max, and I though that if it's already open, let's make some scifi stuff , like a big telescope , and some space antennas.
what the actual f***ck , terragen, what are you doing. It renders the background beautifully, THEN changes into that low poly Idon'tknowwhat.
Is that suppose to be some refraction effect?
Don't worry, increase the ray detail multiplier in the render subdivision settings. It's set to 0.25 by default, so if you increase it to 1, it should look as you want it to. It's about the accuracy of reflections and refractions.
Quote from: Martin on February 01, 2017, 04:02:05 PM
If I use an obj file without proper uv s, can I somehow tell terragen to use simple word coordinates to put procedural textures on it?
Pipe your shaders through a Transform shader set to world space.
Quote from: j meyer on February 02, 2017, 12:11:38 PM
Quote from: Martin on February 01, 2017, 04:02:05 PM
If I use an obj file without proper uv s, can I somehow tell terragen to use simple word coordinates to put procedural textures on it?
Pipe your shaders through a Transform shader set to world space.
Ah thanks! That's a good idea. I tried get xyz coordinated, get position etc, but not the transform shader with world space coordinates- which I use all the time by the way...
though I already textured the models , at least I know how to do it now.
Quote from: Hannes on February 02, 2017, 12:57:58 AM
Don't worry, increase the ray detail multiplier in the render subdivision settings. It's set to 0.25 by default, so if you increase it to 1, it should look as you want it to. It's about the accuracy of reflections and refractions.
Ah! thanks! Wonderful, I'll try it!
Those floating rocks in the clouds on the previous page are great!
You're still using the free version, if I understood correctly?
Just asking in relation to that it looks like it could need a bit more AA-love, if possible.
Quote from: Tangled-Universe on February 02, 2017, 02:30:10 PM
Those floating rocks in the clouds on the previous page are great!
You're still using the free version, if I understood correctly?
Just asking in relation to that it looks like it could need a bit more AA-love, if possible.
Thanks! Yes I use the free version, though the AA wasn't on the max. I used 3 or 4 and I think 6 is the max? But I felt like I'm loosing detail on some parts with that. Also I do some post work on the newest renders, some blurring on the sides, and occasional chromatic aberration. It makes it look less like a sterile 3d render.
Forgot this one.
Cliff renders- and the Martian rocks in a normal blue atmosphere
Hope you don't mind if I keep posting my experiments.
Nope. Each one is a marvel. Very interesting and unusually beautiful. This series looks like the "Standing Stones" (not rolling) ;D
Quote from: luvsmuzik on February 08, 2017, 12:53:37 AM
Nope. Each one is a marvel. Very interesting and unusually beautiful. This series looks like the "Standing Stones" (not rolling) ;D
Well, I had a standing stone picture series earlier last month:)
Tried to make a new ground texture node network, so when I want to render some nice rock formations and I need a ground shader that looks good from high up as well as upclose I can just insert this node network.
I have to tweak it but I think it works.
A few renders made at 3 km height, 800 meters, 10 meters, 2 meters.
Carry on!! "Cartoonmars 44" looks like a Star Wars podrace backdrop. Great.
And some of your ground textures look like someone had swept it with a broom. Interesting.
Quote from: Hannes on February 08, 2017, 04:33:31 AM
Carry on!! "Cartoonmars 44" looks like a Star Wars podrace backdrop. Great.
And some of your ground textures look like someone had swept it with a broom. Interesting.
I used to make podrace scenes in 3ds max years ago:) So I learned a lot from those star wars rocks! Phantom menace had some amazing rock miniatures! Too bad they were more proud of those early cgi creations than those amazing miniatures.
Also that broom effect is something you can see on satelite images:) I checked google maps for references. A few quick look at the Nevadan desert and I have all the reference I need !
The shader is finished, tweaked it until I'm satisfied with it : )
The new shader in action
Great!! The ground texture looks fantastic!!
Quote from: Hannes on February 08, 2017, 05:55:19 AM
Great!! The ground texture looks fantastic!!
Yeah, I'm happy with it^^
Also , I totally forgot about this render:
I know you are doing Mars....but I truly expect to see a new Mt. Rushmore soon. Such precision displacements. :)
...probably Trump only!
Good series and multi-distance texture. Mars44J is grand.
Quote from: luvsmuzik on February 08, 2017, 10:44:26 AM
I know you are doing Mars....but I truly expect to see a new Mt. Rushmore soon. Such precision displacements. :)
Well, not Mt. Rushmore, as this is Mars, but you have Mount Zblorgmore, with the carved faces of the first Warglars of Mars. (yeah, I had to do 15 minutes of zbrush sculpting haha)
Hannes,
lol ;) :D ;D nice dig. Now that is good CLEAN fun.
Nice stuff Martin
Ah,nice to see that after all these years, the carved face of Lord Lonrthox is still visible.
Fun fact: The people of Mars thought that the only way to show their incredible respect for acting president Lorthax is to make his monument 5 km tall.
Incredible! I probably already said that a time or two, but this stuff is great!
Quotethe only way to show their incredible respect for acting president Lorthax is to make his monument 5 km tall.
If I ever start a cult, my rules will be similar.
Quote from: luvsmuzik on February 08, 2017, 08:57:00 PM
Incredible! I probably already said that a time or two, but this stuff is great!
haha, thank you^^
Quote from: TheBadger on February 08, 2017, 09:01:41 PM
Quotethe only way to show their incredible respect for acting president Lorthax is to make his monument 5 km tall.
If I ever start a cult, my rules will be similar.
Good man.
Last renders from yesterday.
New renders. The last 4 is 3d!
The tomb of Zalklor, Martian minister of defence
wow the last series are f...awesome!
Quote from: archonforest on February 10, 2017, 02:49:45 AM
wow the last series are f...awesome!
oh haha, thanks! : ) Terragen renders zbrush models pretty nicely
Great from all angles..no pun intended. ;D
Working on some sci fi models. I'll import these to terragen as an obj file(this is a max render, sorry : ) )
I was playing with erosion again, but I think I prefer the procedural terrain.
Also my spaceship is there:P
Nice! I like the erosion, but your terrain always has such good detail......seems a shame to smooth it. :)
Should one look at these images through 3D glasses? Or is the red/green shift the result of enlarging the images (because the free version has a limit for image sizes IIRC)?
Quote from: AndyWelder on February 16, 2017, 11:14:33 AM
Should one look at these images through 3D glasses? Or is the red/green shift the result of enlarging the images (because the free version has a limit for image sizes IIRC)?
There are a few red cyan 3d images in this thread yes(when the file name has "3d" in it then it's a red cyan 3d image), but most of them only has a chromatic aberration effect with side blur and film grain added in post to simulate old camera lenses- like the last space ship render.
I think the chromatic aberration effect on the last image was a bit extreme. ;) I would have liked to see it without quite so much blur as well. Glad to see you continue to experiment with objects in TG though.
- Oshyan
Quote from: Martin on February 12, 2017, 04:29:15 PM
Working on some sci fi models. I'll import these to terragen as an obj file(this is a max render, sorry : ) )
Nice work, also like your spaceship in that last render.
I really like this spaceship. And I have to say, although I love chromatic aberration, I have to echo Oshyan. It's quite a bit too much.
Quote from: Hannes on February 16, 2017, 04:58:21 PM
I really like this spaceship. And I have to say, although I love chromatic aberration, I have to echo Oshyan. It's quite a bit too much.
Yeah, I had to tweak that pic a lot to look the way I wanted, and ended up using too many effects. I will take back with the Chromatic aberration and side blur.
I spend more time with zbrush and 3ds max recently ,so no time for terragen. I kind of used up all my ideas in the past few months, I made a lot of terragen renders haha!
Quote from: Oshyan on February 16, 2017, 01:48:34 PM
I think the chromatic aberration effect on the last image was a bit extreme. ;) I would have liked to see it without quite so much blur as well. Glad to see you continue to experiment with objects in TG though.
- Oshyan
I will keep rendering my models in other apps though. While Terragen is suprisingly good at rendering custom objects, it's still not a match for an unbiased renderer:)
Though of course I can't really post those here so a bit of inactivity.
Quote from: Oshyan on December 08, 2016, 01:37:19 AM
Yes, the pace of experimentation and iteration is really something! :D Reminds me of when Chinaski was active...
Yep! Hi guys! I really love this thread, reminds me of the good old days. Astonishing renders... Keep up the good work Martin! ;)
The days are still good Chinaski, glad to see you! Come back and show us some Terragen work some time. :)
- Oshyan
Quote from: Oshyan on March 06, 2017, 02:42:40 PM
The days are still good Chinaski, glad to see you! Come back and show us some Terragen work some time. :)
- Oshyan
yup and please show and tell...it's what makes the days better.