Daz 3D is part of 
Connect
DAZ Productions, Inc.
224 S 200 W, Suite #250
Salt Lake City, UT 84101
Licensing Agreement | Terms of Service | Privacy Policy | EULA
© 2024 Daz Productions Inc. All Rights Reserved.Daz 3D is part of
Connect
DAZ Productions, Inc.
224 S 200 W, Suite #250
Salt Lake City, UT 84101
Licensing Agreement | Terms of Service | Privacy Policy | EULA
© 2024 Daz Productions Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Comments
Thank You so much for taking the time to give your feedback. It means a lot to me. I usually do a lot of post effects in Photoshop on my images but am trying to do as much as I can in Carrara. There is a moon to add and of course the water splashes and ripples. The finished image will incorporate all of your suggestions and recommendations.
Dartanbeck, the splash too looks interesting. Will check it out.
This is one of my finished images. I photographed an actor on a Harley Bike. All vegetation done in Carrara 8 Pro. Rest is Photoshop
Question for 3dage.
Great image as usual. Care to share how you did the breaking waves at bottom right.? If so that would be very kind.
PM will be fine ;)
You might want to consider for your motorcycle image that if the motion of the front wheel is motion blurred, then the motion of the rider and bike should also be motion blurred, since they are basically going the same speed....otherwise it looks like a stationary rider and bike with his wheels spinning.
Good point JoeMamma2000. Will incorporate that suggestion into the revised version.
I used the Mil Environment for quite some time since. Reminds me. I could really stand for a bit of a revisit. But now when I look at it in a medium Carrara scene, it looks so small! In Poser and D|S, part of it's excellence was how big it is! lol
Nonetheless, plenty of space to use as a diorama setting for figure-sized focal points. :-)
Ahhh, sorry Mate.
Off on a tangent again!
Additionally, I really like the biker painting - as with many other works of yours I've seen.
Dartanbeck, the more opinions and thoughts people express here, the more our prospective grows. No need to be sorry for anything. I think you are one of the most positive beings I have had the pleasure of interacting with.
Just something off topic.
Check out Bashar teachings. It will blow your mind and open many doorways to your Imagination.
http://bashar.org/
Each Image I create is a journey that opens another doorway to my Imagination.
The journey is long. The journey is the destination.
FirstBastion if it is a prop, it can be used in carrara as well as or probably better then Studio. ;)
Now I have figured out how to do a ships wake, or low tides/waves on a beach. But it isn't done in carrara, I can use Genetica to make a displacement map on the water, then try to make the boat follow it, or the beach match the waves.
The ocean primitive is a joke, you could do the same thing in carrara with a bit of set up long before the ocean prim was put it. One of those unnecessary features as far as I'm concerned. If it was an actual ocean primitive it would react dynamically to surface contact, like a boat or a beach. But as it stands it's just a one click for something carrara could already do.
For stills maybe, but Ocean primitive does two things (options):
animated loops
tile
BrianOrca's Ocean plugin does some of what you are saying, but I haven't bought it yet
http://www.brianorca.com/CarraraPluginOcean.html
DCG's TERRAIN TOOLS shader plugin also does some of those things, but you need to be a bit advanced in the shader room to set them up.
http://www.digitalcarversguild.com/plugin.php?ProductId=19
Best looking oceans I've seen are from an AfterEffects plugin called PSUNAMI:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EjQpQJxKBdc
For stills maybe, but Ocean primitive does two things (options):
animated loops
tile
Could do the same thing as the old way, the ocean prim has no advantages over the old set up, other then not have to go through setting it up.
Could do the same thing as the old way, the ocean prim has no advantages over the old set up, other then not have to go through setting it up.
Most people would consider that an improvement.
Btw, probably most people already know but it's worth mentioning that advanced transparency effects like absorption, inscattering, and realistic refraction don't work on a simple displaced plane... You need a cube or some kind of internal volume to the mesh to get "realistic" effects.
It wouldn't show in the example image in this thread, but it might be useful to think about for people who see this thread later looking for hints how to get better oceans....
In-scattering and absorption don't work on a plane or the Ocean primitive? I've been using it on them all the time and it seems to me that they work. See example:
In-scattering and absorption don't work on a plane or the Ocean primitive? I've been using it on them all the time and it seems to me that they work. See example:
I don't know... Have you tried any side-by-side experiments? It was a while before I discovered the extreme difference in using SSS under IBL vs scene lights...
I don't know... Have you tried any side-by-side experiments? It was a while before I discovered the extreme difference in using SSS under IBL vs scene lights...
It's been a long while since I discovered the In-scattering and absorption. It never occurred to me to try a closed shape. I always had assumed it was a way to give the appearance of volume to 3D objects since they're really just a skin.
This is for Bryce but you can export from Bryce into another format Carrara can use.
http://www.sharecg.com/v/5728/browse/5/3D-Model/Ship-Wakes
As mentioned before, my plugin is an improvement over the Carrara ocean primitive, and it excels when you need a more distant horizon, but I'm not sure how much it will help this task. In particular, it doesn't do breaking waves. The main thing will be your shaders, lighting, and effects.
http://www.brianorca.com/CarraraPluginOcean.html
So I tested the exact same shader applied to a plane and a cube primitive, placed them side by side with a glowing cylinder sticking down through each objects' center. The shader uses absorption and in-scattering. I think the effect is pretty indistinguishable between the plane and the cube.
Yes. :) it does look the same to me too. Thank you for checking!
Are there any other good water shaders available for sale at Daz?
I do have "Water" by HolyForest and Carrara Realistic Seas by PhilW.
Also what Plug-ins should I buy to help with my workflow?
One thing that I am always noticing in renders is that it is rare to see ripples around objects. There is a plugin that can help in this respect. DCG's "Terrain Tools" works great for this.
McGuiver, that looks good. Will buy it on Thursday.
Can someone please explain to me this seemingly endless fascination for plugins and prepackaged shaders and stuff to solve EVERY problem ?? :)
I guarantee, with just a little thought and understanding you can do most of this stuff yourself and save a lot of money. Like I said, for example you may not need fancy ocean shaders if you're looking ACROSS the water, since the shader becomes nothing more than a reflection shader. Simple.
As I've said over and over again, the best way to learn is to get reference images and photos and figure out how to replicate that. And you'll probably get far more satisfaction from figuring it out yourself, and your results will probably be FAR better than any drag-n-drop, one size fits all solution.
And I agree about the ripples around objects in the water. As I've said many times before, objects MUST interact with their environment, and often people miss that. And, BTW, when you do stuff like ripples, make sure they are consistent. If you have small, long waves hitting an object, make sure that the bouncing ripples are small, long waves too. Or else it looks weird. Again, that's where reference photos help a lot.
Try doing stuff manually. Try modelling things. Give things character and don't make everything so repetitious and uniform like you get from most prepackaged solutions and procedurals. Look at the real world and see how it REALLY is, not just some foggy remembrance of something that's not even close. Be an ARTIST !!! Use whatever artistic talents you might have somewhere inside of you.
People are ALWAYS wondering about how to model a wave. Well try this....open Hex or whatever, get a reference photo, and try MAKING ONE by hand. It's not that difficult !!! Try to duplicate what you see in a photo. YOU CAN DO IT !!! YOU DON'T NEED PLUGINS !!!!
Okay, I'm done. Back to your discussion of plugins. Carry on.
Joe, I get your point about the pre-packaged shaders and such, but what's the beef about the plugins? Wasn't that basically what you were suggesting by using Blender's fluid sim? Wouldn't that be using Blender as the plugin? A plugin adds functionality to a program, be it Carrara, Photoshop, AE, etc.
Joe, I get your point about the pre-packaged shaders and such, but what's the beef about the plugins? Wasn't that basically what you were suggesting by using Blender's fluid sim? Wouldn't that be using Blender as the plugin? A plugin adds functionality to a program, be it Carrara, Photoshop, AE, etc.
Again I think you're missing my point. The point is that everyone ALWAYS runs to a plugin or a prepackaged something to solve their problems, instead of using their own brains to figure out how best to get the result they want using their own skills and abilities and artistic talents, and, of course, other applications.
OF COURSE sometimes, after you analyze what you want and how best to do it, you choose a particular tool. Sometimes that means doing it by hand, for example modelling a mesh by hand, sometimes it means looking at reference photos and figuring out how to duplicate that, sometimes you decide to use a fluid sim, and on and on.
But here the FIRST response is "there's an app for that". I don't HATE plugins (well, yeah I do, for other reasons), and I would never tell anyone to stick with only one tool. Blender's fluid sim, for example, is a tool, just like AE and Photoshop and Hex and any other software you use to get something done. And sometimes you might decide to use a fluid sim to get a particular effect.
What I don't understand is why people completely bypass that whole thought and analysis process and just run to buy a plugin.
This was the post that preceded the plugin discussion - a specific list of features the built in ocean doesn't have... But of course you'd need to pay attention to the discussion to understand what is going on... 8-/
It started on page 3 of the discussion. Not the first thing. No one even discussed any plugins in response to the images. You're throwing a tantrum over something that never happened.
And here's an example...
The OP was asking about how to generate a render of a mermaid jumping and splashing out of the ocean. That started a long discussion of plugins to simulate the ocean. But ocean plugins won't solve his problem !!!! What will solve his problem is, as I suggested, looking at reference images of fish jumping and splashing and figuring out how to duplicate that. It's not an ocean plugin problem, it's a generating splashes and waves problem and figuring out physics and motion and feeling.
But nobody suggests doing any of that, they hear OCEAN and they start suggesting OCEAN plugins.
pointless tantrum. never happened.
Completely in your imagination only.
And for those whose immediate response might be anger and tantrums when anyone who dares to challenge them, might I suggest a healthier and more useful response...
Here is a link to an image of a gorgeous killer wave off the coast of Oregon.
http://nees.oregonstate.edu/killer_wave/wave.jpg
How about this....look at the image, or choose any other image, and try to use your artistic abilities to figure out the best way to generate a wave image like that. And instead of immediately running to a plugin, try to do it manually, and think about the image, and why it looks powerful, how you can convey a feeling of power in your image, and how you can model it, and what the ocean characteristics are, and the colors and the lighting, and on and on.
That's how you learn and get better.