Blender/Blendigo - Fountains

[Eku]

Hey, first post here. Thought I'd try Indigo, and I really like it.

I've posted this over at the Blender Artists forum already, thought I'd post here for more Indigo/Blendigo specific crits. It's not really a WIP anymore, more of a Finished project. Note that I say its a finished PROJECT, since if I thought it was Artwork, I'd have posted it in the Artwork section of this forum. The stuff over there just blows me away - wow.

I just sort of modeled without any real plan in mind, other than trying to get as many materials as I could that would test out the renderer. The UV'd marble textures are from the Photorealistic texture set, I've forgotten the artist's name, although I did my own bump-maps. So this is a WIP in the sense that my Indigo knowledge is in progress, and I could use some tips. The water, for instance: the fountain spouts and the pools are the same material, but they look very different. Also, the glass (could you tell it was glass?) blurs what's beyond it, but why? The cauchy setting was 0, and the IOR was 1.5. Other misc stuff: I tried a HDRI sky image, but since you can't use both sun and HDRI, I got a really washed out blah. Advice? UV map a skybox? One last question: I couldn't find how to preview a material I've UV mapped - where do I find that info? And, final question, are there plans to add support for tangent normal maps? Thanks!

(Sorry 'bout the big attachment - the low-res jpg really doesn't show enough of the detail.)

[pxl666]

will be nice but needs further work - egdes are too sharp

have u modelled the water or used fluid sim?

[Kram1032]

O.o
I never saw such liquid glue, before
It's a very nice start.

Could it be, that you used SSS (Sub Surface Scattering, which basically blurs the light, that comes through it [EXTREME simplification ]) for the water and the windows? basically, it's not wrong to use it, as there is very slight blur in water... but this is slightly too strong

Something is missing in this scene... I guess, the light situation is quite boring and also the cam angle could be improved...
The vignetting effect is nice, though

If you don't want to do so, anymore, it's ok, but I'd say, your pools should have beveled edges. Keep this in mind, in future No edge is that perfectly sharp.

For your first Indigo render, it's very nice, though.

[lar111]

Thats an unusal image, very surreal. I think kram has answered the question on why the glass blurs whats beyond, the other possibilitie is that you have are using glossy transparent with a low exponent which will blur the objects beyond. As for previewing a uv mapped material, the objects in the material preveiw are not uv mapped ( well the cube will show a distorted texture). You can uv map them, or I think at one stage there was a folder of uv mapped preview objects on the forum somewhere.

The only crit I would have is that I would have liked to see more detail in the fluid, ie some nice spashes coming up out of the pools instead of just a depression and ridge of water. Oh and the sharp edges on the pool could be bevelled a bit, but then if it was cut and polished marble it would have quite sharp edges.

[Eku]

Thanks, gang.
Glue indeed. I'll try the suggestion. I may well have had SSS on, but what's odd is that the fountain spouts look "right" to me, its the basin water that's weird - but, exactly the same material. As for the glass...hmmm, I'll check that, again SSS is possible. That would indeed do it.

The basin water is completely modeled, no fluid sim involved, just several applied wave mods. I'd have done better if I'd tried a fluid sim, but then that would have taken much more time than I wanted to spend. Next project....

I'll work on camera angle and artistic presentation more, too. It isn't a strong suit of mine; I tend to think in terms of the 3D environment as something to walk around in (as in, view-independent) rather than as stills. Something I need to work on.

[Kram1032]

Well, that's why I don't think, it's Glossy Transparent, but SSS:
SSS is depth dependend The thicker your material, the more blur.
Think of fog, for example. If you're slightly in fog and look backward, everything will be nearly sharp (though not as sharp as before) but if you look forward in the thick cloud of fog, you wont see anything but a white something.

In those pools, the water is thicker / uses more space than in those spouts, which are pretty thin.

Glossy transparent isn't depth dependent, as it's just changing the surface. It's like sanded glass. Where it's sanded, you can't see through it but you can clearly see through, where it isn't sanded. The sanded part has a lower exponent than the clear part. The sanded layer is just the top. Directly beyond it, the glass still is clear.

About the walking-part: Well, if you have such a kind of a scene, that also might look interesting

[Eku]

Well, I looked it up, and (drum roll please) you're right. I had SSS on the water. Problem solved. As for the glass: nope, nothing but a slight bit of color, 1.5 IOR, glossy transparent material, exponent 56140. Is it the color? (very pale yellow absorption)

There are some aspects of this I do like, and at some point, I think I'll explore making it into a "vignetted animation" (rather than a true animation - I'd be old and grey waiting for the renders!), a slide show of a walk-through with maybe music and splashing water background. Too cheesy? Ah wall, depends on the audience, right?

[Kram1032]

We told you already: Glossy Transparent also blurs things (though, not dependent on the thickness but on the surface..., so, maximally twice +/- totally reflected rays, which might be blurred far more often... ^^)
Use a normal specular, instead but don't forget to enable the "transparent" button