Pumpkin

@SOF if only my animating abilities were any good!

@TerryG @Helmut hehe you're right, I'm not aiming for photo realistic, more like cartoonish.. hey Helmut I left you a message in the scripts quick visual guide.. I can't find some of those scripts that look very interesting.
 
I have a question.. In the image above I'm using area and spot lights. The light behind the pumpkin is a bright large area light and it's the main light of this scene. I was hoping to get some nice specular reflections (top of the pumpkin and grass on both sides) like those in the image below. This image was rendered with an HDRI light (artist workshop 8k from HDRI Haven) that has a bright window behind the pumpkin. I want the same reflections with the area light but I can't make it happen. Clamp attenuation is unchecked, normalize is unchecked, but still no bright reflections.



BTW, also the area light in the image in the previous post it's white 100% but somehow I feel it's warmer than the HDRI below. No problem with that in this scene (the warm coloring looks nice), but for me it doesn't make much sense.
 
Hahaha I guess I shouldn't. All I want right now is five tacos of barbacoa.

I know you live in an alternate reality and sadly don't know what barbacoa is. When the gods throw a mexican party they eat barbacoa tacos. Of I go to get some.. bye.
 
* Well, as it is related to barbecue (the national religion of Australians) I have somewhat guessed its meaning. The word seems to have an interesting etymology, having its roots in indigenous / AmerIndian languages of the Caribbean.
* If it is a feast for the Gods Goats (and sheep) at a Mexican party, it may be the last one they attend :eek:
 
@jdmac I don't want to use both because I don't want light in the background, but I guess I could composite those reflections in Photoshop, I just hoped it was done at render time but I can't get those highlights with the area light.
 
Final renders!

Which one do you prefer? I can't decide..

1.


2.


pumpkin and moon rendered in the same pass. Everything else is Photoshop.

There's another angle I'm rendering right now, but it takes 2 or 3 hours so..

Cheers!
 
Aaah.. I lowered the value of the map in the emissive node for the warmer render so it would look more rounded. There's a spot light hitting only the moon from the right of course to give it more volume (in both renders). I'll make another render for the cooler version. It just takes so damn long lol..
 
About DOF.. it's not important, but everything is wrong lol.. In order to get a full moon photographed and exposed correctly you should use a fast shutter speed (or a very small aperture, or both). The moon is very bright compared to objects on earth at night, so if you want to capture the texture of the moon you have to under expose everything else, or capture the moon during the day (close to same amount of brightness in all objects). So realistically speaking, this render is impossible in real life. If you have the full moon in a night shot where you can see details of earth objects (buildings, trees, people) the moon would look like a white spot with no texture.

So, ignoring the exposure thing, the camera in this render has a large aperture (you can see the grass behind the pumpkin going out of focus already) so the moon being so far away, even if it's super large, it goes out of focus too. If you can see details at all in its surface it's because of the scale of the moon and those details, but in reality everything is super out of focus. How much? well I really don't know, I would guess it should be even more out of focus but I'm not entirely sure, and it really doesn't matter as this is not supposed to be photo realistic, just look nice :)

shooting stars.. yeah you're probably right too @podperson (Even though they're much closer to earth, as they are rocks entering the atomsphere).. but again this is not a photo realistic effort :)

in case anyone finds it fun to see the scene :geek:
 
Last edited:
Back
Top