|
The Stick Wreck -team is looking for your ideas and comments. Join and show your support for Stick Wreck. Realistic perspective or not?This task is closed
Thumbs ranking
Closing NoteDone DescriptionIn this latest render I have made the perspective realistic. The catch is that the realistic perspective confuses the sense of movement of the viewer. In effect, the perspective behaves in a realistic way, but viewers might not perceive it as such. It's kind of like when you sit in a train that starts real smoothly, before your logic center catches up you, for just a second, feel like it's the station that's moving, not the train. Should I: 1. Try to fix the sense of motion by adding a lot more asteroids as points of reference. 2. Screw realism! 3. Let people be confused? Movement is easier to understand, no?: This task is closed. Shots  CommentsReally good! Speed is just fine, bullets are perfect, it looks good (did you change shading options?) and that bottle flying on the beginning is good, but it flashes weirdly :) There is no need to edit this anymore. When you make the final version, just zoom more, but that was pritty fine too. Replace that old one on the front page. Put that to fronpage to replace older version. WOW! You have to tell how you did those bullets and twinkler beams, so someone else could also make animations about this. Speed is right.  Background doesn't move enough?On the first video the background is too fixed at the beginning and end. Maybe if the camera moved all the time it would seem more realistic? I couldn't get the second video to play so can't comment. CommentsDon't break your keyboard :) Ok. It got done. Then I noticed I had forgot to change one ipo curve when I made the scene longer. One. *Bangs head on keyboard.* Oh well. I need better Disturber effects anyway... *holds thumbs too* I am currently baking a version that might be the final version! I hope I can be pleased with it... *Holds thumbs* I'm going to buy a new computer in few weeks, so I can render those videos faster. One solution to your problem: Don't render them! I didn't render any test videos for "a dog and a christmas tree". Just test images. I understand that this is a different thing because of the backround problem, but really... You have about 4 videos in youtube wich all look like same! I think I solved it. Many small asteroids that the camera pass nearby makes it a lot more apparent that it's the camera that moves. Now, baking and rendering takes such a damn long time, so I'm going to see if there is anything else that needs changing before I bake and render. I think that video has been pritty fine all the time and the latest one is perfect! Don't remove that nebula. It's cool. Asteroids are cool and ships look great. I think it don't need any fixing anymore. Welcome to the group of those who are thinking they need a better computer :) I'm allready buying a new one... Don't hurry with that blenderfarm. Renderfarm is going to be integrated to Blender in the next version, so it's much easier to use. For test renders, you can reduce the image size to 75%, 50% or 25% from the original from the blender rendering settings. Choosing smaller image it goes faster to render and you can easily change it to original by selecting the 100%. Other good news, I'm back from my holiday!!!!!! I start working with this project soon... But that nebula turned out so pretty... I just don't know. I think I will simply be starting from a standstill. I like the confusing perspective, it's kind of like a puzzle, only kind of boring from my perspective as I built it and thus know the solution... In the end I figure that the question I need answered is; does it make what the scene tries to portray confusing and would you even have considered or noticed it if I hadn't asked? Since I added all the particle systems every test render is taking bloody long, and looking at the animation with simplified graphics unrendered has started to lag too much to be useful. For the first time since I bought this computer I feel that I need a faster one, rendering 3d animation on a three year old laptop is less than optimal... I am going to try one more time to get Blenderfarm working for me. To me, the confusing factor is indeed the moving camera. But I would not neglect trying different approaches as everybody else said. Being it an optical illusion, it may not be what it looks like. :P Could you try making the background dark first? That's what I have the biggest problem with I think? Could you try making the background dark first? That's what I have the biggest problem with I think? I thought About a fix that might work. If the Camera starts standing still I gather You understand that it's the camera that moves and not the asteroids? I think it looks fine when the camera moves. To me, it's the bit at the beginning with the still camera and the colourful background that seems unrealistic. 100% black backround seems to be a good idea. If not, try to make that image bit bigger. Also, try not to move or rotate that camera at all. Just cut it to a new place. If the camera don't move or rotate, the asteroids don't seem to rotate either. Should we try to use this effect. What's wrong in spinning asteroids? David, it's the colourful background that is the problem for me. Could you make the background almost 100% black with just a few stars? Still the same. Until about 0:01, when the camera moves before the starships come in sight, the asteroids seem to move. Maybe you could try to only move the camera AFTER the ships have moved into sight? And then again, from 0:08 when the nebula has moved to the right-hand of the image, the ships more or less appear to float in the center of the image while the asteroids also move around. You may consider stopping to follow the ships then, and allow them to fly off screen and cut to the next sequence if necessary... The problem seems to be always the same: mere lack of clearly "fixed" reference points when setting something as small as ships and asteroids in the giant depths of space. :P But there are of course just ideas or suggestions. The final decision lay in your hands after all. You're the producers. :) But, do you feel any difference in the latest version?
Yes, that is exactly my impression as well. I am sure that is technically correct, as the nebula is probably far too far in the background to appear moving due to perspective, but since there are no other reference points, this ends up making the asteroids "move" when the camera follows the ships' movement. CommentsNope. Adjust the Initial velocy settings (the starting speed) and make damping (it makes particles to slow down in air) value higher. I must admit that I haven't figured out how the math of the particle speed values. Is it blender units per frame, or something else? Those bullets are bit unvisible. Biggest reason to that is that the camera is too far away. In the last few frames the particles goes messy because of the amount of them and the point of wiev. That twinkler is great but it disappears so quickly that I had to look twice before I noticed that it was twinkler. That asteroid explosion is good, but those particles spread bit too much to the space and cool flames are missing. I can try to edit my flame particle setup for Sample into a explosion setup. Overall, this is really great render. I'm getting sure that this film will be cool. This video is so great that it could even be the final video!  I am not sure what the problem is?Hmm... I must have watched the little animation five or six times by now but I do not really seem to see what the problem with it would be. Clearly, the asteroids have an own slow motion while the starships chase each other in space much faster...? Or what do you exactly think is visually tricky? CommentsThat looks really great. I can still see one astroid spinning at the beginning, but it looks good. You don't rotate the camera so much, so the asteroids aren't spinning either. Ship movement is good and effects are good. Well done! Does it look better now? I seem to still be seeing the asteroids move. :( I really think it is a matter of lack of reference points on the background... when the ships stay in the middle of the image in the last few moments, and the stars also stay exactly in the same place where they are, it looks like the asteroids are shifting away slowly... Actually, when I look it now, I can't see any problems in it. Only that the ships look like little fighters. I can't see any perspective problems or asteroids spinning. I don't know is the problem in me or what. I just can't see it! In Star Wreck the ships are much slower and they don't move the camera so much. In space scenes, it is often just rotating and not moving. Try to do this next:
I'm still suggesting the realisic way. If this don't work, we can look the oher ways to do this. Aha! *giggle* Alrighty then, glad to have been at service somehow. ;) I think the reason the asteroids seem to be moving in the very first scene is, the camera moves slightly backwards before the ships appear, and yet there is no reference point in the field which makes it possible to understand it is the point of view changing (since the nebula is far too far on the background to actually change in sight due to this) Perhaps a way to make this effect disappear would be to start slightly farther with the point of view and do not to move the camera until the ships have already entered the scene? This is interesting. I added more asteroids. Now you can see the movement of the camera from the start, and you are more likely to interpret it as just that with the many more reference objects. I might add more. It's easy, but bloody tedious. And it ups the render time dramatically... And I haven't even gotten started with particle effects yet... Let's hope I can get that Renderfarm thing working... Well, you prove my point as the asteroids are in fact standing still. It's the camera that moves, and if you think about it you will see that the movement of the asteroids are always in the direction that the camera pans. That would have worked as an explanation if the camera had moved in only one direction though. However It would also mean that the the ships also follow this drift, which isn't illogical, but might look strange to the keen eye. It would be very apparent when you see the ships travelling from right to left on the screen. |
Jump to comment form
Comments
Yep.
I think that if the camera would move faster, zoom and jump to other places that the ships will be just fine
It's just fine now. Fix it only in the actual movie.
I would, if I had planned for it from the start. I would have to change the scale of everything, or zooming in would mean betraying the relative scale of the camera and the ships...
I agree with Alexander.
Could you please make use of zooming in the next upload? It gives a better expression of the big size.
I agree with Daniel. With the intended size of the ship and all the turning that is going on more speed would destroy the sense of scale. As for slower, they are going a bit slower in the latest version that I haven't uploaded yet. (I think I am going to try and make a better disturber effect before I make another upload.)
I think they should be slower... Those ships aren't small and because they don't have so much details, it should be the speed, wich gives the imagination of a hughe size. They are pretty fine now... I think they don't need any fixing.