HOME | DD
dothacker2 — Desert Rose
Published: 2010-01-22 09:56:18 +0000 UTC; Views: 252; Favourites: 3; Downloads: 9
Redirect to original
Description
Eh...screwing around. I had a few better ones while making this, few designs caught my eye, but I decided to play with it and this is what I came up with. Not too great, but here you go.Related content
Comments: 12
Very nice colours and such a pretty pattern! well done
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I almost didn't put this up because I thought it was too low brow and not worthy compared to my other works I have yet to post. Seems popular though.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Well, it's a good thing you posted it then
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
There are 2 ways to get rid of grain:
raise the quality when you render
or
reduce the gamma (and probaly the brightness too)
In this case I think the second will do the most good, since there is a lot of grain. However rendering at a quality at or greater than 2000 is a good habit to be in.
Molly : )
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Thank you but the grain is aliasing here due to jpg conversion. I generally keep several copies of each on my HD, some in gif with no aliasing and some to upload here which are quite poorer quality. I will play around with the gamma and see what we come up with, though. My quality is always 4000 and 3 oversamples.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
If you don't mind slumming it you can render .jpg files ; ) I render for DA, so I just do .jpg out of habit and convenience.
Did you know you can type in higher quality values than 4000? 20,000 is probably the upper limit to time spent versus product received. I think my average is 8000, some need 15,000 like julian rings, others like tubes only need 2000.
oversample won't effect the render, just how long it takes to render.
Molly : )
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I would rather do my image editing in a more stable program, apop has quite a few bugs it needs to fix. Yes, I was aware of the quality, but I don't know if I'd need much more quality right now. The lower quality blends in the inconsistencies of my newbie art.
Oversample does affect the render, it makes the details finer in the finished product because it makes the image larger than specified and resides it smaller so your detail is much more clear. Plus if you want to quickly scale it up without rerendering, go for it, no quality loss!
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
does that work the same for rendering .jpg?
pixels are pixels
Molly : )
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Yeah same process just saved in different format. I really don't like the idea of rendering in jpg unless you are absolutely done with that image. I like to modify mine so I keep them in unaliased formats and keep transparencies. I keep a redundant copy of all the ones I modify so I have the original to play with again.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Nice! I like the little sand cloud the the bottom right corner. Very much a desert rose.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I'm not sure what went with that, needed a bit of cleaning up I didn't know how to do, but good enough for me.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
If it's good enough for you, then it's good enough for me!
👍: 0 ⏩: 0