HOME | DD
Published: 2011-04-15 22:22:12 +0000 UTC; Views: 453; Favourites: 5; Downloads: 10
Redirect to original
Description
First attempt at 4D Cinema, better than photoshop, even with my lack of skills!Related content
Comments: 19
RuneTrantor In reply to DCkiq [2011-04-22 16:30:17 +0000 UTC]
Thanks! I only need to learn how to do shadows and I'm good. XD
I love it, it feels WAY more 3D (for a reason) than photoshop.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
DCkiq In reply to RuneTrantor [2011-04-22 16:34:37 +0000 UTC]
I used to used Photoshop to make my planets. C4D is now much easier, yes?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
RuneTrantor In reply to DCkiq [2011-04-23 00:25:48 +0000 UTC]
Easier? It's too early to say, but the fact that I can save my setting for atmosphere, surface, and clouds is great, no more guessing what I did last time...
better? Hell yes, it looks way more beautiful... even if my family when asked which was better between my last two pics, they selected Ignius (the photoshop one, original one, in case you are wondering, it's on my gallery) apparently it's more 3D than an actual sphere... it's not that bad, but compared... my heart skipped a beat when I rendered this Earth (specially because in the preview, it looked highly pixelated, and it didn't occur to me that it was for convinience )
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
DCkiq In reply to RuneTrantor [2011-04-23 01:33:48 +0000 UTC]
There's a way to smooth the pixelation...
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
RuneTrantor In reply to DCkiq [2011-04-23 05:15:02 +0000 UTC]
I meant in the work view, once rendered it loked perfect, at least to me, is the picture texture good?
I suppose it gets super-pixelated so you can see what the hell you are moving, but not high quality so your computer doesn't crash XD Which I thank.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
DCkiq In reply to RuneTrantor [2011-04-23 05:26:26 +0000 UTC]
All you really need to do is lower the atmosphere's intesnity a tad. Other than that, it looks great overall.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
RuneTrantor In reply to DCkiq [2011-04-23 16:26:10 +0000 UTC]
The inner one yes, but there is no glow outwards... it looks... circular, it should be fussy.
And for some god forsaken reaosn, my shadows are grey, and I can't seem to be able to move them like the surface... at least mananged to hide it for that picture, because well... night is not grey. Let alone using a lightmap on my first try (I do have it, but this was just a test)
Hope to improve, little by little, if you saw my first picture on photoshop... (Is it here? hope not... can't seem to remember...)
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
DCkiq In reply to RuneTrantor [2011-04-23 16:31:29 +0000 UTC]
What kind of light are you using? And what's the size of the sphere for your planet?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
RuneTrantor In reply to DCkiq [2011-04-23 16:42:54 +0000 UTC]
1000... segments was it? The ones that the more, the spherer your planet looks.
This is the tutorial I used, I had to guess a few things, seeing as it doesn't explain obvious things (discovered a lot, but missed a few)
Did everything (that I could understand, most of it, but still...) as told here:
[link]
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
DCkiq In reply to RuneTrantor [2011-04-23 17:01:36 +0000 UTC]
Actually, in C4D, a sphere primitive uses math to automatically smooth it out in the render. That's what's cool about it. No matter how you see the sphere, it will always be perfect in the render! (unless you start editing the ball.)
Most of my planets were spheres with a radius 100m. For the atmospheres, I usually choose Global Intensity: 30% with Decay Height: 30-40 km on the Rayleigh setting.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
RuneTrantor In reply to DCkiq [2011-04-23 17:48:28 +0000 UTC]
100 m?! Why the hell I went all the way to 10.000 then!? -.- Damn...
So, even if I leave the sphere with like 24 segments (which look more like a cube in work view) it gives a nice ball in render? Cool.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
DCkiq In reply to RuneTrantor [2011-04-23 17:57:15 +0000 UTC]
Yeah! Then I usually have an omni light at the center with 200% intensity and hard shadowing. The planet is usually somewhere between 10000 - 20000 m away from the light.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
RuneTrantor In reply to DCkiq [2011-04-23 21:22:47 +0000 UTC]
The only thing I don't like is the camera controls, Bryce was better in that sense, at least to me.
Taking note of your tips! Once I have free time I will give them a try. (Right now focused on studying and writting) XD
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
RuneTrantor In reply to DCkiq [2011-04-23 23:14:44 +0000 UTC]
Proyects actually, exams where just last week.
University sucks...
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
tekanako-the-first [2011-04-16 03:56:19 +0000 UTC]
Hey, that's really awesome, save up and you should be able to get Terragen 2.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
RuneTrantor In reply to tekanako-the-first [2011-04-16 06:13:24 +0000 UTC]
I'm glad you like it! I still have some mistakes to correct (the lightning is terrible) not to mention the shadows, but I'm getting there right? My first attempt at photoshop wasn't remotely as good, and I also used a tutorial back then...
Tried the demo, couldn't make a single thing, Terragen 1 was quite easy, but in 2 they blatantly stated that they ignored user friendly interface.
And I have also tried Bryce, with which I made my spaceship I have as top deaviation, but while easier in some aspects, 4D has more options regarding planet making.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0

























