Damn, you guys need to take a breather.
All artwork has both good and bad points. Now with this image, if indeed it was meant to look real, needs work, but that does not mean its bad. I think the problem here is the human factor, our incesent need for symetry. If you look at this image, its just riddled with it. Now for many pictures this is the way to go, but for realism, particulary for the natural world, this is a no no.
Most of the elements look real enough, but the planet, it just seems lacking - almost like it was painted.
As for what Styl had to say
| 28 by Skinner Styl skinner - 9/20/2003 7:34:56 AM personaly I think it looks like the flaming pear filter. |
It does look like the nebulas and starfield were created using the flamingpear plugin, which is fine - they look good, but I have to wonder(if this is true) why a plugin wasn't used for the planet? I think this would add more realism to both the planet and the asteroid.
Now for the rings - what about them - I think I would have to stick with the symetry bug. Assuming there were three rings around a planet, I doubt they would assume orbits that have the same angles and rotating completely on center to the planets axis. Most objects in space take eliptical orbits.
But I have been creating artwork for a long time and all I have to say on that subject is, space scenes ROCK! I still don't get tired of them. Someone may say they are childish, but the truth is when you look into space, how can you not feel like a child compared to the age of the universe and the lack of knowledge we possess of it!
Keep working on it - the elements to making the image true, is there!
