posted
I just received my calendar. I'm a bit disappointed, since the images don't look much better than what you can see at Scifi Meshes. Some of them have a posed CGI composition-look about them rather than looking like still frames from the show or real-life photos. Maybe it's because the lighting is off, with the backgrounds not matching the foregrounds? A few have Poser people that look bad. (Also, too much NX-01)
-------------------- When you're in the Sol system, come visit the Starfleet Museum
Registered: Oct 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
The only thing I don't like is the complete omission of anything from Deep Space Nine!!!! fucking VOYAGER has two pics that look just like all the other Voyager calander art and the NX-01 facing down the Andorians and Vulcans looks like a screenshot that was rendered over. Even the angle is the same.
A nice shot of the DS9 facing off the Klingons or Dominion just prior to the battle would have been nice....(sigh!)
-------------------- Justice inclines her scales so that wisdom comes at the price of suffering. -Aeschylus, Agamemnon
Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
quote:Originally posted by Jason Abbadon: A nice shot of the DS9 facing off the Klingons or Dominion just prior to the battle would have been nice....(sigh!)
Not if it is as bad as Masao says... then lets be thankful there was no DS9 connection!
I still think Mojo should do a big wall poster of DS9 art.
Andrew
-------------------- "Bears. Beets. Battlestar Galactica." - Jim Halpert. (The Office)
posted
Yeesh, folks - as crappy as the art may be (and I'm sure there has to be some redeeming features), I'd think the thumbnails would be sufficient...
posted
The artwork is NOT crappy in any way. Some pics are more inspired and have better composition than others though.
-------------------- Justice inclines her scales so that wisdom comes at the price of suffering. -Aeschylus, Agamemnon
Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
posted
I'm not saying that the work is "crappy" exactly, but I'm not extremely impressed. The images obviously settle for a CGI form of reality without looking like they exist in the real world. For example: 1. A shot of V'ger's cobblestone walkway to the refit Ent has these Poser (?) figures (representing the Big three, Decker, and Ilia), with tiny heads and overly tall bodies) 2. The centerfold shot of the NX-01 crew standing on the hull again has fake-looking and strangley posed Poser figures. 3. Two pics with NX-01 (with the Romulans and with the ring ships) have stagy-looking compositions in which everything is perfectly placed to not overlap each other. A 2-D composition only. 4. The textures on the big "Canada arm" for NX-01 in drydock is supposed to be some sort of insulation sheath but looks likes like a standard rendered texture. 5. The shot of the Doomsday Machine uses this same texture. This pic also has a strong yellow light coming from the maw that nonsensically bathes the port side fo Constellation.
-------------------- When you're in the Sol system, come visit the Starfleet Museum
Registered: Oct 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
I feel i have to jump in and speak up for all the CGI artists on this board and elsewhere, the pictures are very realistic, for a given value of 'real'. None of the stuff depicted in the shots is real, it's all pure conjecture and imagination. Since we are human however we are programmed to be very, very good at spotting and recognising other humans, so those tend to be the flaws that leap out at us in CGI pictures. The CG in the shows get away with it by adding movement, either animated or motion captured, which helps to sell the 'humanity' of the character being protrayed, but that's not an option here. The only thing they could do would be to composite in real humans in suits that were photographed and lit for the occasion, and I guarantee that it would cost more for one such shot than it cost to produce the entire calander.
Please also bare in mind that it's still art; the composition, lighting, texturing and all the other elements were created and posed by a person with an aesthetic vision which may differ radically from your own. Although many people see CGI as making 'realistic' scenes or pictures, the individual CG artist is adding a lot of themselves to the piece. The software is rarely capable of making a scene look real without a lot of tweaking and direction from the artist. If the scene with the planet-killer was lit totally realistically, you'd see practically nothing.
Having said that I have to agree that some of the shots are a little disappointing in both content and execution. When i saw the E-nil with the Botany Bay my hackles instantly went up, it looks awfully like my mesh of the BB in that thumbnail. I'd need to see it closer to check if it's a rehash or not, although I'd assume they wouldn't be so crass as to nick a publically available mesh and not give credit. Or am i just flattering myself?
-------------------- www.kennyscrap.com - where I download crap I make.
Registered: Jun 2003
| IP: Logged
posted
Having checked out the scans, I gotta say two the majority of the images come across as too busy and not having a clear focus. For instance, the planet killer and the two starships aren't enough...there has to be planet rubble as well as sparks coming off the Constellation. Voyager and the Flyer AND a planet AND a nebula. NX-01 and two Vulcan ships, AND...
Less is more.
-------------------- "Well, I mean, it's generally understood that, of all of the people in the world, Mike Nelson is the best." -- ULTRA MAGNUS, steadfast in curmudgeon
Registered: Feb 2001
| IP: Logged
posted
yeah, a couple of those images are a little too busy for my liking as well, particularly the one with all the crap in orbit around the NX-01. When you have a large format to fill however the tendency is to cram in as much interesting stuff as you think you can get away with, and if their models are anything like mine then they dont bare up to really close examination.
-------------------- www.kennyscrap.com - where I download crap I make.
Registered: Jun 2003
| IP: Logged
quote:Originally posted by Axeman 3D: yeah, a couple of those images are a little too busy for my liking as well, particularly the one with all the crap in orbit around the NX-01. When you have a large format to fill however the tendency is to cram in as much interesting stuff as you think you can get away with, and if their models are anything like mine then they dont bare up to really close examination.
Just out of curiosity, how many polys or vertexes do you have in a typical model?
-------------------- "Well, I mean, it's generally understood that, of all of the people in the world, Mike Nelson is the best." -- ULTRA MAGNUS, steadfast in curmudgeon
Registered: Feb 2001
| IP: Logged
-------------------- "I was surprised by the matter-of-factness of Kafka's narration, and the subtle humor present as a result." (Sizer 2005)
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
I never put vertexes in my models. Never. It's a matter of principle.
-------------------- Justice inclines her scales so that wisdom comes at the price of suffering. -Aeschylus, Agamemnon
Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic
