HOME | DD
Magnus-Strindboem — Witchwinter: Dominion Range
#andes #condor #fantasy #horror #ice #lovecraftianhorror #mountains #peaks #snow #wendigo #winter #3dartwork #daz3dstudio #3dartfemale #witchwinter #irayrender #daz3diray #topazstudio #glacier #rockymountains
Published: 2019-06-10 19:33:17 +0000 UTC; Views: 2336; Favourites: 125; Downloads: 41
Redirect to original
Description
A little sight of the Dominion Range of the Witchwinter setting which loosely translates to the Rocky Mountains/Andes, with some peaks rising over 20.000 ft.After the Witchwinter Cataclysm most of the passes through the mountains became impassable except for the St. Augustino Bay area, but there the desert frustrates all but the most desperate attempts to reach the center of the continent.
I promised a close look on the mountains - here it is
DAZ3D Iray Render, Minor PS/Topaz post work.
Related content
Comments: 57
Well I did everything I could to scare the caravans of tourists and sherpas away. They're on the peak to the rear.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Oh, that's what all those dead frozen bodies are doing over there!
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
That way they don't smell as bad.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
El condor pasa...
Very nice
I've finally got those montains on the last coupon sale. Wouldn't have bought them if not for your tip with the terradome shaders! And what a great tip that is, so thanks for that!
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Let's have some epic mountains, then!
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Will do... once I get back from vacation
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Awesome! Did you make the mountains? If so, what did you use?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Nah... I'm lazy... just cobbled a huge amount of Stonemasons Winter Terrains together with terradome shaders, some distance fog & clouds on top and a condor as cherry on top
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Well, it looks great! And condors are cool.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I second glnw43 's proclamation: you are the King of Epic Imagery, and these mountainsides are only one of your kingdoms. I wouldn’t even know where to start such an image, and my computer certainly wouldn’t see the end of it... Awesome, in the true sense of the word.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Well I do feel a slight quality pressure here 
But then again... heck, there's something afoot in the kingdom! It's almost time.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
You, sir, are the king of epic imagery. I absolutely love the depth of your scenes. Simple as this image might seem, I can't help but wonder what's on the other side and who has traversed these mountains. Reminds me of LOTR! Are these by chance Stonemason's winter terrains?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
It's winter terrains. Amazing set. I just slapped terradome shaders on it.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Ja, da muss ich jetzt wohl echt nicht sein. Aber trotzdem sehr atmosphärisch und wenn man nur 1-2 Sekunden hinschaut merkt man ev. auch nicht sofort, dass es 3D ist.
Wollte mich jetzt nicht der Diskussion anschließen, aber ich habe ja einen 3440x1440 Monitor und daher freue ich mich immer auf große Bilder, die man dann auch "im Detail" betrachten kann (vor allem bei Leuten wie Dir, wo es oft sooooo viele Details gibt). Außerdem reduziert "kleiner machen" ja das Rauschen und man kann es ggf. als Poster drucken (zumindest drucke ich mir ja immer in Kalender). Bei einer Bildergeschichte verstehe ich aber auch, wenn man nicht jede "Nebenszene" in 4k rendern möchte.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Naja ich werde demnächst mal probieren, mehr kleinere Render für die Storyszenen zu machen. Andererseits (so verrückt das klingt), hab übrigens mal den Denoiser ausprobiert, die Resultat sind nach meinem Gefühl besser als mit Photoshop, weniger Detailverlust auch bei komplettem Entfernen des Rauschens. Da ich fast immer mit SSS für die Atmosphäre rendere, hab ich auch fast immer Rauschen drin, mal sehen ob das jetzt besser wird.
Ich bin die ganze Zeit versucht mal den Dynamic Auto Painter zu testen... da der nicht filtert sonder malt, sollte das Thema 3D dann durch sein
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Habe den Denoiser jetzt schon ein paar Mal ausprobiert. Gerade in der Vorschau ist er manchmal ganz hilfreich. Bei nicht organischen Strukturen ist er denke ich sehr gut auch im Ergebnis einsetzbar. Bei Menschen und vor allem Nahaufnahmen ist es wohl eher ungeeignet:
Gibt ja noch ein externe Denoiser der im Forum breit erklärt worden ist, glaub AMD oder so etwas... der soll möglicherweise nicht so "hart" sein. Aber bin zu faul mich damit zu beschäftigen.
"Dynamic Auto Painter" oh, habe ich nie von gehört. Mhmm, hab jetzt nur ein 2min Video von 2018 angeschaut, sieht für mich auf den schnellen Blick nur nach einer etwas spezialisierten Version von Funktion aus die Photoshop schon hat oder täusche ich mich da. Aber im Video ging es um störende Dinge zu ersetzen...
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Ah, ich meinte den externen: www.deviantart.com/getsx/journ…
(geht aber natürlich auch ohne Registry Eintrag)
www.mediachance.com/dap/
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Okay, ja dass ist der Denoiser zu dem es einen sehhhhr langen Thread im Forum gibt. Ich habe wie gesagt nur den Iray in 4.11 bisher probiert und nutze ihn vor allem für die Vorschau gerne... nur die Bildschärfe kann man damit nicht so gut beurteilen (schnell).
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Bisher bin ich mit den Resultaten sehr zufrieden (hab aber noch nichts geposted damit).
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
I still can't wait to see a map of this world!
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Unfortunately these are mostly older renders, as I'm actually working on the up and coming projects, I'm not likely to do it before fall 
On the bright side, all the maps you need for the other stuff are right at your fingertips
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Very nice depth and composition. as for the slight purple noise I think it helps. The subtle colours help it. also as it has been pointed out the mountain being too dark in the far right works considering the details of the image taken in as a whole.
I like the balancing and wouldn't change it.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Thanks
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
wow fantastic
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Thanks! Actually I feel grain is not always a bad thing. It's kind of an obsession with rendering to remove all the grain... but professional artists often actually add grain/noise/textures to (digital/3d) pictures, to make them look more realistic. Most Topaz filters I use actually add textures or grain. Do a search for Topaz Studio, it's free. It's a bit like Lightroom, and it does plug into Photoshop, too.
I usually run several filters to reduce grain, but i always prefer grain over plastic look, and as you said, you're likely to kill off details.
Of course it's also a ressource problem , since I almost always run my scenes in a SSS/Fog box, they render slower and more grainy than 'clear' ones, but the light feels more satisfying to me.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
thank you for the info
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
I need a good chimney fire after seing this picture.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Lol... seems the environment is pretty suggestive. Gotta do some warmer scenes next.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
"Far over the Misty Mountains cold…!"
Na ja bis auf den Kondor wäre es so in der Richtung.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Hmm... LOTR Fanart... irgendwann im nächsten Jahrhundert, wenn ich Zeit habe
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I began to notice some purple noises on your renders. In Photoshop, you could use a denoiser, and then increase the sharpness of the image by 100%, which might help.
Like the example below. I removed the noise and made the black parts in the picture more distinguishable.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
You got sharp eyes. It's true, though.
I did not render this one very long. And since I use sub surface scattering all over, it shows.
It was mostly targeted for instagram and small mobile screens. So I rendered quickly and denoised only slightly
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Magnus, to be honest, I don't know why you are rendering with high resolution. The proportion of screens with a resolution higher than FullHD (1920x1080) is only about 5%, and they can be completely neglected. Well and decently save time and resources )
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I checked the statistics and you're pretty much right, especially since it really cuts into render ressources.
But... ...
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
We have been discussing this problem for quite a long time on the forum, and I believe that 4k is justified only when the client has paid or is ready to pay a fourfold loss of time (compared to FHD).
But the probability of this is quite small )
---
A pair of numbers, simple arithmetic:
FullHD (1920x1080) = 2 073 600 px (100% render time)
4K UHD 2160 (3840x2160) = 8 294 400 px (400% render time, )
FHD to paper (300 dpi) = 6.4" x 3.6" = 162 x 91.5 mm
4k to paper (300 dpi) = 12.8" x 7.2" = 325 x 183 mm
Note: 300 dpi is not very quality printing, but you can hang it on the wall under the glass.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I agree that 4k is usually overblown, except for printing/patreon and the like. I use QHD often because that's my native resolution. But I already considered reducing size for the coming storyline renders, because as you said, the larger resolutions really don't justify the time and ressources...
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
"Fifty weeks of snowy peaks is where you're going to be ..." Beautiful shot of the mountains.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Just an impression, especially experimenting with the clouds. Glad you like it.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Glad you like it, it's not perfectly rendered, but I hope it gives an impression
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
I see you started taking pictures in the Cordillera from a helicopter
Beautiful view
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Up where we belong Where the eagles cry On a mountain high !
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Only in this world you ought to be very careful of anyone or anything with the force to be up there
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Some scaly ones, you mean ?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
but that is a story for another time...
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
| Next =>