View Full Version : Mars Documentary Shot.

09-25-2003, 11:30 AM
Well, I have begun work on a Mars documentary.

It is about a plan to show an actual budget, build, timeframe and possibility of a manned mission to Mars. The guy (Robert Zubrin)wrote a book about a mission to mars.

The shot is a first render of a scene I built last night from images/textures free off the web and fast built models.

I will probably get the full size large images (planetary) so I can get really close to mars without pixelization, and I mean really close.

What do you think of this shot? I know that Phobos and Diemos aren't that close to each other but its supposed to be artsy and pretty :D

Anyways, we are doing a large scale project and I might need two other 3d artists, Lightwave of course, to help with the CGI.

If you are interested and are in the Los Angeles area and can do photo realistic (or near photo) quality space shots let me know here.

09-25-2003, 11:34 AM
OH also, THere will be a budget per shot made and you do not have to be in LoS Angeles if your work is really nice.

We are going to be doing space ships, traveling through atmosphere, Leaving earth, rovers on the surface, Astronoughts, Mars life support facilities (with the trees and stuff) where the manned mission lives.
If your into this stuff let me know :)

I know there is a JOb forum here and Will also post there but I wanted opinions on my mars shot.

09-25-2003, 12:41 PM
Looks nice, although not photoreal yet.

Guess your payment for this job is a ticket to Mars in the first test-ride of an ACME build rocketvehicle you designed. Well, you can count me in then hahahahaha
:D ;)


09-25-2003, 12:52 PM
No Im just the 3d guy.

Robert Zubrin wrote the book. I know very little about the physics.
The mission will be a NASA project so its not just Wiley Coyote to Mars.

Robert has the plans and people but needs to get public interest.

He knows that NASA is capable of far more then it has been doing and insists that space projects are not out of our technical or economic reach. Actually the first trip to mars to test the process will be not manned. It will send out supplies and materials to make the facility when the manned flight arrives. The first trip will test the cost, time and plausability of regular interplanetary travel.

Im not at Photoreal yet ;), but will be trying to get as close as possible.

3d animation and Documentary might generate enough interest to start another Space race. Too bad Russia or Germany aren't trying to beat us to Mars, if they were we might be trying to get thier first since that is our tradition.

09-25-2003, 02:00 PM
Ooh - what a project! I am REALLY jealous!

But as its not the day job, (and I'm the wrong side of the pond), pooh.

Mars looks too saturated to my eye - more of a peachy colour would be better.

There are TONS of useful resources around for you. Most useful will probably be the Mars digital elevation maps, tons of detail for the closeup stuff, and realistic surfaces. It will be tempting for total polygon overload to set in though...

One thing to beware of - the height data is based on 'reverse engineering' from shadows in some cases, (particularly the older Viking based data). This can mean a loss of detail when the shaows run along crater rims, and you will often see twin 'notches' in crater walls due to this.

There is good shape data around for the satellites, but I could never make sense of the formats personaly - it would be great if you get further, and could share the technique.

I'll also be interested to know how you handle the detailing at a level below the actual geometry record. I always find it REALLY difficult with landscapes to get some detail at the scale between the texture level of sub cm, and the tens of metre landscape resolution. Good old vistapro would fake it quit nicely, but its way too long in the tooth these days...


09-25-2003, 03:04 PM
Well I can't wait to see more on this project. I am also very facinated with Mars and visit Robert Zubrins website marsscociety.com a lot. I'd say it won't be long till we are pushed into another space race with the Chinese. They plan on putting a man into orbit sometime in October.

09-25-2003, 04:46 PM
Hows this for a peach tone?

I didn't change the color much. There is a cloud layer obscuring the pole with the snow, I'll post the snow capped shot later. This weekend I am working on the rocket construction.

I am doing alot of preliminary work so we can story board and pre visualize the shots.

Oh, also I used the twinkle stars that come with lightwave but they dont show up so I made points to poly's but they are all flat shaded dots now.

Any suggestions about the stars?

Buying the large scale maps this weekend.

09-25-2003, 08:38 PM
usually when I play around with stars I'll load a few of the stars objects that come with LW so i have a lot of them. Also, I'll vary their intensity and color or perhaps dissolve them out partially. The stars in your first pic seem too sharp and too even. Of course, I haven't really seen stars outside of the atmosphere. :)

Also, the dark side of the moons/planet. Aren't they way too bright for a space image? It's probably a stylisation thing, eh?

09-25-2003, 10:49 PM
To create an accurate Mars surface scene, use real Mars data! High-precision elevation maps of Mars are available through NASA. The Mars Orbiting Laser Altimeter (MOLA) has been used to create elevation maps of the surface of Mars with 60 Km/pixel resolution and a vertical accuracy of <42 feet. These are not the old elevation maps made from stereo analysis of old Viking images - these are much, much better. Complete elevation maps can be obtained from the NASA MOLA Site (http://ltpwww.gsfc.nasa.gov/tharsis/mapping_data.html). The DEMScape plug-in (http://amber.rc.arizona.edu/lw/demscape.html) can be used to convert MOLA GEM files into Lightwave-compatible elevation maps.

For color quality, good atmospherics, and accurate Mars weather dynamics, take a look at the work done by Dan Maas (http://www.dcine.com/). He did the animation for NASA of the recent Mars Exploration Rover mission (http://mars.jpl.nasa.gov/mer/), and spent a great amount of time studying the Mars environment with members of the Mars science teams to get it right.

Good luck!

09-26-2003, 05:11 AM
Well, one thing I did for stars that worked nicely, but was a real pig to do...

I took a real star catalogue, and poked around in the old format scene files until I understood how lens flares worked. (Old style scenes because they were plain text, and therefore easily hacked about).

I then used excel to turn the yale bright star catalogue into a set of several thousand lens flares, and parented them to a central null!


09-26-2003, 05:12 AM
Nice peachy tone, by the way! Maybe a slight shift to olive in the darker areas?


09-26-2003, 11:09 AM
I then used excel to turn the yale bright star catalogue into a set of several thousand lens flares, and parented them to a central null!

YOWZA!!! That sounds awesome!

I'd love to play space with ya, but I'm on the east coast. I actually have to create the whole solar system for an upcoming series, but nothing really closeup.

That plug sounds cool - being able to use the actual Nasa info to fly through mountain ranges. Do they have the big face plotted?

09-26-2003, 11:25 AM
Just a couple of quick comments...

First, the MOLA topographic maps at http://wufs.wustl.edu/missions/mgs/mola/megdr.html can be loaded directly into Lightwave with the ElevationModels image loader plugin at http://amber.rc.arizona.edu/lw/elevations.html. Then you could use the image as a displacement map or use TextureScape (http://amber.rc.arizona.edu/lw/texturescape.html) to create a more optimized version of the object in Modeler.

You can also find some interesting Mars stuff done with those Lightwave plugins at http://www.space-graphics.com

09-26-2003, 11:57 AM
I also found this site which not only has a nice 1k map of mars and its moons but also has large maps of every planet.


09-26-2003, 01:30 PM
Thanks for the help guys. I will try out these maps and pics and post some results. Tomorrow I am building the rocketship and going to try my hand at a few landscapes on Sunday.

09-26-2003, 01:36 PM
If I can find where I saved the *!?$ star flare scene, I'll pass it around, but I am having problems locating it. The unfinished part was to turn the spectral type column into an approximate colour!

It was a bit slow to manipulate though!!!


09-28-2003, 04:53 PM
Here's a shot of my version of mars and a mars spacecraft done for another project...

While the MOLA data is great keep in mind that for rendering purposes, especially surface shots, it is VERY low resolution. And, a landscape rendering for Mars in LW can be very quickly overwhelmed by the amount of detritus (read as: ROCKS) that need to be in the scene to make it look correct. The Mars Pathfinder images are excellent reference for this.

09-28-2003, 05:06 PM
I just realized that that scene has a really old version of the hab arm (diagonal part in the middle is a habitation arm that rotates to create artifical gravity)

The newer version is a bit more detailed with windows and stuff...

09-28-2003, 05:07 PM
I think your first shot looked very good!
If you like my work, I'd like to try helping on your project.

Besides my website here are my recent thread posts and images. quicktime clips also linked in threads.


thread #1 (http://vbulletin.newtek.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=11324)

thread #2 (http://vbulletin.newtek.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=11582)

09-28-2003, 05:20 PM
I seem to remember a free model around the internet that was the actual ploting ( or whatever you call it) of stars from the milky way in a LW scene. I'll take a scour threw the drives

09-28-2003, 05:24 PM
Actually I guess it comes with LW now in the ->objects->space directory


mybad.. :D

09-29-2003, 10:29 AM
Man I found a mars map that was built from actual data of the satellite that is there now.

its rsolution is roughly 16,000x,12,000.

Its massively detailed. Has bump maps and and everything.

so I spent alot of time getting the color and bump maps set up really nice. Didn't have a chance to work on ships cause the director and I had such a blast playing around with Mars' look.

What do you think. posting more images in a few minutes.

09-29-2003, 11:12 AM
OH I forgot to mention in my last post. I had to size the original maps of mars down to around 10000x5000 because the images would crash my computer. SO I went and upgraded 256MB of ram so that I have 512MB ram. It is still crashing the computer.

As you can see the image quality is good but it starts to fall apart when you get close. Now I am not asking for much better image quality close but I need the extra 1/3 quality for that extra detail.

Here is the close shot where I feel it starts to break up.

09-29-2003, 11:16 AM
Also since this is my first serious planet project I need some tips an realistic atmosphere. I have tried using the frsnel effect for the edge and have added a few small clouds. I know that mars has a very minimal atmosphere that really only shows up during sandstorms or unless clouds are on the edge.

ANy thoughts?

09-29-2003, 11:35 AM
buy more RAM. :D

I've always been of the opinion of doing whatever it takes for the best quality. If it means longer renders, over-detailed models, HUGE texture maps, so be it.
I have 2gig in my main, 1 gig in my slave and 768 in a dinosaur that renders in emergency situations.

09-29-2003, 12:44 PM
The last 2 images look really good. The only thing to be aware of is, the "dark" side of the planet needs to be black (i.e. no light what-so-ever.)

The only light that would ever fall on the dark side would be reflected light from a moon or another planet.

09-29-2003, 12:54 PM
I checked this forum on another computer and realized my screen is dark. I didn't see how much of the dark side was being ambiently lit up.

It looked stark black to me on this computer :confused:

I'll set my screen and check again.:D

09-29-2003, 08:15 PM
Originally posted by Intuition
Also since this is my first serious planet project I need some tips an realistic atmosphere. I have tried using the frsnel effect for the edge and have added a few small clouds. I know that mars has a very minimal atmosphere that really only shows up during sandstorms or unless clouds are on the edge.

You are right that the Mars atmosphere is thin - it is about 1% of the denisty of Earth's atmosphere - but it is still visible from orbit. Mars is a smaller planet, about one half of the diameter of Earth. So when you have the planet fill the entire frame, your camera position will be much closer to the surface than you would be for a similar scene of Earth. Since you are closer, it will be easier to discern the atmosphere.

When looking at the horizon, the lower part of the atmospher will be the same pale umber as the surface of the planet (due to all the surface dust suspended in the atmophere). However, the highest parts of the atmosphere will actually include a very thin layer of blue, due to the lower dust concentrations. You can see this effect in some of the photos from Mars Odyssey.

Across the face of the planet, you will be able to easily see thin, wispy clusters of clouds. Look at some of the MOC global view photos like this one (http://www.msss.com/mars_images/moc/2003/04/04/globalviews/chryse021403.jpg) and these (http://www.msss.com/mars_images/moc/2003/04/04/globalviews).

The "dark side" of the planet is not entirely dark. Some sunlight is reflected onto the surface by the Mars moons, but there is also a constant, low level of starlight that does provide illumination. A lot of the ambient starlight makes it down to the surface, because the atmosphere is too thin to filter it out to anywhere near the degree that it occurs on Earth. If you look carefully at images like this one (http://www.msss.com/mars_images/moc/2003/04/04/may02/Mars_earlyMay02.jpg) you can just make out some of the surface details on the "dark sie" beyond the terminator.

Where did you find the 16000 x 12000 Mars map images?


09-29-2003, 09:02 PM
I had looked at those shots. That is why I tend to grvitate towards a more brown mars then on the first page of this post that I originally had.

Also is there a way to get lightwave to make topographical maps like terragon?

I would like to make them based on the maps but then of course use lightwave's advanced render engine to interact with it.

The mars maps are on a website I found that has really neat stuff. I will post a link.


is the site where I saw the terragen program. Can lightwave generate these kinds of landscapes based on greyscale images?

As you can see they have an already impressive mars look. But of course its too plain for me so I want to manipulate it in lightwave.


10-01-2003, 01:51 PM
Is this darkside any better?

the large mars maps are located at


See if you can get a nice look and post here.

I think I need to get a new set of monitors or a new graphics card because it seems like I am fighting actual image brightness instead of what I see is what I get. Best buy here I come :rolleyes:

10-02-2003, 02:17 PM
OK I think the atmosphere is looking nice. Maybe I need less clouds but the fresnel effect is looking right now.

What do you think?

I am also using an inverse distance intensity falloff sinlge point light. The light diffuses much more pleasantly.

Color more red? less red? Light is slightly yellow instead of straight white.

10-02-2003, 08:35 PM
I like it, but it would look better with more stars. Like this. It makes the scene look more complete with out all that empty space.

10-03-2003, 02:36 AM
The atmosphere doesn't seem to have any falloff into space, it should go transparent to give it the appearance of the atmosphere getting thinner away from the surface.... this technique is usually done using edge transparency on the sphere you are using for the atmosphere.

10-03-2003, 02:40 AM
Sunlight in space looks more like a distant light source. Falloff from the sun at this scale would be nearly invisible.... unless yyou want to place your light source 2 AUs away from mars, make ift a point light with inverse square falloff, and then crank the intensity up until it actually matches that of the sun. Also, the terminator should be pretty sharp, look at actual pictures of planets for a guide. There shouldn't be any shadow softening on anything except Mars, and on Mars only a little. There is no atmosphere to scatter the light in space....

10-03-2003, 08:59 AM
There are stars but they are dim I om not working on them yet. Just Mars and its atmosphere :D I do agree they need to be better.

But thanks for the suggestions.

Some shots I have seen of mars actually have a softer diffusion then I thought.

This atmosphere is nice looking but the real mars atmosphere is sometimes barely visable unless there are clouds or a dust storm is happening.


SOmetimes the fresnel effect works if there were say a dust storm on the edge. But like the above shots there is no atmosphere edge. It is almost not there. But there are lots of clouds.

Also is mine too red?


This shot shows contrary to what I thought a planets edge would look like.

I thought planets would have a sharp edge, high diffuse sharpness, but this shot shows a soft diffusion :/

THis Mars is brown as well. I wonder if its because of image filters?

10-03-2003, 03:46 PM
These are really starting to look good!

The darkside illumination appears just about right, based on the images I have seen. The terminator between the light/dark sides also appears correct. The relatively high concentration of dust in the Mars atmosphere causes a lot of light scattering, so the terminator is fairly broad.

Conversely, the terminators for Phobos and Deimos should be nice, sharp lines with virtually no diffusion. But remember that for many shots, the "dark sides" of both moons will have a substantial amount of "Mars-light" reflection if they are on the day side of Mars.

The base color of the planet is too red. I have seen the Space Graphics "Red Mars" data sets before, and there is some dispute in the Mars science community that their flat shaded images are not properly calibrated and show too much red. The Jet Propulsion Lab has posted an updated Mars Pathfinder panorama (http://mars.jpl.nasa.gov/gallery/martianterrain/PIA01466.html) with revised color correction that gives a better idea of the surface color (at least at one location). It correlates pretty well with images like this one of the Martian Northern Plains (http://mars.jpl.nasa.gov/gallery/craters/E19-81_82_n_plains.html), and a lot of others. Also, the MOC images you referenced from Malin Space Science have been color-corrected, and are good guides for the colors you want.

10-03-2003, 07:23 PM
Well, I didn't reakky notice but I realized I had my bump map messed up in the last shot :0

THe craters are outies instead of innies. Some how a negative mark was in the bump%. Anyways it looked good to my eye so I didn't think anything of it. SO I fixed it upon closer inspection and I think I have my Mars.

Now this weekend I will get the RAM upgrade so I can get the large map that isn't sized down into memory. Then render it out :D

Here is the result of the fixes.

Next set of shots will be rockets and planet surfaces. Oh, also will have a few with Mars and the new Stars. For now here you go :)

10-04-2003, 01:47 AM
Here is a Freeware, from SourceForge, work on Mac and Pc; with all the planet from the solar system, (and there map and map source in the ressource and "read me"...

I find it cool...

10-07-2003, 08:20 AM
Hi there. Those renders are starting to look good. I've had problems with lightwave crashing with very large image maps no matter what the amount of memory. What I usually do for very large image maps is do the shots in parts. You can get away with mapping half the planet anyway, since the other half is not seen, unless you want to do a full 360 in a single shot, in which case you can split your map in like 8 segments or more as needed and do multiple passes for later compositing.

By the way, I have a better space backdrop than the one you are using right now, I'll post it later from work and you can use it if you wish :)

10-07-2003, 01:58 PM
And here's the space backdrop I promised... Hope you like it...

10-08-2003, 08:14 AM
On the subject of starfields, I find a technique from the following page very useful:


(It's Step 1 in the tutorial)

Not for amazingly realistic starfields, but very pretty ones.


10-08-2003, 04:57 PM
Hey Cholo, Thanks for the JPg Starmap. I'll post a render with it later. I am assuming I would use this map in the luminosity texture so the stars willhave brightness right?

Also will try the tutorial Mike.

The director and I are meeting tonight and will be story boarding the shots in the Doc. Should be space ship time soon as well.

10-10-2003, 12:32 PM
OK I know why the edge is not dark.

I used fresnel and I didin't know it lit up the non lit edge.

Here is a sample of no fresnel shading

10-10-2003, 12:34 PM
OK here is the fresnel

I really like what it does to the shots. THe large mars shots on page 2 look nice from front with fresnel as well.

BUT as you can see the dark side looks lit up by a planet sized moon.

Is there a way to get the lit side to be fresnel but the darkside to look as dark as the no fresnel shot above?

10-10-2003, 01:34 PM
OK, it's a dumb suggestion, but you hacve got RAY TRACE SHADOWS on, haven't you?

I've tripped up on this with atmosphere effects many times!


10-10-2003, 01:35 PM
And it's coming along beautifully by the way!


10-10-2003, 03:02 PM
I actually use shawdow maps since it is softer then ray trace.

But that aside I did have them turned off :eek:

Oops tee hee hee :D

Ok here we go. THanks for the help. I think it is time for some rocket shots tomorrow

Stay tuned.

10-14-2003, 09:05 PM
That's way dope. The valley of the Mariner looks sweet. Very realistic.

10-15-2003, 11:00 AM
Valley and Labryinth shot sunrise with your regular overused abused lens flare for a sun.

10-15-2003, 11:02 AM
Here is the canyon going into the darkness. It shows off the bump map better :D

10-15-2003, 11:14 AM
I'd say it's looking pretty good, but that lens flare is Cheese Factor 10.

10-15-2003, 11:29 AM
I keep trying to steer the director away form cheesy Lens Flares. I think a small generic flare would do the job.

He likes some of the Lightwave effects. I put it in there as an example but he really likes it :eek:

I think I'll show hijm your post so that he realizes that many people see it that way as well.

10-15-2003, 08:09 PM
I'd make the lens flare bigger (make 2 actually to make it bigger and brighter but without so much lens reflections) and get rid of the random streaks, they look bad ;)

Try pointing a camera at the sun and use the footage as reference to achieve a realistic looking flare

10-17-2003, 05:44 PM
So the director was talking about making a real nice atmosphere entrance shot with one of Mars' landmarks in the background.

So I was thinking either Valley Marineris or Olympus Mons.

I made olympus first. Using the old displacement map on a large sqeare with hundreds of trpiled polys. Then found a big overhead shot of olympus and mapped it on the displacement map.

Now, I have to get some more landscape and make it on a horizon and then fix the camera zoom ratio so that it looks larger then life. Add in our lander blasting through the atmospher and we are going to have a nice shot. Valley Marineris coming real soon. Oh also those rocket shots I was talking about :D

Should I make a new post for the different shots or keep adding to this post>?>?

mega maniac
10-19-2003, 04:01 PM
its looking great, those asteroids need a little work i think, oh and here is a star map

star map (http://www.oera.net/How2/PlanetTexs/StarsMap_2500x1250.jpg)

as you background is a bit plain.

10-19-2003, 04:06 PM
Technically, from this angle, there should be alot more of the planet left, not a star map.

mega maniac
10-19-2003, 04:08 PM
i dont quite get you??

mega maniac
10-19-2003, 04:09 PM
i was talking about the full planet shots, not the close up lump thing.

10-19-2003, 07:10 PM
Ok, just a couple of thoughts some of which have already been addressed.
First I really liked the look of your last post.
Cholo sent you a star field that would work very well with your project. I think you're playing down just how bright stars are when not looking through an atmosphere. When you're showing the planet partially illuminated (both light and dark portions) the shadowed side one; should be at least suggested to visually, two; star fields don't belong in the same space that should be occupied by the dark side of the planet. The latter is a major "excuse me.":rolleyes:
There are times when the planet surface features are not visible due to dust storms sometimes lasting for months. You might consider obscuring some of those features.
Next I wouldn't necessarily take NASA Photos as gospel for color reference. I remember some while back when one of the surface missions depicted the Martian ski as blue. While I appreciate this is a documentary, I think a little artistic license on your part wouldn't kill ya. To make something more visually exciting or have more impact on those viewing the piece is tantamount with the term artist. Good luck.

10-19-2003, 07:32 PM
On the other hand, look at NASA photos of Earth in orbit and even Mars from an orbiter and you will note you can either not see the stars or barely see them... I'm referring to from a camera that is actually THERE, not a telescope because they are very subject to ambient light.

Considering who is creating the documentary, artistic liscence is NOT a good idea, and too much artistic liscence may cause the documentary filmmaker to start looking for another contractor. The film is being made under the auspices of (Dr?) Robert Zubrin, a space scientist of some note. Previous experience of mine working with people of this sort will tell you, on a project like this, tolerance for 'artistic liscence' can be VERY thin.

It also depends on his target audience. If the documentary is going to be seen by NASA and (possibly) senators, then visual impact is going to be almost secondary to making it as factually correct as possible.

Robert Zubrin is more than likely making this documentary to promote his "Mars Direct" Mars mission plan, which has both its pros and cons and I feel won't do enough to push international space technology and create eough fringe (spinoff) technological benefits to make it an effective effort.

10-19-2003, 10:26 PM
"Too much artistic license may cause the documentary filmmaker to start looking for another contractor. "

Good advice...

I don't condone unbridled artistic freedom with a project such as this.

However, something as simple as a more inviting color or deeper saturation can make viewers (Senators included) senators especially more receptive. Let's face it, if things look drab and uninviting who the f--- wants to go. The goal is to appease the people paying for your service and when possible achieve the end goal desired by these same people. As for the star field, again don't take astrophotos as truisms. These are computer enhanced images not necessarily processed to view as you or I would see them. Half the astronauts in orbit mention how uncannily bright the stars are.

Obviously, keep it ballpark but don't tie your hands.

10-20-2003, 11:02 AM
It is About Zubrin's Mars Direct mission.

The Director, Scott Gill, who also did the Porn Star doc about R.J. ;)
is directing this piece.

He has done a few other docs but I havent seen them yet. Scott thinks we can have a balance of both artistic and realistic elements.

They are actually shooting some guys in space suits in a desert in Utah, I think, where the scenery is actually close to mars in a few spots.

The asteroids are actually Phobos and Diemos. I saw real shots of both of them and they look more 3d then my own do. THey are actually really smooth with very few little pock mark craters so Scott said to make a surface that is a composite from other moons.

Recent real close mars shots are almost yellow brown instead of red but Scott wanted a happy medium between the two since we call it the red planet.

So we were story boarding a shot last night with the half finished ERV (earth return vehicle). It has a atmosphere entrance shield that pops off once inside the atmosphere and then uses its lander rockets to slow it down in conjunction with opening parachutes (which are probably going to be the roughest part of the 3d in theis doc) then once it is used again the top part seperates from the bottom lander part and goes back to earth. I am trying to get the model as close to reality as possible. For this animation test I had finished the shield and lower half but threw on the top half real quick thats why it has the cheesy 1950's submarine windows.

On a few notes.....

The stars will be brought up a little bit more.

The sun/lens flare will be adjusted. It is a minimalist lens flare now which the directore likes. The director and Zubrin like Mars as is even though I am trying to get it even more realistic. They say its great but I think when they see a better version they will cling to it.

I am not sure what you mean by the stars shouldn't be in the dark side of the planet.

For 8 years I have been doing product shots and "how it works" for products that my 3d space stuff has been limited to doodling.

10-20-2003, 11:18 AM
By the way,
The lump is Olympus mons. The Volcano, I just built a square area of it. It is not a final shot or anything. I would of course make a whole section of horizon and everything. Just posted Olympus to show results I got from merely a elevation displacement map on a large section of tripled polys and then a color texture and bump map added.

Merely showing how you can get great results where nice images do the work.

10-20-2003, 02:01 PM
"am not sure what you mean by the stars shouldn't be in the dark side of the planet."


I was referring to your first image posted. Turns out it was my monitor and my mistake. It appeared at the time that you had stars showing within the perimeter of the shaded side of the planet. After adjusting my tube I see that you have indeed partially illuminated the shadowed side and the starts are not an issue. Have fun with the project. :)

10-21-2003, 03:51 PM
Very cool stuff there!!