Question about edges are they darker?

Join the #1 Art Workshop - LevelUpJoin Premium Art Workshop
Results 1 to 27 of 27
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    110
    Thanks
    33
    Thanked 22 Times in 18 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0

    Question about edges are they darker?

    Hi, I get:

    1. Planes appear lighter or darker depending on the angle they are compared to the light source

    2. Planes can appear lighter or darker depending on position of the observer. ie. because not all light is reflected in random directions, smooth objects can reflect more light at a certain angle.

    But

    I want to know if a plane appears darker because it is oblique to the observer. This is suggested here: http://conceptart.org/forums/showthread.php?t=14739

    on page 2

    If so, why?

    Does that explain why the horizon is darker (ie. planes further away will get closer and closer to being oblique) or is it just the waves bunched up. see here:

    http://stapletonkearns.blogspot.com/...rtance-to.html

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  


  2. Hide this ad by registering as a member
  3. #2
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    SLC, UT
    Posts
    311
    Thanks
    67
    Thanked 32 Times in 27 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Two things are happening , something one of my instructors called Spontaneous Contrast which is essentially an illusion. You may also be observing that the part that is darkest is almost paralell to the rays of light, so it's catching less light, (less reflected light and direct light)

    ~"With a little hope, and alot of try, anything is possible."~
    ~"The harder You work, the better life gets."~
    ~"The pain doesn't last, but the gain will last forever."~
    ~"Fear is my courage." ~Mr_S_14
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  4. #3
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Northern California
    Posts
    5,234
    Thanks
    3,512
    Thanked 4,905 Times in 2,546 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by sharprm View Post
    Hi, I get:

    1. Planes appear lighter or darker depending on the angle they are compared to the light source

    Does that explain why the horizon is darker (ie. planes further away will get closer and closer to being oblique) or is it just the waves bunched up. see here:
    It has more to do with #1 - the orientation of the plane to the light.

    The horizon isn't generally darker - rather lighter in "most" situations, due to atmospheric perspective and it being flat to the light source (sun or sky).

    The important thing to keep in mind is there aren't any rules to these things - at least not when it comes to the landscape - still life is a little more controlled and therefor subject to more consistent "rules".

    If you want to further understand the idea of planes in the landscape get a copy of "Carlson's Guide to Landscape Painting" - which is what Stapleton is referencing in his article.

    Hope that helps!

    What would Caravaggio do?
    _________________________

    Portfolio
    Plein Air
    Digital
    Still Life
    Sight Measuring
    Fundamentals
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  5. #4
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    110
    Thanks
    33
    Thanked 22 Times in 18 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    >"Spontaneous Contrast which is essentially an illusion" - can you explain more? Does the brain see things differently than they should appear. Where a light object overlaps a dark object, does the brain put a darker edge on the dark object?

    Jeffxx9:

    But if you look at the horizon it is darker in that situation. Why? Is it specific to those waves (ie. the light side of the waves are hidden by the dark side - deeper ocean etc.) or is it an illustration of the plane "oblique to the eye".

    What I'm asking is if I had a plane in 3ds max and I had a light source that was directly above it and both had the same axis of rotation, so when I rotated the plane the light was still directly above it, and if I rotated the plane so it became "oblique to the eye" would it be dark?

    Thx for help srry I posted in wrong section

    Last edited by sharprm; April 1st, 2010 at 05:55 AM.
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  6. #5
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    64
    Thanks
    1
    Thanked 27 Times in 19 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    I will explain it for you since some of the responses are lacking in explanation.

    In the standard fixed function graphics pipeline, light is modelled as several terms.

    Ambient, Diffuse, and Specular.

    Ambient light is essentially blanket light coverage that illuminates all objects. It is light that has bounced around so many surfaces that it is impossible to detect the source. Ambient lighting is generally very smooth and uniform across the surface of an object.

    The next term, diffuse, is light that reflects from a source in a spread out way. This is generally attributed to the uneven surface of an object so parallel rays of light bounce off the object 'diffusely'. This is your general lighting term.

    The last term, specular, is light that reflects at a specific angle. This is generally attributed to shiny, smooth surfaces. Light no longer reflects as a spread, but reflects as a point. Specular light can only be observed at certain angles.

    These are the three basic terms and applies for both light coming from point sources and for light reflecting off another surface.

    The whole 'darker as the plane turns away from you' is a simple artistic tool to emphasise the mass and form of a shape. In the real world, we need no visual cues to perceive depth. We have two eyes and depth is created as a combination of two images taken at two different angles. When we deal with a 2D image, we need a little extra help in order to perceive it as a three dimensional object. Thus artists tend to make planes facing away from the viewer darker than those facing the viewer. It is nothing more than artistic representation and isn't really present in the real world.

    Vilppu explains is better than I can so if you want more info (or a better explanation) go to this link: http://www.awn.com/articles/tutorials/using-tone-draw

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  7. The Following User Says Thank You to M-Kaibigan For This Useful Post:


  8. #6
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    110
    Thanks
    33
    Thanked 22 Times in 18 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Thanks alot M-Kaibigan! I appreciate the clear answer. I'm nolonger confused, the "oblique to the eye" was a representation method. The links seem good but I haven't read it properly yet.

    One last question: light falls off at 1/r^2. Reflected light seems stronger the closer the plane is to the reflecting plane. When you are drawing from imagination, are there some rules for how bright the reflected light will be based on distance?,

    If not its okay I'll just copy some busts/statues. Thanks for your help guys.

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  9. #7
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    South Africa
    Posts
    1,878
    Thanks
    84
    Thanked 631 Times in 400 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by sharprm View Post
    Hi, I get:

    1. Planes appear lighter or darker depending on the angle they are compared to the light source

    2. Planes can appear lighter or darker depending on position of the observer. ie. because not all light is reflected in random directions, smooth objects can reflect more light at a certain angle.

    But

    I want to know if a plane appears darker because it is oblique to the observer. This is suggested here: http://conceptart.org/forums/showthread.php?t=14739

    on page 2

    If so, why?
    Not sure what you are referring to here, edges or planes? It does talk about contrast and keeping local value accurate. Where did your observation come from, the picture or description?

    From the picture I can only see the cores that could look like what you are describing. Cores are darker for effect because of contrast and it's true in most cases where the reflect light would be the least in the core area. This somehow generalised into a method in art and is used to punch the effect.



    Does that explain why the horizon is darker (ie. planes further away will get closer and closer to being oblique) or is it just the waves bunched up. see here:

    http://stapletonkearns.blogspot.com/...rtance-to.html
    Water have some additional qualities to take into account.
    Question about edges are they darker?

    The texture of the water is waved, the further back into the distance you go the more of the water reflective qualities get blocked by waves due to the perspective and thus you see more darker non reflecting wave bodies. Yes, you can say then it's because they are bunched up.

    ----------------------------------
    Scetchbook: View the exhibitionist's stuff.
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  10. #8
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    110
    Thanks
    33
    Thanked 22 Times in 18 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Not sure what you are referring to here, edges or planes? It does talk about contrast and keeping local value accurate. Where did your observation come from, the picture or description?
    Hi it just came from the picture 'Materials property page 2'. He shows a dark part where "rolls away from light source". He creates a second dark part (which is not away from the light source) and says it "roll moves oblique to the eye". I thought that they are two seperate things. I thought it was just the edge (but an edge is a small plane almost parallel to the line of sight of viewer). Do you think "roll moves oblique to the eye" refers to the edge or the planes well inside?

    M-Kaibigan seems to have explained it though. "roll moves oblique to the eye" has no justification. It is there just to aid the viewer.

    My observation about the horizon was just a one off I saw (that's why I was excited and posted about it). Because if you draw a line from a point on a plane to the observer it will form an angle theta. But the further you make that point away then the smaller theta will be. Hence it is like "roll moves oblique to the eye". This could explain it getting darker. But as you say the correct explanation is that it is the waves bunching up because "roll moves oblique to eye" is not real, just to aid the viewer.

    Maybe we would see it in photos with the flash on though.

    Not sure what cores are.

    edit:
    The next term, diffuse, is light that reflects from a source in a spread out way. This is generally attributed to the uneven surface of an object so parallel rays of light bounce off the object 'diffusely'.
    does diffuse light reflected at all angles evenly? ie. if I did that plane with the light source directly above and both are rotated, would the brightness change, or would that only happen for specular?

    Last edited by sharprm; April 1st, 2010 at 09:12 AM.
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  11. #9
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    64
    Thanks
    1
    Thanked 27 Times in 19 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    The appearance of diffuse light depends greatly on the material.

    Question about edges are they darker?
    Image from wikipedia.

    It's essentially light that has low contrast and no hotspots. Again, depending on the surface, it generally doesn't change drastically based on your viewing angle. Since there are many many micro-facets, all presumed to be facing random directions, for a given area it will generally distribute light equally in all directions.

    In the case of a rotating plane lit directly above, I would say (for most materials) the diffuse term would constant. The specular term would be changing however. This would essentially be 'flat lighting' and one would generally try to avoid these cases as it doesn't really describe the direction of the forms best.

    I would draw up some images of my own to show/explain it better but I don't have my tablet with me 'n'

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  12. #10
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    South Africa
    Posts
    1,878
    Thanks
    84
    Thanked 631 Times in 400 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by sharprm View Post
    My observation about the horizon was just a one off I saw (that's why I was excited and posted about it). Because if you draw a line from a point on a plane to the observer it will form an angle theta. But the further you make that point away then the smaller theta will be. Hence it is like "roll moves oblique to the eye". This could explain it getting darker. But as you say the correct explanation is that it is the waves bunching up because "roll moves oblique to eye" is not real, just to aid the viewer.

    Maybe we would see it in photos with the flash on though.

    Not sure what cores are.
    I see. Cores are the rim of the edge of a plane where the shadow starts, if you have seen loomis illustration on a ball, the rim is made darker and is called the core.

    The waves effect is simmilar to other effects, like skin. Look at the top of your hand , the planes that are oblique to the eye are more brown/tan color and the planes facing the eye is more pink/fleshy. If you look at your skin texture under a magnifying glass you will see the same effect as with waves. Your hand is covered with little wave or scale like bumps. Since at the oblique angle you see less of what's going on underneath the surface skin you see more of what's on the little skin shell. The bumps are more dead skin and tanned skin where as the skin in the crevice's are more pinkish and even red file folds or white.

    So, depending on the material quality you would have the same, but you can't really say it will go darker, it might but it depends on what you see at the particular angle microscopically.

    edit: does diffuse light reflected at all angles evenly? ie. if I did that plane with the light source directly above and both are rotated, would the brightness change, or would that only happen for specular?
    Diffuse is the smallest/finest texture effect and it' bouces in theory evenly in all directions. like matt is just like looking at sand paper but since the ocean have a more arraged texture behaviour it will have some angles that behaves uniquely almost like some other materials like silk, CD's etc..

    The ocean go darker at those areas because the depths looking into the ocean is darker there. If there where a alien luminosity that would have made the ocean brighter under the water than the sky then the ocean would have become brighter into the distance and less "sky blue"

    Secular light is noting other than reflection. So if you move the secular would move. In reality there is no pure diffuse so there is some micro scattered seculars in there changing the saturation of the surface and even changing the hue depending on the color of the light source.

    Last edited by George Abraham; April 1st, 2010 at 11:38 AM.
    ----------------------------------
    Scetchbook: View the exhibitionist's stuff.
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  13. The Following User Says Thank You to George Abraham For This Useful Post:


  14. #11
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Haifa, Israel
    Posts
    4,194
    Thanks
    2,388
    Thanked 2,345 Times in 1,448 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    To the ambient, diffuse, and specular lighting you can add a zoo of other things.

    Reflectivity and Fresnel index: some things are reflective, some are matte, some (like water) are more or less reflective depending on the angle you view them at. Water in the distance is highly reflective, water right at your feet is barely so.

    In fact, there is really no diffusion and specularity. Specularity you get when the surface is reflective enough to give you an image of the light source. "Diffuse" lighting is either due to surface texture that breaks the reflection down, or found in the lit areas beyond the light source reflection.

    Anisotropy: things with fine-grained directional texture have shaped reflections that stretch across the texture. Applies to lots of things, from hair and vinyl records to brushed metal and waves in the distance.

    Translucence, also known as "subsurface scattering": diffusion of light through the object, rather than off its surface. Many organic things like wax, horn, organic tissue show this property.

    The one most relevant to the question about darkening of edges is the ambient lighting occlusion.

    Since the ambient lighting depends not only on the light scattered in the atmosphere, but also on the light scattered off nearby objects. (Including other surfaces of the same object, of course, if they are in the right position.) If something is close enough to your object that less scattered light enters into the space between them, both surfaces will darken.

    This is the reason why there are darker edges between fingers, in the nostrils, between touching body parts.

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  15. #12
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Northern California
    Posts
    5,234
    Thanks
    3,512
    Thanked 4,905 Times in 2,546 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by sharprm View Post
    >Does the brain see things differently than they should appear. Where a light object overlaps a dark object, does the brain put a darker edge on the dark object?

    Jeffxx9:

    But if you look at the horizon it is darker in that situation. Why? Is it specific to those waves (ie. the light side of the waves are hidden by the dark side - deeper ocean etc.) or is it an illustration of the plane "oblique to the eye".

    What I'm asking is if I had a plane in 3ds max and I had a light source that was directly above it and both had the same axis of rotation, so when I rotated the plane the light was still directly above it, and if I rotated the plane so it became "oblique to the eye" would it be dark?
    Lots of good technical information here. So I see, you're talking about modeling - when working from imagination or setting up environments I try to err on the side of general observation "rules" based on the lighting conditions and subject of the scene. Carlson's landscape "planes" theory is great for this - but drapery, the figure, still life are not subject to atmospheric perspective the way thte landscape is.

    So yes, the brain does see things differently because it sees things relative and it edits a great deal of information. A camera sees things much differently as well and is part of the problem with the seascape - the camera cannot accurately record relative values the way your eye/brain does. But yes, I think in that example it is specific to the wave pattern and lighting condition. The ocean, even more than the landscape, often is so light at the horizon that it is lost into the sky or atmosphere.

    Like I mentioned earlier, you can't go from one photo and draw conclusions about all the various factors in the environment/landscape - they change every minute of every day anyway and a camera doesn't even come close to capturing anything but form/detail. You're best bet is to stick with generalized "theory/rules" that work for the situation you are modeling/simulating.

    What would Caravaggio do?
    _________________________

    Portfolio
    Plein Air
    Digital
    Still Life
    Sight Measuring
    Fundamentals
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  16. #13
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    110
    Thanks
    33
    Thanked 22 Times in 18 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by zaorr View Post
    I see. Cores are the rim of the edge of a plane where the shadow starts, if you have seen loomis illustration on a ball, the rim is made darker and is called the core.

    From the picture I can only see the cores that could look like what you are describing. Cores are darker for effect because of contrast and it's true in most cases where the reflect light would be the least in the core area. This somehow generalised into a method in art and is used to punch the effect.
    I just wanted to check I got this point. So the core is there because it is further/facing away from the reflected light? (see diagram) But it could be done even in situations where that wasn't true just for effect.
    Quote Originally Posted by zaorr View Post
    The waves effect is simmilar to other effects, like skin. Look at the top of your hand , the planes that are oblique to the eye are more brown/tan color and the planes facing the eye is more pink/fleshy. If you look at your skin texture under a magnifying glass you will see the same effect as with waves. Your hand is covered with little wave or scale like bumps. Since at the oblique angle you see less of what's going on underneath the surface skin you see more of what's on the little skin shell. The bumps are more dead skin and tanned skin where as the skin in the crevice's are more pinkish and even red file folds or white.
    Thanks! I was wondering about that.

    JeffX99: The book is on google books so I will check it out. I'm not into landscapes at the moment though I just read stapleton's blog because it has so much good info on drawing.

    arenhaus: I might stick to simpler stuff for now though if you have a good link that explains how to use that info in drawings please share. Thanks.

    edit: just to explain the diagram, it is supposed to see how the core could come about. I labelled the whole thing 'potentially incorrect' (not saying loomis part is incorrect, just my explanation of it). I think if there were ambient light but no reflected light there should be no core. It is only when there is reflected light that there is a core.

    Attached Images Attached Images  
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  17. #14
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    San Diego
    Posts
    2,852
    Thanks
    1,128
    Thanked 1,402 Times in 557 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    The core isn't there because of distance, it's there because of lighting direction. The core happens because it's the place where the least amount of light actually exists. The reason for this is because the direct light is scraping by the edges of the (in this case, ball). What i really boils down to is how lighting effects planes, since the planes around the edges are facing outward, any bits of light slips by and isn't reflected off of the edges.

    Then of course this is working in reverse for the reflected light. The reflected light is bouncing back up but again, isn't hitting the planes along that same edge of the ball, thus, less light is actually hitting there, creating the core shadow.

    So it isn't a distance thing as much as it is a lighting direction thing, and the fact that the core edge is facing away from where the lighting direction is coming from.


    Also on a sidenote, pay attention to the core shadow and how that area effects color. Right around the core will be the most saturated color on most objects. This is because lack of light creates a lack of color because color comes from light reflecting off of it, and thus those things in shadow won't be as saturated.

    Then this works in reverse for the lit area. Oftentimes the light will bleach out the color of the object it hits, making that area in the middle (around the core) the most saturated area because it's neither getting bleached out from the direct light, nor losing saturation from the lack of light. Its usually pretty noticeable on human skin, albeit subtle.

    It isn't human skin, but you can notice the saturation happening on the image below, as well as the light bleaching out the color where it is directly hitting. Theres also some color temperature stuff going on that you can see especially on things like oranges but thats a whole conversation in of itself.

    Attached Images Attached Images  
    "I must not fear. Fear is the mind-killer. Fear is the little-death that brings total obliteration. I will face my fear. I will permit it to pass over me and through me. And when it has gone past I will turn the inner eye to see its path. Where the fear has gone there will be nothing. Only I will remain."
    --- Frank Herbert, Dune - Bene Gesserit Litany Against Fear

    Check out my Sketchbook! Critique and Criticism welcomed.

    or my Deviantart!

    · or check out my: Blog
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  18. #15
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    110
    Thanks
    33
    Thanked 22 Times in 18 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Then of course this is working in reverse for the reflected light. The reflected light is bouncing back up but again, isn't hitting the planes along that same edge of the ball, thus, less light is actually hitting there, creating the core shadow.
    I don't really get that. I get the 'flux' - the intensity light that will hit the plane - depends on sin(theta) - so if theta equals zero (when the plane is parallel to the light direction) it will be dark. But the light that is reflected will be coming in all different directions. The reflected light is more intense at the bottom of the sphere because there are more points along the floor where light can bounce from. But maybe also because the distance is less.

    I don't get why the reflected light seems to hug the shape of the shadow.

    Last edited by sharprm; April 2nd, 2010 at 06:26 AM.
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  19. #16
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Hudson River valley, NY
    Posts
    16,212
    Thanks
    4,879
    Thanked 16,675 Times in 5,021 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    sharpm:
    LESS RUMINATION, MORE OBSERVATION


    Tristan Elwell
    **Finished Work Thread **Process Thread **Edges Tutorial

    Crash Course for Artists, Illustrators, and Cartoonists, NYC, the 2013 Edition!

    "Work is more fun than fun."
    -John Cale

    "Art is supposed to punch you in the brain, and it's supposed to stay punched."
    -Marc Maron
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  20. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Elwell For This Useful Post:


  21. #17
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Northern California
    Posts
    5,234
    Thanks
    3,512
    Thanked 4,905 Times in 2,546 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    LOL! I was just about to post, "Go out and look at stuff!" OK - there, I did.

    What would Caravaggio do?
    _________________________

    Portfolio
    Plein Air
    Digital
    Still Life
    Sight Measuring
    Fundamentals
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  22. #18
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    110
    Thanks
    33
    Thanked 22 Times in 18 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    You can't have photo refs for everything. Like I want to redraw this underwater pirate. The only way I can copy something is if I made a 3d model and did a render - but I don't have 3ds max atm. So how reflected light works is important. For instance should I have made the pink light brighter down the bottom (ie. light coming from lava or something on the ground). Should the pink light have reached the neck etc.

    edit: okay I get you I will copy some statues.

    Last edited by sharprm; April 3rd, 2010 at 12:35 AM.
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  23. #19
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Hudson River valley, NY
    Posts
    16,212
    Thanks
    4,879
    Thanked 16,675 Times in 5,021 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    No one's talking about photo refs. We're talking about getting out in the REAL WORLD and observing how light affects different surfaces under different conditions. Theory is important, because what you see is affected by what you know, but you need both.


    Tristan Elwell
    **Finished Work Thread **Process Thread **Edges Tutorial

    Crash Course for Artists, Illustrators, and Cartoonists, NYC, the 2013 Edition!

    "Work is more fun than fun."
    -John Cale

    "Art is supposed to punch you in the brain, and it's supposed to stay punched."
    -Marc Maron
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  24. The Following User Says Thank You to Elwell For This Useful Post:


  25. #20
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    San Diego
    Posts
    2,852
    Thanks
    1,128
    Thanked 1,402 Times in 557 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    sharprm, the reflected light hugs the shape of the shadow like that because when it reflects, it sends the light going in all different directions.

    I'll try an explain it like an explosion. If you've ever noticed in action movies how big explosions when they hit turn almost fluid like and wrap around everything they touch, it's because the energy which was once focused then is bouncing around in all different directions, dissipating, and falling away from its source.

    Light is doing the same thing (sort of) when it is projected on a surface with an object on it. The light hits the surface behind the object, then changes from going just one direction, to going many directions, then wraps back around the object giving it that look like the reflected light is "hugging" it.

    "I must not fear. Fear is the mind-killer. Fear is the little-death that brings total obliteration. I will face my fear. I will permit it to pass over me and through me. And when it has gone past I will turn the inner eye to see its path. Where the fear has gone there will be nothing. Only I will remain."
    --- Frank Herbert, Dune - Bene Gesserit Litany Against Fear

    Check out my Sketchbook! Critique and Criticism welcomed.

    or my Deviantart!

    · or check out my: Blog
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  26. #21
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    110
    Thanks
    33
    Thanked 22 Times in 18 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Doesn't explain why it should hug the shadow. I'm looking for a good 3d render to see what happens, at the moment just have this:

    Question about edges are they darker?

    The reflection doesn't hug the shadow. Even with a rough plane (reflecting diffuse light) I think the reflected light should have a similar shape as that.

    edit: I was right it doesn't have to hug the shadow. Here are some where the reflected light follows a different curve. But what causes the different shapes?

    Question about edges are they darker?

    white wall confusing things a bit here:

    Question about edges are they darker?

    maybe observers position changes the curve seen on the sphere:

    Question about edges are they darker?

    Last edited by sharprm; April 3rd, 2010 at 08:05 AM.
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  27. #22
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    1,008
    Thanks
    175
    Thanked 697 Times in 292 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    I think you're overestimating the accuracy of 3D rendering. Ray tracing, which all of the renders you posted implement, fails at the concept of reflected light you're talking about. In most movies and a lot of renders, the reflected light is actually faked by setting up extra lights in the scene.

    If you're looking at renders, you need to find renders that model diffuse interreflection. Radiosity and Photon Mapping are two rendering methods for diffuse interreflection that approximate what happens in nature in a way that's computationally reasonable for a computer. Keep in mind that you're getting second- or third- hand info. You're settling for other people's observations and then what they are actually able to implement given today's computer models. It's a mistake to think that even the most state-of-the-art renderers will make accurate simulations of reality in all cases. However, some of the concepts are very valuable to the artist and are worth researching and understanding.

    The best case scenario is to balance research with your own observation.

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  28. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to dose For This Useful Post:


  29. #23
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    South Africa
    Posts
    1,878
    Thanks
    84
    Thanked 631 Times in 400 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    With enough practice you will look at a diffuse surface and see a diffused mirror image that is the reflect light in the shadow area.


    A good ref to have had for this effect would have been a matt white ball morph slowly into a chrome ball and back. A chrome ball being sandblasted finer and finer untill it loses metalic quality becoming white.

    ----------------------------------
    Scetchbook: View the exhibitionist's stuff.
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  30. #24
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    110
    Thanks
    33
    Thanked 22 Times in 18 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by dose View Post
    I think you're overestimating the accuracy of 3D rendering.
    That's interesting. I might check out a some other 3d renderers when I have time eg. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kerkythea

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  31. #25
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Haifa, Israel
    Posts
    4,194
    Thanks
    2,388
    Thanked 2,345 Times in 1,448 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    You already have a perfect 3D renderer that handles hyper-realistic lighting, diffusion, self-shadowing, ambient occlusion, photon mapping, caustics, radiosity and any number of fancy acronims you encounter in CGI - and does it all in real time, too.

    It's called The Real World.

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  32. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to arenhaus For This Useful Post:


  33. #26
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Northern California
    Posts
    5,234
    Thanks
    3,512
    Thanked 4,905 Times in 2,546 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Your spheres and cube ref are excellent examples of why observation is important. The ideas of core shadows, reflected lights, etc. change and vary depending on environmental conditions. Theory is a good starting point but doesn't trump observation.

    What would Caravaggio do?
    _________________________

    Portfolio
    Plein Air
    Digital
    Still Life
    Sight Measuring
    Fundamentals
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  34. #27
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    3,432
    Thanks
    643
    Thanked 1,484 Times in 719 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by dose View Post
    I think you're overestimating the accuracy of 3D rendering.
    This.

    So much cg is a hackjob to make it look a bit more real without blowing your cpu. (lightdomes of spots to fake GI in a reasonable time, that kinda thing..)

    Don't trust it as ref..

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  35. The Following User Says Thank You to Flake For This Useful Post:


Members who have read this thread: 0

There are no members to list at the moment.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
  • 424,149 Artists
  • 3,599,276 Artist Posts
  • 32,941 Sketchbooks
  • 54 New Art Jobs
Art Workshop Discount Inside
Register

Developed Actively by vBSocial.com
The Art Department
SpringOfSea's Sketchbook