Supplement Four
May 2nd, 2007, 01:15 AM
Stumbled across this tonight. This is the type of thing that should be in a modern-era Traveller source book.
This type of stuff is awesome. You just look at it, and it makes you want to play the game.
http://www.freelancetraveller.com/features/gallery/mag/06-xboatfullcut.jpg
This type of stuff is awesome. You just look at it, and it makes you want to play the game.
http://www.freelancetraveller.com/features/gallery/mag/06-xboatfullcut.jpg
Supplement Four
May 2nd, 2007, 01:16 AM
http://www.freelancetraveller.com/features/gallery/mag/02-xboatgrey.jpg
Supplement Four
May 2nd, 2007, 01:18 AM
http://www.freelancetraveller.com/features/gallery/mag/05-xboatdocked2.jpg
Supplement Four
May 2nd, 2007, 01:20 AM
http://www.freelancetraveller.com/features/gallery/mag/08-PilotCloseup.jpg
http://www.freelancetraveller.com/features/gallery/mag/07-Pilot.jpg
http://www.freelancetraveller.com/features/gallery/mag/07-Pilot.jpg
Supplement Four
May 2nd, 2007, 01:24 AM
http://www.freelancetraveller.com/features/gallery/mag/12-xboatbridgecut.jpg
http://www.freelancetraveller.com/features/gallery/mag/11-xboatbridge2.jpg
http://www.freelancetraveller.com/features/gallery/mag/11-xboatbridge2.jpg
Supplement Four
May 2nd, 2007, 01:27 AM
http://www.freelancetraveller.com/features/gallery/mag/13-xboatqtrscut.jpg
http://www.freelancetraveller.com/features/gallery/mag/14-xboatcutlounge.jpg
http://www.freelancetraveller.com/features/gallery/mag/17-xboatcutsrfrsh.jpg
http://www.freelancetraveller.com/features/gallery/mag/14-xboatcutlounge.jpg
http://www.freelancetraveller.com/features/gallery/mag/17-xboatcutsrfrsh.jpg
Supplement Four
May 2nd, 2007, 01:30 AM
http://www.freelancetraveller.com/features/gallery/mag/20-airraftpilot.jpg
hunter
May 2nd, 2007, 01:31 AM
No doubt. But do you realize the time and work involved in producing images like that? There is a reason you don't see much of it in RPGs. Cost. If you can find me a 3d artist who will work at our standard rates that can do this kind of work, I'll be happy to give him some business!
Hunter
Hunter
Supplement Four
May 2nd, 2007, 01:31 AM
http://www.freelancetraveller.com/features/gallery/mag/23-types.jpg
Supplement Four
May 2nd, 2007, 01:35 AM
Originally posted by hunter:
No doubt. But do you realize the time and work involved in producing images like that? There is a reason you don't see much of it in RPGs. Cost. If you can find me a 3d artist who will work at our standard rates that can do this kind of work, I'll be happy to give him some business!
Hunter Cost is always an issue. I understand the business side.
Thought: This dude produced these images for his own amusement (and to our delight). Maybe he'd license them to you cheap since they're already completed?
No doubt. But do you realize the time and work involved in producing images like that? There is a reason you don't see much of it in RPGs. Cost. If you can find me a 3d artist who will work at our standard rates that can do this kind of work, I'll be happy to give him some business!
Hunter Cost is always an issue. I understand the business side.
Thought: This dude produced these images for his own amusement (and to our delight). Maybe he'd license them to you cheap since they're already completed?
hunter
May 2nd, 2007, 01:36 AM
I was looking at the page those are from but didn't see any contact info for him.
(And you should have just linked to the site rather than steal bandwidth displaying them here ;) )
Hunter
(And you should have just linked to the site rather than steal bandwidth displaying them here ;) )
Hunter
Supplement Four
May 2nd, 2007, 01:44 AM
Originally posted by hunter:
I was looking at the page those are from but didn't see any contact info for him. E-Mail Jeff Zeitlin at Freelance Traveller. I bet Jeff can get in touch with him for you.
I was looking at the page those are from but didn't see any contact info for him. E-Mail Jeff Zeitlin at Freelance Traveller. I bet Jeff can get in touch with him for you.
aramis
May 2nd, 2007, 03:11 AM
It is the kind of stuff that would be cool, but I still want deckplans!
Rhialto the Marvelous
May 2nd, 2007, 03:14 AM
S4, those are very cool. One thing, though: How well does this kind of art reproduce a) in black-and-white, b) on the page? I like Jesse de Graff's GT art, but it looks much better on his website than in the books. Digital seems to work best on the screen.
Rhialto the Marvelous
May 2nd, 2007, 03:27 AM
PS: While we're at it, there's of course this Japanese website... old hat to most I guess, but not to all. I'm partial to the Close Escort:
http://kemkem-web.hp.infoseek.co.jp/hukkou/cef/CE.htm
http://kemkem-web.hp.infoseek.co.jp/hukkou/cef/CE.htm
atpollard
May 2nd, 2007, 08:00 AM
Originally posted by Supplement Four:X-boat Lounge Image (http://www.freelancetraveller.com/features/gallery/mag/14-xboatcutlounge.jpg)
Does that carpet go with that sofa? ;)
Does that carpet go with that sofa? ;)
Pickles
May 2nd, 2007, 08:16 AM
Originally posted by atpollard:
Does that carpet go with that sofa? ;) That's exactly what she's thinking ... tongue.gif
Does that carpet go with that sofa? ;) That's exactly what she's thinking ... tongue.gif
ravells
May 2nd, 2007, 08:23 AM
Those cutaways are truly beautiful...the amount of work that must have gone into that is phenomenal...although I'm not sure about the wooden table and chairs they look a bit incongrous. The japanese ones are phenomenal.
Then again, call me old fashioned, but I still prefer hand drawn line drawings in traveller adventures. Photorealism makes me use my imagination less and just doesn't feel 'traveller'.
Ravs
Then again, call me old fashioned, but I still prefer hand drawn line drawings in traveller adventures. Photorealism makes me use my imagination less and just doesn't feel 'traveller'.
Ravs
Klaus
May 2nd, 2007, 08:48 AM
CG works well with ships and landscapes, but CG people still just look wrong... And they tend to all look the same too. Give me drawn (even if digitally drawn) figures any day. smile.gif
Andrew Boulton
May 2nd, 2007, 11:39 AM
Very nice. Every ship should have an air rock :)
Hemdian
May 2nd, 2007, 08:30 PM
Originally posted by hunter:
I was looking at the page those are from but didn't see any contact info for him.Material on the site is contributed by several individuals. One such person goes by the name "MAG" and back in 2004 used the email address RXE05667@nifty.ne.jp. MAG is not one of the CG artists but he does have passable written English and if the address is still active he may be able to help put you in touch.
Regards PLST
I was looking at the page those are from but didn't see any contact info for him.Material on the site is contributed by several individuals. One such person goes by the name "MAG" and back in 2004 used the email address RXE05667@nifty.ne.jp. MAG is not one of the CG artists but he does have passable written English and if the address is still active he may be able to help put you in touch.
Regards PLST
Kharum1
May 2nd, 2007, 09:01 PM
Originally posted by hunter:
No doubt. But do you realize the time and work involved in producing images like that? There is a reason you don't see much of it in RPGs. Cost. If you can find me a 3d artist who will work at our standard rates that can do this kind of work, I'll be happy to give him some business!
Hunter What is the standard rate? And yes, I do that type of work.
http://www.renderosity.com/mod/gallery/index.php?image_id=1416482
No doubt. But do you realize the time and work involved in producing images like that? There is a reason you don't see much of it in RPGs. Cost. If you can find me a 3d artist who will work at our standard rates that can do this kind of work, I'll be happy to give him some business!
Hunter What is the standard rate? And yes, I do that type of work.
http://www.renderosity.com/mod/gallery/index.php?image_id=1416482
hunter
May 2nd, 2007, 09:06 PM
Originally posted by Kharum1:
What is the standard rate? And yes, I do that type of work.
http://www.renderosity.com/mod/gallery/index.php?image_id=1416482 Link to image doesn't work, required a username and password. I did use the link in your sig, nice stuff!
Standard rates for B/W are
$25 Quarter Page
$50 Half Page
$100 Full Page
Color is twice the B/W rate.
Hunter
What is the standard rate? And yes, I do that type of work.
http://www.renderosity.com/mod/gallery/index.php?image_id=1416482 Link to image doesn't work, required a username and password. I did use the link in your sig, nice stuff!
Standard rates for B/W are
$25 Quarter Page
$50 Half Page
$100 Full Page
Color is twice the B/W rate.
Hunter
Kharum1
May 2nd, 2007, 09:50 PM
Sounds good to me. What do you need? And when?
hunter
May 2nd, 2007, 10:12 PM
Email me directly at grip (the @ sign) RPGRealms.com and we'll get the details worked out.
Hunter
Hunter
Kharum1
May 2nd, 2007, 11:26 PM
Hunter, are you going to GENCON this year?
hunter
May 2nd, 2007, 11:43 PM
Nope. Maybe next year. I miss it :(
Gadrin
May 3rd, 2007, 02:52 PM
The scout courier's very cool. I've seen the X-Boat before, although the air/raft is new.
Pretty neat.
Pretty neat.
BetterThanLife
May 3rd, 2007, 07:25 PM
Originally posted by Rhialto the Marvelous:
S4, those are very cool. One thing, though: How well does this kind of art reproduce a) in black-and-white, b) on the page? I like Jesse de Graff's GT art, but it looks much better on his website than in the books. Digital seems to work best on the screen. Much of that is due to the resolution. Screen resolution is only 72DPI. Print tends to be 300DPI or more. Since there is no way to tell what it looks like, short of actually printing it at the correct scale this can cause issues.
S4, those are very cool. One thing, though: How well does this kind of art reproduce a) in black-and-white, b) on the page? I like Jesse de Graff's GT art, but it looks much better on his website than in the books. Digital seems to work best on the screen. Much of that is due to the resolution. Screen resolution is only 72DPI. Print tends to be 300DPI or more. Since there is no way to tell what it looks like, short of actually printing it at the correct scale this can cause issues.
hunter
May 3rd, 2007, 07:35 PM
Originally posted by BetterThanLife:
Much of that is due to the resolution. Screen resolution is only 72DPI. Print tends to be 300DPI or more. Since there is no way to tell what it looks like, short of actually printing it at the correct scale this can cause issues. It can also be done properly if the artist knows that the final is for B/W reproduction rather than color.
Much of that is due to the resolution. Screen resolution is only 72DPI. Print tends to be 300DPI or more. Since there is no way to tell what it looks like, short of actually printing it at the correct scale this can cause issues. It can also be done properly if the artist knows that the final is for B/W reproduction rather than color.
Icosahedron
May 5th, 2007, 02:13 AM
Originally posted by Kharum1:
Sounds good to me. What do you need? And when? Psst! Kharum1, don't forget to haggle for a PERSONAL personal avatar. :D
Sounds good to me. What do you need? And when? Psst! Kharum1, don't forget to haggle for a PERSONAL personal avatar. :D
GypsyComet
May 5th, 2007, 12:56 PM
Originally posted by ravs:
Those cutaways are truly beautiful...the amount of work that must have gone into that is phenomenal...
Then again, call me old fashioned, but...
I'll echo these comments, with the additional comment that these still need to be accompanied by the simpler style of straight deckplan. I don't mean just adjusting the POV to straight overhead, either. If a map of the deck can't tell me quickly what is a door and what is a wall, then it's no good for Snapshop/AHL play. Full rendered-color maps SUCK for that type of use, because the contrast is never good enough. Put a few minis on an already dodgy map and watch the important details just *vanish*.
So yeah. Nice *artwork*, but I still want clean and clear deckplans.
Those cutaways are truly beautiful...the amount of work that must have gone into that is phenomenal...
Then again, call me old fashioned, but...
I'll echo these comments, with the additional comment that these still need to be accompanied by the simpler style of straight deckplan. I don't mean just adjusting the POV to straight overhead, either. If a map of the deck can't tell me quickly what is a door and what is a wall, then it's no good for Snapshop/AHL play. Full rendered-color maps SUCK for that type of use, because the contrast is never good enough. Put a few minis on an already dodgy map and watch the important details just *vanish*.
So yeah. Nice *artwork*, but I still want clean and clear deckplans.
Supplement Four
May 5th, 2007, 03:25 PM
Originally posted by GypsyComet:
I'll echo these comments, with the additional comment that these still need to be accompanied by the simpler style of straight deckplan. They serve two different functions. Clean, B&W, line drawn deck plans (and I favor the very good deck plans that DGP used to put out over the simple graph paper style we typically see in Traveller) over a grid are needed for game play.
The fully rendered 3-D pics are beneficial for what I call "imagination boosters". They can make a universe so "real" when the GM holds up a cool shot and says, "THIS is what you see."
Players play off of that.
I used a neat 3-D pick like what I've shown earlier in this thread in a game once (as an example) when my players were attempting to force open a locked airlock.
They were inside the ship, trying to get into the airlock compartment. I happened to have a 3-D rendering I'd printed off the net in my GM's notebook.
I laid it out before them. Someone said, "Well, there's got to be a mechanical back-up system in case the ship's power goes out."
I looked that the 3-D drawing and ran with it, "See this compartment to the right of the airlock door near the deck?" I pointed to a clearly drawn access port on the 3-D drawing, speaking the ship's engineer. "This is where you have access that mechanical back-up system."
From there, I just ad-libbed what he saw--I had a car jack in mind and made it a little "spacey"--and had to do to get the lock open. We made some die rolls, and this turned out to be a very memorable encounter of our gameing session--so much that I'm recounting it here.
Could I have made that up all on my own? Sure. Easy. No problem.
But, did the 3-D drawing I have enhance my game?
It sure did. It put my players right "there" in the story. They had a clear picture in their minds of what it was like going about that task.
And, we ended up taking a mundane task and turning it into the highlight of the gaming session. Had I not had the pic to make the encounter "cool", I probably wouldn't have spent as much time in the game getting that airlock open. It probably would have been a little dialogue with the players, a die roll or two, and we move on.
But, since I did have the pic, I took the time to draw my players even farther into the "universe", inviting them to experience what their characters were experiencing.
The return for the time spent on that was brought back to me in spades. Like I said, it was the highlight of that particular gaming sessions.
All because we had a cool space pic of an airlock to use.
So, I'm a big believer in having these type of "play aids" in rpg materials.
If they're drawn well, they can really add to a game.
I'll echo these comments, with the additional comment that these still need to be accompanied by the simpler style of straight deckplan. They serve two different functions. Clean, B&W, line drawn deck plans (and I favor the very good deck plans that DGP used to put out over the simple graph paper style we typically see in Traveller) over a grid are needed for game play.
The fully rendered 3-D pics are beneficial for what I call "imagination boosters". They can make a universe so "real" when the GM holds up a cool shot and says, "THIS is what you see."
Players play off of that.
I used a neat 3-D pick like what I've shown earlier in this thread in a game once (as an example) when my players were attempting to force open a locked airlock.
They were inside the ship, trying to get into the airlock compartment. I happened to have a 3-D rendering I'd printed off the net in my GM's notebook.
I laid it out before them. Someone said, "Well, there's got to be a mechanical back-up system in case the ship's power goes out."
I looked that the 3-D drawing and ran with it, "See this compartment to the right of the airlock door near the deck?" I pointed to a clearly drawn access port on the 3-D drawing, speaking the ship's engineer. "This is where you have access that mechanical back-up system."
From there, I just ad-libbed what he saw--I had a car jack in mind and made it a little "spacey"--and had to do to get the lock open. We made some die rolls, and this turned out to be a very memorable encounter of our gameing session--so much that I'm recounting it here.
Could I have made that up all on my own? Sure. Easy. No problem.
But, did the 3-D drawing I have enhance my game?
It sure did. It put my players right "there" in the story. They had a clear picture in their minds of what it was like going about that task.
And, we ended up taking a mundane task and turning it into the highlight of the gaming session. Had I not had the pic to make the encounter "cool", I probably wouldn't have spent as much time in the game getting that airlock open. It probably would have been a little dialogue with the players, a die roll or two, and we move on.
But, since I did have the pic, I took the time to draw my players even farther into the "universe", inviting them to experience what their characters were experiencing.
The return for the time spent on that was brought back to me in spades. Like I said, it was the highlight of that particular gaming sessions.
All because we had a cool space pic of an airlock to use.
So, I'm a big believer in having these type of "play aids" in rpg materials.
If they're drawn well, they can really add to a game.
BetterThanLife
May 5th, 2007, 03:50 PM
Originally posted by GypsyComet:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by ravs:
Those cutaways are truly beautiful...the amount of work that must have gone into that is phenomenal...
Then again, call me old fashioned, but...
I'll echo these comments, with the additional comment that these still need to be accompanied by the simpler style of straight deckplan. I don't mean just adjusting the POV to straight overhead, either. If a map of the deck can't tell me quickly what is a door and what is a wall, then it's no good for Snapshop/AHL play. Full rendered-color maps SUCK for that type of use, because the contrast is never good enough. Put a few minis on an already dodgy map and watch the important details just *vanish*.
So yeah. Nice *artwork*, but I still want clean and clear deckplans. </font>[/QUOTE]Actually I have no issue at all with full color deckplans. After all both Snapshot and AHL came with color deckplans. They do have to be set up where you can see what is there, and they do have to be done with sufficient resolution that you can use them for 15mm gaming, if that is what you intend to use them for. However there is no way you are going to be able take a deckplan at screen resolution (72dpi+/-) where a Square is 10 pixels on a side and blow it up to 15mm scale, whether it is color or black and white. If you are going to do deckplans for Snapshot or AHL then they have to be done so they are 15mm and 150-300dpi at that scale.
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by ravs:
Those cutaways are truly beautiful...the amount of work that must have gone into that is phenomenal...
Then again, call me old fashioned, but...
I'll echo these comments, with the additional comment that these still need to be accompanied by the simpler style of straight deckplan. I don't mean just adjusting the POV to straight overhead, either. If a map of the deck can't tell me quickly what is a door and what is a wall, then it's no good for Snapshop/AHL play. Full rendered-color maps SUCK for that type of use, because the contrast is never good enough. Put a few minis on an already dodgy map and watch the important details just *vanish*.
So yeah. Nice *artwork*, but I still want clean and clear deckplans. </font>[/QUOTE]Actually I have no issue at all with full color deckplans. After all both Snapshot and AHL came with color deckplans. They do have to be set up where you can see what is there, and they do have to be done with sufficient resolution that you can use them for 15mm gaming, if that is what you intend to use them for. However there is no way you are going to be able take a deckplan at screen resolution (72dpi+/-) where a Square is 10 pixels on a side and blow it up to 15mm scale, whether it is color or black and white. If you are going to do deckplans for Snapshot or AHL then they have to be done so they are 15mm and 150-300dpi at that scale.
Scarecrow
May 5th, 2007, 05:19 PM
I'm going to have to disagree here and say that I find that staggeringly mediocre 3D artwork. The modelling is okay. The texturing is weak and the lighting is abismal.
Crow
Crow
Supplement Four
May 5th, 2007, 05:30 PM
Originally posted by Scarecrow:
I'm going to have to disagree here and say that I find that staggeringly mediocre 3D artwork. The modelling is okay. The texturing is weak and the lighting is abismal.
Crow Interesting. I'm no modeler, and I do like your work (and Jesse DeGraff's). But, that stuff I posted at the beginning of this thread is some of the best Traveller 3D work I've ever seen (speaking as a Traveller consumer).
I'd get real excited if I saw something of that quality in a Traveller book.
I'm going to have to disagree here and say that I find that staggeringly mediocre 3D artwork. The modelling is okay. The texturing is weak and the lighting is abismal.
Crow Interesting. I'm no modeler, and I do like your work (and Jesse DeGraff's). But, that stuff I posted at the beginning of this thread is some of the best Traveller 3D work I've ever seen (speaking as a Traveller consumer).
I'd get real excited if I saw something of that quality in a Traveller book.
Kharum1
May 5th, 2007, 06:27 PM
Ummmm...what kind of stuff are you looking for? As I said earlier, I like doing this type of artwork. If you have something in mind let me know.
ravells
May 5th, 2007, 07:03 PM
That's interesting, Supplement four - I'm find that I'm the complete opposite.
For me when a GM is describing something, everyone has an mental image of the description but each persons image varies in the details. So if a GM pulled out a 3d render of the image and said 'this is what you see', then every player is going to think, well...yes, but not exactly. But if he pulled out a line drawing with less detail, it's easier for the player to fill in the gaps using their imaginations and still have a fit of what they see in their minds eye and what is being described pictorially.
That's why, for RPGs, I'd take line drawings over 3d renders for most things except maybe covershots and perhaps starships.
Ravs
For me when a GM is describing something, everyone has an mental image of the description but each persons image varies in the details. So if a GM pulled out a 3d render of the image and said 'this is what you see', then every player is going to think, well...yes, but not exactly. But if he pulled out a line drawing with less detail, it's easier for the player to fill in the gaps using their imaginations and still have a fit of what they see in their minds eye and what is being described pictorially.
That's why, for RPGs, I'd take line drawings over 3d renders for most things except maybe covershots and perhaps starships.
Ravs
Supplement Four
May 5th, 2007, 07:41 PM
Originally posted by ravs:
That's interesting, Supplement four - I'm find that I'm the complete opposite. Different strokes for different folks, I guess. From the early days of D&D, my group (many of them have been playing with me for 20+ years) has always loved it when I could come up with a cool looking prop or visual aide. We dug the sparse illos you'd find in early D&D modules.
When the net came about, we were in the middle of this 7-year Star Wars campaign I ran. Man, the stuff I printed off then. Here's your hand communicator. Here's your blaster. Here's your fighter. Etc.
We use our imaginations, but cool pics and illos and 3-D renderings are always welcome.
That's interesting, Supplement four - I'm find that I'm the complete opposite. Different strokes for different folks, I guess. From the early days of D&D, my group (many of them have been playing with me for 20+ years) has always loved it when I could come up with a cool looking prop or visual aide. We dug the sparse illos you'd find in early D&D modules.
When the net came about, we were in the middle of this 7-year Star Wars campaign I ran. Man, the stuff I printed off then. Here's your hand communicator. Here's your blaster. Here's your fighter. Etc.
We use our imaginations, but cool pics and illos and 3-D renderings are always welcome.
aramis
May 5th, 2007, 10:01 PM
I like the ones posted at the top of the thread as they look "blank" enough to be textbook illos, rather than attempting the photorealism that 'Crow, Jesse, et al, are doing.
The PR stuff is great for covers, but is not useful in game, while the more "technical drawing" style of cutaways shown are useful in game.
And one bit of advice I heard in Art Appreciation class: An artist is seldom qualified to judge art, as they have different expectations than the public.
The PR stuff is great for covers, but is not useful in game, while the more "technical drawing" style of cutaways shown are useful in game.
And one bit of advice I heard in Art Appreciation class: An artist is seldom qualified to judge art, as they have different expectations than the public.
GypsyComet
May 7th, 2007, 02:55 AM
Originally posted by Supplement Four:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by GypsyComet:
I'll echo these comments, with the additional comment that these still need to be accompanied by the simpler style of straight deckplan. They serve two different functions. Clean, B&W, line drawn deck plans (and I favor the very good deck plans that DGP used to put out over the simple graph paper style we typically see in Traveller) over a grid are needed for game play.
</font>[/QUOTE]Agreed. I'm just trying to forestall those who think these would replace proper deckplans.
Originally posted by BetterThanLife:
Actually I have no issue at all with full color deckplans. After all both Snapshot and AHL came with color deckplans. Full color is fine, if used properly. 3D work like the proffered example is typically not high-contrast enough for 2D if shaded properly for 3D. Two different goals and two different approaches to hue and shade.
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by GypsyComet:
I'll echo these comments, with the additional comment that these still need to be accompanied by the simpler style of straight deckplan. They serve two different functions. Clean, B&W, line drawn deck plans (and I favor the very good deck plans that DGP used to put out over the simple graph paper style we typically see in Traveller) over a grid are needed for game play.
</font>[/QUOTE]Agreed. I'm just trying to forestall those who think these would replace proper deckplans.
Originally posted by BetterThanLife:
Actually I have no issue at all with full color deckplans. After all both Snapshot and AHL came with color deckplans. Full color is fine, if used properly. 3D work like the proffered example is typically not high-contrast enough for 2D if shaded properly for 3D. Two different goals and two different approaches to hue and shade.
Spinward Scout
May 7th, 2007, 11:09 AM
That's pretty. I especially like the one where it's docked and people are floating outside. Gives a great sense of scale. Definitely shouldn't 'replace' deckplans, but I never really liked the X-Boat until I saw those rendered pics. That, I'm converting into a Scout. Space-based surveying only - that's not a lander. Replace the J-4 with a J-2, swap the extensive communications/data array with sensors, reduce the fuel compartment and expand the cargo space, then...
A new paint job!
A new paint job!
Rhialto the Marvelous
May 7th, 2007, 01:25 PM
Re. color deckplans, what Colin/Ted are doing for 2320 looks like a very good compromise of legibility and detail (bearing in mind that as Colin says these images are lower res than they will be in the book):
http://www.travellerrpg.com/CotI/Discuss/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=30;t=000240
Re. color vs. b/w: Hunter nailed it. A b/w image is not a color image without color. It's its own beast--e.g. you work with light and dark contrasts, and strong ones at that, not with color contrasts. See Bill Keith's work.
http://www.travellerrpg.com/CotI/Discuss/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=30;t=000240
Re. color vs. b/w: Hunter nailed it. A b/w image is not a color image without color. It's its own beast--e.g. you work with light and dark contrasts, and strong ones at that, not with color contrasts. See Bill Keith's work.
atpollard
May 7th, 2007, 10:57 PM
Originally posted by Scarecrow:
I'm going to have to disagree here and say that I find that staggeringly mediocre 3D artwork. The modeling is okay. The texturing is weak and the lighting is abysmal.If the ultimate goal of Computer Generated Artwork is to achieve photographic quality realism (so it looks like a photo of a real object - like movies strive for) then all CG images have far to go, and these more than some.
They do appear to be good quality technical illustrations (especially the cut-away views) which communicate the character of the spaces and their interrelationship. However, as others have pointed out, they do not lend themselves to use as a deck plan for miniatures (nor does most 3D artwork).
Personally, I have the most trouble with images like the original (Classic Traveller) Azhanti High Lightning plans which give little sense of the interior and no sense of the exterior form of the ship. My deepest congratulations to the 2320 crew for raising the bar above the old “Traders and Gunboats� style of plans.
I'm going to have to disagree here and say that I find that staggeringly mediocre 3D artwork. The modeling is okay. The texturing is weak and the lighting is abysmal.If the ultimate goal of Computer Generated Artwork is to achieve photographic quality realism (so it looks like a photo of a real object - like movies strive for) then all CG images have far to go, and these more than some.
They do appear to be good quality technical illustrations (especially the cut-away views) which communicate the character of the spaces and their interrelationship. However, as others have pointed out, they do not lend themselves to use as a deck plan for miniatures (nor does most 3D artwork).
Personally, I have the most trouble with images like the original (Classic Traveller) Azhanti High Lightning plans which give little sense of the interior and no sense of the exterior form of the ship. My deepest congratulations to the 2320 crew for raising the bar above the old “Traders and Gunboats� style of plans.
aramis
May 8th, 2007, 03:12 AM
3D views don't replace deckplans. They augment them.
pyratejohn
May 10th, 2007, 01:58 PM
Originally posted by Rhialto the Marvelous:
PS: While we're at it, there's of course this Japanese website... old hat to most I guess, but not to all. I'm partial to the Close Escort:
http://kemkem-web.hp.infoseek.co.jp/hukkou/cef/CE.htm Cool! I stumbled upon the pictures shown above the other day, but have never seen these Japanese pics! This stuff is so great my brain is going to pop just looking at it.
PS: While we're at it, there's of course this Japanese website... old hat to most I guess, but not to all. I'm partial to the Close Escort:
http://kemkem-web.hp.infoseek.co.jp/hukkou/cef/CE.htm Cool! I stumbled upon the pictures shown above the other day, but have never seen these Japanese pics! This stuff is so great my brain is going to pop just looking at it.
Supplement Four
May 10th, 2007, 06:45 PM
Originally posted by pyratejohn:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Rhialto the Marvelous:
PS: While we're at it, there's of course this Japanese website... old hat to most I guess, but not to all. I'm partial to the Close Escort:
http://kemkem-web.hp.infoseek.co.jp/hukkou/cef/CE.htm Cool! I stumbled upon the pictures shown above the other day, but have never seen these Japanese pics! This stuff is so great my brain is going to pop just looking at it. </font>[/QUOTE]The Japanese pic of the close escort is just a little too anime-looking for my tastes.
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Rhialto the Marvelous:
PS: While we're at it, there's of course this Japanese website... old hat to most I guess, but not to all. I'm partial to the Close Escort:
http://kemkem-web.hp.infoseek.co.jp/hukkou/cef/CE.htm Cool! I stumbled upon the pictures shown above the other day, but have never seen these Japanese pics! This stuff is so great my brain is going to pop just looking at it. </font>[/QUOTE]The Japanese pic of the close escort is just a little too anime-looking for my tastes.
pyratejohn
May 11th, 2007, 07:46 AM
That's cool. Too each his own as they say. I wish I had the talent to do this type of stuff. All of these artists are very talented, and their talent fires my imagination!
Không có nhận xét nào:
Đăng nhận xét