The double perspective on the map is quite surprising!
+1 on the geometry accuracy question: how did you keep the two views consistent?
The double perspective on the map is quite surprising!
+1 on the geometry accuracy question: how did you keep the two views consistent?
Thanks Voolf
Thanks DominoNo worries.
Thanks JaxIt adds a lot of exrtra time and effort.
This client was willing to pay for that. Usually they aren't.
Thanks Joel
I agree - this does give more of the feel of the place.
I have some plans to try doing some of this for regional areas.
Sometimes it is easier to have the perspective view on top.
It can be easier to integrate, but doesn't have quite as much impact.
Thank you Sap
Thanks BeeeI got into doing that way back with an oasis commission.
Thanks QEDno worries.
Thanks Stefano. It's not as precise as it may seem.
This one was more difficult than the others.
All of the rock stuff just made it a lot more complicated.
Thanks L1easy answer - with much difficulty.
This is version 3 of the perspective. The first two were wrong in differing ways.
Last edited by J.Edward; 03-05-2019 at 11:28 AM.
Artstation - | - Buy Me a Kofi
That's interesting!
With my usual workflow, for perspective i usually do a 3D model and hand-drawn (ink on paper) over a light outline of a render. This could really save you some time too! If you're interested, drop me a PM!
Once you get the hang of the basics, 3D modelling is an extremely quick solution!
I appreciate the offer L1. Very generous.
I've worked with 3d in the past, and am familiar with the technique.
It's more problematic with the organic rock/hill shapes and the changing terrain levels.
I can model it, but it just takes so much longer.
I've also been trying to challenge myself to improve on my visualization.
Artstation - | - Buy Me a Kofi