Sam Johnson's BAT Bunker

[thingfishs]

that's an impressive structure Sam

There's things I like and don't like about all of those light setups. The first LTBL one shows up a lot more detail and makes the whole thing look less pastel (which I think is a good thing for an industrial BAT), but it seems too dark in places with a too high contrast between the areas that are right and those that aren't. The other LTBL ones look washed out to me. Your original one is even and good, but maybe lacks a bit of the punch of the first LTBL one. That's how it struck me anyway...

[starfinder9659]

yes...very very good 

[Sam Johnson]

Thank you

I just added the nightlights

[io_bg]

Wow, it looks absolutely fascinating!

[Girafe]

Incredible model and nightlightings 


maybe the yellow lights inside are a little to "flashy" for me 

[Air6]

Textures are amazing. Truly great work.

[Sam Johnson]

Thanks guys

@Girafe: Well those yellow lights are molten iron and slag, in RL this is even a bit more flashy 

After the blast furnace was done, I decided to create more furnaces and other facilities of a steel mill, so I started a facility containing an open hearth furnace:

[Sciurus]

Waow, it's just amazing!!

Guillaume

[SimFox]

As they say "picture speaks a thousand words"... However they forget to add "to those who can or prepared to listen"
I would think that this illustration makes quite an obvious case... But I can word it too...
First of all your rig is too dark. Second it to a large degree kills all the details in the shadows plus flattens them. This is a complex issue and has to do with both the rig itself and other rendering settings that are set by LtbL and, apparently, not set in your system. Plus, there is an issue of materials. In order to get your model to come to life it is very important to have properly set materials. And I mean exactly materials now, not a well painted bitmap (at what you're clearly excelled). All in all those shortcomings created completely bizarre and "inverted" situation in the shade. And one, I'm very sure, can't really refer to the game here. The rig in GMAX BAT and one used in production of original models was not adequate for a complex shapes, and so, by no accident, there weren't any. Virtually all models were simple boxes. Whenever they diverge to any significant degree from that basic shape the problems were obvious and they actually do stand out from the rest of the game.
So, today when there are much better tools available I can't understand clinging to that old and clearly deficient setup. Mind you I'm not calling for the break with game conventions, just taking it to the modern age, allowing complex shapes being brought to game with both degree of realism, and, crucially, fitting with the basic simple shapes that dominate the game.
You called my rig realistic. But it is not. At least not from the point of hue. It is designed not for real sun and sky illumination but for the game sun and sky. It also takes care of that slid pinkish toning of the sunny areas that people tried to implement with textures. Of course with textures it doesn't quite work cause there is no way to control this hue depending on the illumination in game.

The same issue is also present/visible in both the night view of the furnace and your response to the remark of the molten iron...



I'm reasonably sure that Girafe meant by "flashy" is not the simple fact of hue or even brightness, but the fact how it is completely jumps/falls out of its environment.  It looks like it has been cut out of entirely different picture and glued into this render. Something so intensely colored and bright will most definitely affect it environment. Yet in your case right next to this, basically bright orange light source, you have quite dark/darkish and very bluish environment. Don't you see that this is not right? (blue arrows)
To make things even more bizarre orange does make its way to some of the geometry, however, to some of the very unlikely places (pink arrows).
Another problem or better put inconsistency is pointed by white arrows. Such a total overblown highlight potentially possible if, for instance we are talking of polished still or something and the lights set just right, so that you actually see the straight reflection of the light itself – not impossible given geometry curvature. But if one looks on the day render – there is nothing of the sots. I mean the material applied to the geometry. Incidentally the brightness of the molten iron in the day view is also way over the top.
All those "small things" are particularly upsetting cause they really letting down this very impressive piece of work.

Saying that you have adjusted your textures to my rig and they still didn't look the way you wanted them ... well it basically saying that you haven't adjusted them right, doesn't it?
One of the most important considerations I had when making rigs was to keep them overall neutral. Meaning that with all the toning etc going on the colors would remain recognizable - blue will be blue, green green, white white. So, in a way no adjustment is really needed for my rig.

PS
in the end this is your work, and you 're it's master. I'm not really to change that. No am set to change your opinions/enforce mine once. All I'm after is to point put things that are problematic in my opinion. What, if any, you'll do with it is up to you...

[callagrafx]

As they say "picture speaks a thousand words"... However they forget to add "to those who can or prepared to listen"

Can you please stick to the critique, thank you.  We have rules about polite responses...

I'm reasonably sure that Girafe meant by "flashy" is not the simple fact of hue or even brightness, but the fact how it is completely jumps/falls out of its environment.  It looks like it has been cut out of entirely different picture and glued into this render. Something so intensely colored and bright will most definitely affect it environment. Yet in your case right next to this, basically bright orange light source, you have quite dark/darkish and very bluish environment. Don't you see that this is not right? (blue arrows)

Well, the molten metal is in a channel so it's effectively a shuttered light source, forcing all light upwards... and we know that light travels in a straight line (unless acted upon).  There should however be some ambient bounce but I think that's reproduced sufficiently well. 

BUT... You may want to add light sources into the "wells" that the metal is channeled into 

All in all an exceptional model and nicely lit.  However, I would agree with SF that the burnout on the domes is too excessive.... maybe reduce the intensity somewhat, or change the falloff.

[Diggis]

Well, the molten metal is in a channel so it's effectively a shuttered light source, forcing all light upwards... and we know that light travels in a straight line (unless acted upon).  There should however be some ambient bounce but I think that's reproduced sufficiently well. 

I feel it should be a bit more orange, I don't feel there is quite enough ambient bounce.  And you do need to get rid of the leaks (pink arrows).

The model is gorgeous however, great detail. 

[callagrafx]

You'd be surprised at just how little molten metal radiates light...most of it's energy is expended in heat.



Look at the floor bottom right by the pit... see how it's quite dark.  Generally as well these types of buildings have high roofs and non-reflective surfaces (soot is a great light absorber) so there is little in the way of ambient bounce. 

As for the colour, it's OK, but needs breaking up.  Sam, why not try adding a noise filter to the texture, making it more "patchy"?

[Sam Johnson]

@SimFox: You say my Lightrig is too dark, can you please explain why? It sounds a bit like (sorry for directness): "it's too dark because my lightrig is brighter"

One of the most important considerations I had when making rigs was to keep them overall neutral. Meaning that with all the toning etc going on the colors would remain recognizable - blue will be blue, green green, white white. So, in a way no adjustment is really needed for my rig.

Well, somehow this lightrig test without textures shows something different:

->

----------------------------------------------------------

To the molten iron, well as callagrafx said and showed with a picture the light of the is absorded well by the materials and the architecture of the casthouses.
I have to say I wasn't completly happy with the texture of the molten iron but I stopped trying out solutions for now. But, because of your constructive criticism I had some new ideas for making the iron better and well here's the current result:

(you probably notice that the night is brighter than in the other pictures thats my blame, I used in chrisadams bat4max the maxis night mode but this mode seems to be darker than the original maxis night. As of now I gonna use the day/night mode for creating night previews, this modes makes the night-preview looking in the same way it will look ingame )

And I also reduced the intensity of the lights around the cowper stoves, I think thats OK so far

[tag_one]

Wonderful work Sam! I really love your industrial buildings
In my opinion the original molten steel textures look better. Maybe making the stream a bit smaller or decrease the intensity of the lighting for the melt would work better

[callagrafx]

That's much improved... Now there's nothing at fault with it.

[Diggis]

The only thing I can spot is that the metal appears to be falling into a black hole.  Not sure if this is because there'll be something else under there or not.

Otherwise, great job. 

[Sam Johnson]

Thanks guys

@Diggis: currently there's nothing under it but I'm working on a few ladle cars which gonna be parked unter it to load the slag and molten iron for transporting it to the other facilities of the steel mill.

The first ladle car for molten iron is done so far, but I also gonna bat torpedo cars and slag ladle cars

[Diggis]

Nice! 

[Girafe]

good progress   

hope to see more soon


ps: have you upload anywhere your last creations ?

[SimFox]

If you'll check saturation levels you'll find that it is always higher with you rig on what is suppose to be color neutral tone. So, that means my one produces more neural color.
If you do a test render with GMAX you'll also see that your rig produces result that is about 8-10% darker than that of GMAX rig. Mine one produces result that is about same 8% brighter. I wet to brighter side cause with my rig there is very little if any danger of blow-outs/burn-outs. even if you select pure white as defuse color you wouldn't get blown our surface unless it is right angle to the sun. Keeping this in mind I decided that it is better to give some extra room in the shadows to help bring more definition there, as default rig had biggest deficiency there. Your rig only makes that deficiency stronger. That's why I say that your rig is too dark.

Also you have to make more consistent molten iron thing.. I mean it appear to be brighter at day in direct sun light, than at night. It also appears to be tinted by sun light.
It is kind of double wrong. First of all molten iron should appear brighter at night view and pretty dim at day. But at the same time it probably should be affected/tinted by sunlight.

About bouncing light... I must confess I didn't figured out that molten iron was in the recessed channel sort of thing...

Apart from that it looks fantastic