Tree test for your review...

tomsdesk

Hey all,

I'd sure like to get your opinions about these trees, in general and particularly about their shadows:

The one on the left is about 280k (with barely passing shadows in my book), the one on the right is about 315k (with better shadows as requested...at least as I understand the request).
But the size of the right one is deceiving as the shadow is a component repeated 20 times or so (there are 8000 more edges and 100 more faces...which on my machine is more important to useablity than memory size).

Please enjoy (I think these are getting quite good...finally :`), but also, in exchange, give me your detailed opinions of/about them: bottomline, I aim to please more than me.

Thanks a bunch and best, Tom.
zzzcompair.skp

Gaieus

Tom,

The treews are beautiful but (for me at least) seem to be a bit "heavy". File-size-wise and graphics-card-wise too. Still for a "final touch" of a model to be rendered, I'd be very happy to use them.

Thanks for sharing!

Stu

Thanks Tom,

I almost missed this one....very very nice
I like the more detailed shadow. OK a bit heavier.....but I'm used to loading my models to the point of stopping

Stu

Gaieus

@unknownuser said:

OK a bit heavier.....but I'm used to loading my models to the point of stopping

Stu

Sure not much problem with it - I always "decorate" my models at the end anyway, too. And then put plants on a different layer to be able to work with the model if still needed.

Jan Vdb

Thanks for sharing Tom

I like the right one (better shadow).
Like Gaieus says you can allways turn the layer off when working on the model.

greetings, Jan

poster-Jan Vdb

juju

wow, nice! I prefer the one on the right with the more detailed shadow as well. Thx for sharing the model!

Anssi

Thanks for sharing again, Tom!

Yes, the shadow on the right one is beautiful, but I still think that I would prefer the "lite" version. In real-world modeling the difference wouldn't be so glaring, as the shadows wouldn't be falling on such pristine ground, and the viewpoint would also generally be somewhat lower, so the shadow shapes wouldn't stick out so much.

Anssi

tomsdesk

Guys,
Thanks a bunch for your helpful responses. My attitude has always been pretty much exactly as Anssi stated. The hitch being the view for the LA's is more often from above like shown. But it dawned on me reading all this: when a shadow casts on a wall it really is just as simple as a flat horizontal...so there's the rub. A second plus for me is in hidden line and shaded modes, the cut up faces look much better too.

So I've decided to pursue the nice shadow by first seeing if I can develope some sort of pinking shear template so making the shadow doesn't take longer than making the tree (and so I don't fall into using the same shadow for all). Then seeing how much I can cut down the edges and still have something nice. Then, if it isn't small enough still, I will add a simpler shadow component for alternate use...though I do always put the shadows on a separate layer too.

Whadaya think? Any other hints? (Wish me luck driving around today...I'll be looking at tree shadows to distraction :`)

Best, Tom.