@okh
...you just made the case for sky-texture (...)
Which was my intention
I'm not trying to talk it down, I'm in fact using sky textures a lot,
although I prefer not to include the horizon. As you can see from the
tent-&-Campfire illustration, even though I did my very best, there's
still a feeling that the foreground is glued to the background – if
you look closely. And the larger the image, the more clearly it will appear.
I actually made a video a year ago, showing how to improve and handle
sky texturing. But I never got around to finishing it with sound and VO.
But it kinda works without.
In case someone wants to see it:
Lef-click to play in a new window or right-cl...e target to DOWNLOAD 16MB
...for real life projects where rendering is not the objective, but the point is getting the construction details right through planning with various tools (as mentioned in threads 6162 and 5953).
Thanks for the link to Geogebra. That is one extremely useful tool.
Understanding my views ( as I know you do) it's important to
acknowledge that my viewpoint is from an illustrators perspective.
I'm using SH3D with the sole intention of illustrating, and as a
general rule I want my constructions to be video-compatible (meaning
that all objects, including the horizon, will behave according to the
laws of physics when I move the camera). That's why I cannot have the
horizon fixed to the sky. That's also why I am texturing everything
- even the ground ( and the main reason I would very much like to
substitute the sky with an alpha-channel).
But when my intention is to produce an artistic image only, I use
every technique I know, including fixed horizons on a textured sky as
well as atmospheric layers and transparent pngs og one-sided planes
(like with the fire and smoke in the tent-&-Campfire illustration.
I hope there are other users that can find our discussions as useful as I do.
Thank you for participating and sharing your knowledge.
cec
