Shop Mobile More Submit  Join Login
Thuban dam by Vidom Thuban dam by Vidom
Made with Mandelbulb3D.
I'm sorry for the size but too many details were lost in resizing (it was rendered much bigger) and I didn't want to compress it much more than this.
I'm sorry for the giant watermark too, I couldn't find a clean spot to hide my usual small ones :-)

Full view is available for detail lovers.
Add a Comment:
 
:iconjennystokes:
jennystokes Featured By Owner Sep 26, 2012  Professional General Artist
Am I allowed to have this one..............???????
Reply
:iconvidom:
Vidom Featured By Owner Sep 26, 2012  Hobbyist Digital Artist
I owe you more than this :-)
Reply
:iconjennystokes:
jennystokes Featured By Owner Sep 27, 2012  Professional General Artist
NO!
You do not!
I love it.
Hugs and xxxxxxxxxx
Reply
:iconuchua:
Uchua Featured By Owner Sep 23, 2012  Hobbyist Digital Artist
Absolutely stunning. I usually upload the large scale versions of my images for the same reason. It's a shame that so much gets lost in rendering when you set the scale lower.
Reply
:iconvidom:
Vidom Featured By Owner Sep 24, 2012  Hobbyist Digital Artist
Yes, it's a limit of monitors anyway. But prints need the high resolution we're cutting here, it's nice to know we can have prints better than what you see on video :-)
And thanks :-)
Reply
:iconuchua:
Uchua Featured By Owner Sep 25, 2012  Hobbyist Digital Artist
I'm planning on getting 2560x1440 pixel 27" display at some point so I can truly appreciate large scale images. Samsung makes one that has almost the same specs as the Thunderbolt Display but works with a typical PC.
Reply
:iconvidom:
Vidom Featured By Owner Sep 26, 2012  Hobbyist Digital Artist
That's great!
Actually I'm submitting my works bigger since my cousin gave me his old Mac, with a Cinema Display 2560x1600. I couldn't make them so big on my old 1600x1200, I discovered monitor size really counts :-)
Reply
:iconuchua:
Uchua Featured By Owner Sep 27, 2012  Hobbyist Digital Artist
Those 2560x1600 displays are nice but cost like twice as much as the ones that are only slightly lower resolution. I'm sure someday I'll be sitting around playing TES XXV: Skyrim IV on a 16,000x9,000 screen but for now I'm content only wanting to blow like $700 on a screen lol.
Reply
:iconvidom:
Vidom Featured By Owner Sep 28, 2012  Hobbyist Digital Artist
:D
As I said, it was a gift and I'm happy for that.
I would've ever bought this monitor 6 or 7 years ago, when the price was ridiculously high :D
But I must say Apple monitors' quality is very good. Last LED one though are too reflective and I still prefer the old opaque coated ones.
I'm not as sure as you about the future though, size is clearly increasing fast but a wall can't be filled by a monitor as efficiently and cheaply as a projection.
If I had to bet about the future, I'd say monitors will be embedded into glasses/masks, or 3D hologram technology will allow us to use air as our workplace :-)
Reply
:iconuchua:
Uchua Featured By Owner Sep 28, 2012  Hobbyist Digital Artist
The future ---> [link]
Reply
:iconvidom:
Vidom Featured By Owner Sep 28, 2012  Hobbyist Digital Artist
Yeah, not bad at all! I wish I could try it :-)
The output is simpler, I'm worried about the development of input systems now :D
Reply
(1 Reply)
:iconjustinart87:
JustinArt87 Featured By Owner Sep 23, 2012  Student General Artist
The structures of this model looks brilliant. Amazing job.
Reply
:iconvidom:
Vidom Featured By Owner Sep 24, 2012  Hobbyist Digital Artist
Thank you :-)
Reply
:iconreder1c:
Reder1c Featured By Owner Sep 23, 2012
I see it as a vast vast ship designed by Frank Lloyd Wright. Perhaps 10 million inhabitants? 100 million? Amazing render.
Reply
:iconvidom:
Vidom Featured By Owner Sep 24, 2012  Hobbyist Digital Artist
Ah, the genius of Frank Lloyd Wright returns often in comments here :-)
I wish I was just 1/1000 of him and I'm not there yet :D
Thank you so much :-)
Reply
:iconmmaera:
MMAERA Featured By Owner Sep 23, 2012
magnificent !
Reply
:iconvidom:
Vidom Featured By Owner Sep 23, 2012  Hobbyist Digital Artist
Thanks :thanks:
Reply
:icongrahamsym:
GrahamSym Featured By Owner Sep 23, 2012   Digital Artist
Superb!
Reply
:iconvidom:
Vidom Featured By Owner Sep 23, 2012  Hobbyist Digital Artist
Thanks
Reply
:iconleoniezurakowsky:
LeonieZurakowsky Featured By Owner Sep 23, 2012   Digital Artist
Wow, this is stunning V! The size is not too large, I think. I usually post much larger with no compression! And I also think your sig is placed nicely and blends in well! :D[link]
Reply
:iconvidom:
Vidom Featured By Owner Sep 23, 2012  Hobbyist Digital Artist
Thank you :-)
Actually I always get a little crazy trying to watch your works, they're slow to load! :crying:
Do you have a reason to post them so huge? It could help thieves to use them, it's dangerous!
If I may... think about resizing them a little, at least until they make 4000px wide monitors :D
Reply
:iconleoniezurakowsky:
LeonieZurakowsky Featured By Owner Sep 23, 2012   Digital Artist
Actually you have a good point! I don't quite know why I have this need to make them so huge. You mean to say, even the basic, non-enlarged images are slow to load? Hm...it's not a problem for me but of course I didn't consider others! ARG!!!

I guess I feel quality is lost by reducing their size. It was one of our fellow fractaleers that suggested rendering at least this size. On the other hand, what do you suggest?

I just can't imagine anyone wanting to steal them though. :D
Reply
:iconvidom:
Vidom Featured By Owner Sep 24, 2012  Hobbyist Digital Artist
Not all images are slow to load, but the last ones you posted were.
People stumbling upon such works should be able to see them fast, or at least without starting to wonder if their computer is having problems, while they wait for download :D
I assure you, many visitors like fast browsing through many images and they could discard the ones too heavy and slow. I patiently wait because I know you, but you can still lose the casual watcher.

My suggestion? It's all about the media used to show your works. If you mostly show them on monitors, like on DA, there is no need to exceed 72dpi and 2600x1600 pixels. All further information would be cut, compressed or lost in a monitor. All the bigger resolutions have a meaning for printing only, where the motto is: the bigger, the better.

No one steal works until they do :crying: then it becomes boring and frustrating to fight with the thieves. Never give them the chance to make a fine art print.

So, feel free to use the definition and size you want for your works, but resize them a little to make them friendlier on the website. Also, using compressed JPG instead of the lossless PNG reduces the file size considerably; this allows you to actually upload those huge 4000x3000 to show details as you want, without making the file too big.

I save ALL my works in lossless format, but I resize and convert them in JPG before sending them over the net. I try to stay under 2MB in filesize; I keep the better quality ones for printing purposes and it makes me feel safer against serious thieves because I can prove the version they used is a copy in lower quality of my original.

This shouldn't change at all your way to work, you only need a further step before submitting :-)
Reply
:iconleoniezurakowsky:
LeonieZurakowsky Featured By Owner Sep 24, 2012   Digital Artist
Thanks for your excellent suggestions! I was already doing this process for submission to Shadowness because they have a size limitation of 3mb. So you figure I can keep the size, but just compress with jpg optimizer? I find that even using the bicubic method of resizing, too much detail is lost or the image loses anti-aliasing and becomes too pixellated.

Of course I anticipate printing some of my paintings - possibly soon - so I want to make them large without taking days to render. Maybe the size I render at is really too small for print size? I just hate to think to rendering everything in more than one size...and I'm not really sure how big I can/should print them yet.

I really appreciate your knowledge in this area. Numbers have always been a bane to me! They get me totally confused! LOL! :D
Reply
:iconvidom:
Vidom Featured By Owner Sep 24, 2012  Hobbyist Digital Artist
You can choose how much the JPG artifact is compressed, and balance between file size and loss of details. In this case I recommend you downsize it AND transform in JPG. The bigger the image the more evident are the loss of details in JPG transformation, that's why you better work on a smaller image already, when posting to the web.
Also, downsizing it with some software allows you to check the first loss of details and ponder if a little tweak is needed to compensate (usually a sharpening effect).
As I said, for prints the bigger's the better :-) Unless you want print postcards, lol.
As a rule of thumb, I approximate the size needed by dividing the pixels by 100, having the resulting centimeters corresponding for a 300dpi print.
So if I want to print 40X50cm I know I need an image about 4000x5000 pixels. That's an approximation of course, and for very big prints you can even lessen the quality below the 300dpi. Also, on media like cotton canvases you don't need such resolution.
I'm not an expert, but I'm here if you dare asking for more info :D
Reply
:iconleoniezurakowsky:
LeonieZurakowsky Featured By Owner Sep 26, 2012   Digital Artist
Thanks for this great advice!

One thing I thought of is that enabling downloads could be disabled - though hardly anyone downloads mine so...?

Sharing could also be disabled though I don't think too many people do that, there's no real way of knowing is there?

Also I could upload at a large size for the sake of prints on dA but change it to a smaller size on upload and let dA do the resizing?

Anyway, I will try and work on this for my next series! Me and numbers, gag! LOL! :D
Reply
:iconvidom:
Vidom Featured By Owner Sep 26, 2012  Hobbyist Digital Artist
Download button disabled is a nice idea to prevent thievery, if you post big images usable in many ways :-)

I personally prefer to keep the sharing buttons enabled, it's an inexpensive way to enlarge your audience and art thieves won't use it anyway. Knowing how many viewers used the sharing buttons is meaningless: even if DA could tell you how many people shared your work, they won't be able to say how many times you work is multiplying around, once on other networks (for example once pinned to Pinterest you can be re-pinned many times on different pinboards)

Every now and then you should search for your works over the net, by a reverse image locator as Tin Eye. I do it and I regularly ask to remove my works when posted without credits or used commercially. I also have a certain fun in finding my works, when correctly credited, on the most disparate websites around the world :D

I never approached the idea of DA prints, so I cannot be of help. I would submit works only with download button disabled, in that case, but I don't know much more :-)

Good luck with your numbers! :D
Reply
(1 Reply)
:iconfraterchaos:
fraterchaos Featured By Owner Sep 23, 2012  Hobbyist Digital Artist
wow! fantastic work, the details are amazing!
Reply
:iconvidom:
Vidom Featured By Owner Sep 23, 2012  Hobbyist Digital Artist
Thank you :-)
I'm tempted to submit it double size for some more :D
Reply
:iconfraterchaos:
fraterchaos Featured By Owner Sep 24, 2012  Hobbyist Digital Artist
that would be cool... some of your work almost needs to be because there is just so much detail to see!

most welcome :)
Reply
:iconsaulinvictus:
SaulInvictus Featured By Owner Sep 23, 2012  Hobbyist Digital Artist
I want to visit this city.
Reply
:iconvidom:
Vidom Featured By Owner Sep 23, 2012  Hobbyist Digital Artist
:D :thumbsup:
Reply
:iconasp-in-the-garden:
Asp-in-the-Garden Featured By Owner Sep 23, 2012
the lighting is breathtaking!
Reply
:iconvidom:
Vidom Featured By Owner Sep 23, 2012  Hobbyist Digital Artist
Thank you! :-)
Reply
:iconjccrfractals:
jccrfractals Featured By Owner Sep 23, 2012  Hobbyist Digital Artist
Oh, it's a nice fractal. A perfect kind of city.
Reply
:iconvidom:
Vidom Featured By Owner Sep 23, 2012  Hobbyist Digital Artist
Thank you! :-)
Reply
:iconjccrfractals:
jccrfractals Featured By Owner Sep 23, 2012  Hobbyist Digital Artist
:)
Reply
:iconquasihedron:
quasihedron Featured By Owner Sep 23, 2012  Hobbyist Digital Artist
WOW! What a structure! :clap:
How many billions and eons did it take to build this! :rofl::eyepopping:
Well done! :D
Reply
:iconvidom:
Vidom Featured By Owner Sep 23, 2012  Hobbyist Digital Artist
:D Thanks!
Reply
:iconquasihedron:
quasihedron Featured By Owner Sep 23, 2012  Hobbyist Digital Artist
You are most welcome! :D
Reply
:iconallthenightlong:
allthenightlong Featured By Owner Sep 23, 2012  Hobbyist Digital Artist
fantastico ..... love your sign too!
Reply
:iconvidom:
Vidom Featured By Owner Sep 23, 2012  Hobbyist Digital Artist
Thank you! Twice! :-)
Reply
:iconcpmacdonald:
CPMacDonald Featured By Owner Sep 23, 2012  Hobbyist Digital Artist
Very nice... reminds me of an old African movie where they're digging for diamonds and this is part of the dig site... Very nice render Vidom! That'd be a nice one to render into a movie.
Reply
:iconvidom:
Vidom Featured By Owner Sep 23, 2012  Hobbyist Digital Artist
Surely diamonds could make this structure worth building :D
Thank you :-)
Reply
:iconcpmacdonald:
CPMacDonald Featured By Owner Sep 23, 2012  Hobbyist Digital Artist
Excellent... :)
Reply
Add a Comment:
 
×
Download JPG 2600 × 1300




Details

Submitted on
September 23, 2012
Image Size
2.3 MB
Resolution
2600×1300
Link
Thumb
Embed

Stats

Views
1,849 (2 today)
Favourites
72 (who?)
Comments
51
Downloads
109
×