Cary L. Brown wrote:
The thing about that form of glow is that it's a post-render effect... meaning it won't actually provide illumination to other parts of the scene, it only "fakes" the glow. So if you do that, you need to create an invisible "ambient light source" to fake out the illumination coming from that region.
That's also a "node" effect, by the way, so I'm presuming that what you mention works much the same way?
Pretty much. This is all done in post. In this case (and with such an extreme glow) the setup involves making sure that EVERYTHING doesn't glow, just the bits I want.
Yeah, that's the problem with using post-render glow effects in what's supposed to be a vacuum environment. The "Halo" effect is just wrong, but that's inherent to pretty much all of the post-render glow effects I've seen. There should be no "atmospheric scatter" effect... that's where you sometimes end up playing with that "normal fall-off" technique...
I know that in places where they need to do a truly photorealistic "space shot" they actually render the glow elements in separate passes and composite them in. Much easier to do in CGI than with physical models (even with motion-control) but still a royal pain in the butt. I'm not aware of any really convincing way to do it other than in that fashion, however... so glow with a minimal "halo" is about as good as you can get. I'd say your halos are just a bit more than they ought to be (looks like it's in a normal atmosphere, but at least not like it's in haze!). But since none of us are expected to think this thing is REALLY flying in space, well... I'd say this is more than good enough!