My first attempt at making blasted rock face.

Started by Deem, February 28, 2026, 03:55:27 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

Deem

I used scrap extruded foam and carved it up and inserted some actual small rocks into it.


IWannaRetire

Deem, ALL your scenery posts are truly amazing in their realism! Additionally, the coastal features are scenic features I haven't seen seen modeled.  Welcome to the forum and thank you for posting.
Mark from Illinois

deemery

My core thought is it's important to understand the geology of the area you're modeling.  There's a big difference between layered sedimentary rock and how that looks in a cut, versus metamorphic or igneous rocks in a cut.  That's true for both texturing and coloring.  

Of course, having photos to work from is the best way to go.  

dave
Modeling the Northeast in the 1890s - because the little voices told me to

Deem

Quote from: IWannaRetire on February 28, 2026, 05:14:45 PMDeem, ALL your scenery posts are truly amazing in their realism! Additionally, the coastal features are scenic features I haven't seen seen modeled.  Welcome to the forum and thank you for posting.
My pleasure Mark.

Deem

Quote from: deemery on February 28, 2026, 06:40:46 PMMy core thought is it's important to understand the geology of the area you're modeling.  There's a big difference between layered sedimentary rock and how that looks in a cut, versus metamorphic or igneous rocks in a cut.  That's true for both texturing and coloring. 

Of course, having photos to work from is the best way to go. 

dave
Indeed Dave. I have taken picks of the locale I model, which has a remarkably diverse and complex variety of geologic formations in such a small area/region.

I like glacial erratics also. I used a real rock. 

Rick

Deem, I think your rock face looks excellent.

deemery

Quote from: Deem on February 28, 2026, 08:54:50 PM
Quote from: deemery on February 28, 2026, 06:40:46 PMMy core thought is it's important to understand the geology of the area you're modeling.  There's a big difference between layered sedimentary rock and how that looks in a cut, versus metamorphic or igneous rocks in a cut.  That's true for both texturing and coloring. 

Of course, having photos to work from is the best way to go. 

dave
Indeed Dave. I have taken picks of the locale I model, which has a remarkably diverse and complex variety of geologic formations in such a small area/region.

I like glacial erratics also. I used a real rock.
Erratics tend to have a 'direction of flow' orientation, but not strongly so, if I remember right.  Most of the BFRs in our neighborhood are erratics that have been brought here.  Turns out this area was under water as the glaciers retreated.   But yeah, erratics are a good addition to a glaciated location, and something where there's no "scale effect" so a planted rock looks just fine.    (One grad student at UNH did a project where she took exposure dating samples from the tops of erratics around the area, to determine max sea level.  She did find a couple spots at the top of hills that were not under water, showing the max sea level rise here.)

dave
Modeling the Northeast in the 1890s - because the little voices told me to

Deem

Quote from: deemery on Today at 09:20:12 AM
Quote from: Deem on February 28, 2026, 08:54:50 PM
Quote from: deemery on February 28, 2026, 06:40:46 PMMy core thought is it's important to understand the geology of the area you're modeling.  There's a big difference between layered sedimentary rock and how that looks in a cut, versus metamorphic or igneous rocks in a cut.  That's true for both texturing and coloring. 

Of course, having photos to work from is the best way to go. 

dave
Indeed Dave. I have taken picks of the locale I model, which has a remarkably diverse and complex variety of geologic formations in such a small area/region.

I like glacial erratics also. I used a real rock.
Erratics tend to have a 'direction of flow' orientation, but not strongly so, if I remember right.  Most of the BFRs in our neighborhood are erratics that have been brought here.  Turns out this area was under water as the glaciers retreated.  But yeah, erratics are a good addition to a glaciated location, and something where there's no "scale effect" so a planted rock looks just fine.    (One grad student at UNH did a project where she took exposure dating samples from the tops of erratics around the area, to determine max sea level.  She did find a couple spots at the top of hills that were not under water, showing the max sea level rise here.)

dave
Interesting Dave. I wish I had you to get advice when I made my rock scenes years ago. At least I had a lot of pics for references. I keep then in a folder on my computer.

The module that has the glacial erratic is wrapped up and put away. I do not recall what box I put the glacial erratic in.

A shot of the hole where it was in.


deemery

Well, "years ago" I didn't know all that much about geology.  I took the undergrad geology course sequence here at University of New Hampshire as a retirement project.   ;D

dave
Modeling the Northeast in the 1890s - because the little voices told me to

Powered by EzPortal