Frost

Helps you spot spies. It doesn't help you catch them though.
Textures ripped from the latest snapshot 20w48a by @Ian_The_One

 

 

Helps you spot spies. It doesn't help you catch them though.
Textures ripped from the latest snapshot 20w48a by @Ian_The_One

 

 

Helps you spot spies. It doesn't help you catch them though.
Textures ripped from the latest snapshot 20w48a by @Ian_The_One

 

 

Helps you spot spies. It doesn't help you catch them though.
Textures ripped from the latest snapshot 20w48a by @Ian_The_One

 

 

Helps you spot spies. It doesn't help you catch them though.
Textures ripped from the latest snapshot 20w48a by @Ian_The_One

 

 

Helps you spot spies. It doesn't help you catch them though.
Textures ripped from the latest snapshot 20w48a by @Ian_The_One

 

 

He bend

Thanks to @__Mine__ for helping with the top and bottom surfaces
DOWNLOAD

Yes, I did use a thesaurus for the name.

I did a thing

? Happy birthday, @Dr. Nexil! ?
Here's @9redwoods and Dave, presenting you with some cake. Enjoy!

I'm aware this is probably a bit early due to timezones. Oh well, better than being late lol
I also ought to make more renders with this trio...

Speed Art:
 

Speed Art:
 

I've thought about the idea of "subsurface scattering" with light bleed for a while now, and today I tried it out for the first time, and my results were successful!
A real-world example of subsurface scattering for those who are confused:
In Mine-imator (spotlight count: 9)

Image from behind
Here's the gist.
Knowing spotlight range directly changes the thickness of light bleed, I set up a folder rig with one spotlight with a very dark red hue and a very high range for very thick light bleed, then I simply duplicated it and lowered its range several times for a gradient effect. The dark red/orange colors stack on each other, giving a gradient effect.
A last spotlight is added with a low range as to not affect the light bleed. It's set to a blue hue to counteract the reds of the subsurface scattering.
QnA:
 
Download the test project HERE.
Important notice: your results may vary depending on your render settings. For the same results as the showcase image, you will need 15% blur size and 64 shadow blur quality.
Test project scaled by 8

and closer shot:
 
 

(left bottom is the credits)

Here's a little render of Pumkin from the web series "Baman Piderman"

Woah! The sixth set is here!
Sorry for the extremely long delay! I've had a lot to deal with recently. ;~;

This pack contains six Creepers; two Dispenser Creeper variants, two Dropper Creeper variants and two Observer Creeper variants.
The Dispenser Creeper and Dropper Creeper have a hidden door on top of their heads that can be opened by rotating the "Top Door" part on the X axis.
The pulse on the back of the Observer Creeper's head can be toggled on or off using the "Active" part.
Download them here!
If used, credit is appreciated!

Greetings forumer!
I made a new version of the fluffy clouds rig from way back.
This time the clouds use a custom noise texture made by my friend EnterDragonGalaxy, to give them a more fluffy appearance.
 
Gumroad Link: 
 
Controls:
To change the color: On the main instance "KeepOnChuckings Volumetric Butts" go to the colors tab and change the multiply color.
To change the fluffyness: On the main instance "KeepOnChuckings Volumetric Butts" go to the scale section and change the Z value.
 

Comparison:
 

Some gifs or a video would be nice.

I'd suggest making it square.

Jeez, I forgot giving suggestions to creators wasn't allowed. I'll remind Red not to give feedback next time 


On a serious note, the feedback on Red's input is very disappointing. A lot of the commentators who replied have based their opinions on ill-informed assumptions. I would not like to let this stand unexplained. (Yes, I know I'm late, and there are a lot of comments to catch up with)

One of the seemingly common counter-arguments to Red's suggestion is that MC's pumpkin pie item is cylindrical, therefore the 3D model should be allowed to follow that geometry.

However, it seems that you haven't drawn the conclusion that MC's item textures are often very different from the actual 3D models used in the game. Minecraft's cake is a great example. Obviously, the item is cylindrical but the 3D object is a square. Thus this counter argument is very flawed, seemingly as it doesn't look at the rest of the game for further information on standards.
My point? MC's item textures do not depict the 3D model's geometry.
 
It appears that many of the defending commentators here have made a devastating misconception, believing that Red's statement was in some way "forcing" his style opinion on the creator. However if you actually look at Red's comment, you'll notice that it was actually a suggestion, one that could be denied or accepted depending on the creator's preferences. That is what we do here, after all.
After a while, some members were already cancelling Red's suggestion with their own opinions before the creator even got a say in what he wanted to do with the suggestion. It's the creator's choice, not yours. Sure, you can state your opinion, but please don't try to negate someone else's with yours. You don't get to choose what happens with the model either. Maybe offer some of your own suggestions, instead of telling someone else to back off because they attempted to help the creator.
 
Not sure where the "harsh" description came from. The suggestion wasn't harsh at all, just plain and straight to the point with no rudeness. Heck, the suggestion was only 5 words, I'm not sure what's so harsh about that. All other messages sent by Red and I were simply defending the validity of the suggestion. These messages were not even directed to the model or the creator, which is where the assumed "harsh"ness is presumed to be directed to.
We weren't even harsh in our defense to the claims that were made. Since when was upholding your own claims considered this preposterous?
Your opinion isn't "incorrect", nobody's is. Please don't bring irrelevant self pity into this.
Some stated that there was a "flame war" happening in the topic, when in reality Red and I had backed off the field while everyone else attacked the suggestion. A very one-sided flame war, if anything.
Once again, we never forced the creator to change anything, it was only a suggestion. Now about "Filled with such things", since when was suggesting considered a bad thing? I'd rather the forums not leave behind users suggesting things to creators.
 
Honestly confused as to where the description "pissy" came from, as far as I remember, suggesting an alternative wasn't labeled as "pissy". Both Red and I acted respectfully while defending the suggestion's validity. Kinda disappointing to hear this come from MI's Visual Designer ?
 
Our intention was not to make the creator feel bad, it is obviously not expected for them to get upset about a suggestion. I have a feeling this might've branched off from all the negativity to Red's comment, possibly giving a skewed perception to the creator. Definitely would've helped if you all hadn't attacked it ?
Funny how you mention "mass-downvoting", while your opposing side downvoted significantly more than Red and I ever did. You don't have much room to talk.
Once again you claim that our comments are "harsh". I touched on this earlier.
Since when was calmly suggesting things considered "toxic"? 
 
Neither Red nor I ever stated that the model was ever "wrong". Red's suggestion wasn't a complaint; there's a difference.
 
The funny thing is that Red and I stopped replying fairly early, even before the wave of overly-defensive and ill-informed comments arrived.
 
I don't like making long posts like these, but I wanted to make some things clear. 
This post was not directed at the creator or the model itself; it is directed at the users mentioned.
 
It honestly saddens me to see the community attack such simple suggestions like this ?

Jeez, I forgot giving suggestions to creators wasn't allowed. I'll remind Red not to give feedback next time 


On a serious note, the feedback on Red's input is very disappointing. A lot of the commentators who replied have based their opinions on ill-informed assumptions. I would not like to let this stand unexplained. (Yes, I know I'm late, and there are a lot of comments to catch up with)

One of the seemingly common counter-arguments to Red's suggestion is that MC's pumpkin pie item is cylindrical, therefore the 3D model should be allowed to follow that geometry.

However, it seems that you haven't drawn the conclusion that MC's item textures are often very different from the actual 3D models used in the game. Minecraft's cake is a great example. Obviously, the item is cylindrical but the 3D object is a square. Thus this counter argument is very flawed, seemingly as it doesn't look at the rest of the game for further information on standards.
My point? MC's item textures do not depict the 3D model's geometry.
 
It appears that many of the defending commentators here have made a devastating misconception, believing that Red's statement was in some way "forcing" his style opinion on the creator. However if you actually look at Red's comment, you'll notice that it was actually a suggestion, one that could be denied or accepted depending on the creator's preferences. That is what we do here, after all.
After a while, some members were already cancelling Red's suggestion with their own opinions before the creator even got a say in what he wanted to do with the suggestion. It's the creator's choice, not yours. Sure, you can state your opinion, but please don't try to negate someone else's with yours. You don't get to choose what happens with the model either. Maybe offer some of your own suggestions, instead of telling someone else to back off because they attempted to help the creator.
 
Not sure where the "harsh" description came from. The suggestion wasn't harsh at all, just plain and straight to the point with no rudeness. Heck, the suggestion was only 5 words, I'm not sure what's so harsh about that. All other messages sent by Red and I were simply defending the validity of the suggestion. These messages were not even directed to the model or the creator, which is where the assumed "harsh"ness is presumed to be directed to.
We weren't even harsh in our defense to the claims that were made. Since when was upholding your own claims considered this preposterous?
Your opinion isn't "incorrect", nobody's is. Please don't bring irrelevant self pity into this.
Some stated that there was a "flame war" happening in the topic, when in reality Red and I had backed off the field while everyone else attacked the suggestion. A very one-sided flame war, if anything.
Once again, we never forced the creator to change anything, it was only a suggestion. Now about "Filled with such things", since when was suggesting considered a bad thing? I'd rather the forums not leave behind users suggesting things to creators.
 
Honestly confused as to where the description "pissy" came from, as far as I remember, suggesting an alternative wasn't labeled as "pissy". Both Red and I acted respectfully while defending the suggestion's validity. Kinda disappointing to hear this come from MI's Visual Designer ?
 
Our intention was not to make the creator feel bad, it is obviously not expected for them to get upset about a suggestion. I have a feeling this might've branched off from all the negativity to Red's comment, possibly giving a skewed perception to the creator. Definitely would've helped if you all hadn't attacked it ?
Funny how you mention "mass-downvoting", while your opposing side downvoted significantly more than Red and I ever did. You don't have much room to talk.
Once again you claim that our comments are "harsh". I touched on this earlier.
Since when was calmly suggesting things considered "toxic"? 
 
Neither Red nor I ever stated that the model was ever "wrong". Red's suggestion wasn't a complaint; there's a difference.
 
The funny thing is that Red and I stopped replying fairly early, even before the wave of overly-defensive and ill-informed comments arrived.
 
I don't like making long posts like these, but I wanted to make some things clear. 
This post was not directed at the creator or the model itself; it is directed at the users mentioned.
 
It honestly saddens me to see the community attack such simple suggestions like this ?

Jeez, I forgot giving suggestions to creators wasn't allowed. I'll remind Red not to give feedback next time 


On a serious note, the feedback on Red's input is very disappointing. A lot of the commentators who replied have based their opinions on ill-informed assumptions. I would not like to let this stand unexplained. (Yes, I know I'm late, and there are a lot of comments to catch up with)

One of the seemingly common counter-arguments to Red's suggestion is that MC's pumpkin pie item is cylindrical, therefore the 3D model should be allowed to follow that geometry.

However, it seems that you haven't drawn the conclusion that MC's item textures are often very different from the actual 3D models used in the game. Minecraft's cake is a great example. Obviously, the item is cylindrical but the 3D object is a square. Thus this counter argument is very flawed, seemingly as it doesn't look at the rest of the game for further information on standards.
My point? MC's item textures do not depict the 3D model's geometry.
 
It appears that many of the defending commentators here have made a devastating misconception, believing that Red's statement was in some way "forcing" his style opinion on the creator. However if you actually look at Red's comment, you'll notice that it was actually a suggestion, one that could be denied or accepted depending on the creator's preferences. That is what we do here, after all.
After a while, some members were already cancelling Red's suggestion with their own opinions before the creator even got a say in what he wanted to do with the suggestion. It's the creator's choice, not yours. Sure, you can state your opinion, but please don't try to negate someone else's with yours. You don't get to choose what happens with the model either. Maybe offer some of your own suggestions, instead of telling someone else to back off because they attempted to help the creator.
 
Not sure where the "harsh" description came from. The suggestion wasn't harsh at all, just plain and straight to the point with no rudeness. Heck, the suggestion was only 5 words, I'm not sure what's so harsh about that. All other messages sent by Red and I were simply defending the validity of the suggestion. These messages were not even directed to the model or the creator, which is where the assumed "harsh"ness is presumed to be directed to.
We weren't even harsh in our defense to the claims that were made. Since when was upholding your own claims considered this preposterous?
Your opinion isn't "incorrect", nobody's is. Please don't bring irrelevant self pity into this.
Some stated that there was a "flame war" happening in the topic, when in reality Red and I had backed off the field while everyone else attacked the suggestion. A very one-sided flame war, if anything.
Once again, we never forced the creator to change anything, it was only a suggestion. Now about "Filled with such things", since when was suggesting considered a bad thing? I'd rather the forums not leave behind users suggesting things to creators.
 
Honestly confused as to where the description "pissy" came from, as far as I remember, suggesting an alternative wasn't labeled as "pissy". Both Red and I acted respectfully while defending the suggestion's validity. Kinda disappointing to hear this come from MI's Visual Designer ?
 
Our intention was not to make the creator feel bad, it is obviously not expected for them to get upset about a suggestion. I have a feeling this might've branched off from all the negativity to Red's comment, possibly giving a skewed perception to the creator. Definitely would've helped if you all hadn't attacked it ?
Funny how you mention "mass-downvoting", while your opposing side downvoted significantly more than Red and I ever did. You don't have much room to talk.
Once again you claim that our comments are "harsh". I touched on this earlier.
Since when was calmly suggesting things considered "toxic"? 
 
Neither Red nor I ever stated that the model was ever "wrong". Red's suggestion wasn't a complaint; there's a difference.
 
The funny thing is that Red and I stopped replying fairly early, even before the wave of overly-defensive and ill-informed comments arrived.
 
I don't like making long posts like these, but I wanted to make some things clear. 
This post was not directed at the creator or the model itself; it is directed at the users mentioned.
 
It honestly saddens me to see the community attack such simple suggestions like this ?

Jeez, I forgot giving suggestions to creators wasn't allowed. I'll remind Red not to give feedback next time 


On a serious note, the feedback on Red's input is very disappointing. A lot of the commentators who replied have based their opinions on ill-informed assumptions. I would not like to let this stand unexplained. (Yes, I know I'm late, and there are a lot of comments to catch up with)

One of the seemingly common counter-arguments to Red's suggestion is that MC's pumpkin pie item is cylindrical, therefore the 3D model should be allowed to follow that geometry.

However, it seems that you haven't drawn the conclusion that MC's item textures are often very different from the actual 3D models used in the game. Minecraft's cake is a great example. Obviously, the item is cylindrical but the 3D object is a square. Thus this counter argument is very flawed, seemingly as it doesn't look at the rest of the game for further information on standards.
My point? MC's item textures do not depict the 3D model's geometry.
 
It appears that many of the defending commentators here have made a devastating misconception, believing that Red's statement was in some way "forcing" his style opinion on the creator. However if you actually look at Red's comment, you'll notice that it was actually a suggestion, one that could be denied or accepted depending on the creator's preferences. That is what we do here, after all.
After a while, some members were already cancelling Red's suggestion with their own opinions before the creator even got a say in what he wanted to do with the suggestion. It's the creator's choice, not yours. Sure, you can state your opinion, but please don't try to negate someone else's with yours. You don't get to choose what happens with the model either. Maybe offer some of your own suggestions, instead of telling someone else to back off because they attempted to help the creator.
 
Not sure where the "harsh" description came from. The suggestion wasn't harsh at all, just plain and straight to the point with no rudeness. Heck, the suggestion was only 5 words, I'm not sure what's so harsh about that. All other messages sent by Red and I were simply defending the validity of the suggestion. These messages were not even directed to the model or the creator, which is where the assumed "harsh"ness is presumed to be directed to.
We weren't even harsh in our defense to the claims that were made. Since when was upholding your own claims considered this preposterous?
Your opinion isn't "incorrect", nobody's is. Please don't bring irrelevant self pity into this.
Some stated that there was a "flame war" happening in the topic, when in reality Red and I had backed off the field while everyone else attacked the suggestion. A very one-sided flame war, if anything.
Once again, we never forced the creator to change anything, it was only a suggestion. Now about "Filled with such things", since when was suggesting considered a bad thing? I'd rather the forums not leave behind users suggesting things to creators.
 
Honestly confused as to where the description "pissy" came from, as far as I remember, suggesting an alternative wasn't labeled as "pissy". Both Red and I acted respectfully while defending the suggestion's validity. Kinda disappointing to hear this come from MI's Visual Designer ?
 
Our intention was not to make the creator feel bad, it is obviously not expected for them to get upset about a suggestion. I have a feeling this might've branched off from all the negativity to Red's comment, possibly giving a skewed perception to the creator. Definitely would've helped if you all hadn't attacked it ?
Funny how you mention "mass-downvoting", while your opposing side downvoted significantly more than Red and I ever did. You don't have much room to talk.
Once again you claim that our comments are "harsh". I touched on this earlier.
Since when was calmly suggesting things considered "toxic"? 
 
Neither Red nor I ever stated that the model was ever "wrong". Red's suggestion wasn't a complaint; there's a difference.
 
The funny thing is that Red and I stopped replying fairly early, even before the wave of overly-defensive and ill-informed comments arrived.
 
I don't like making long posts like these, but I wanted to make some things clear. 
This post was not directed at the creator or the model itself; it is directed at the users mentioned.
 
It honestly saddens me to see the community attack such simple suggestions like this ?