Render Dump

[Lion.Kanzen]

The shape is fine. But texture must be kind stone

 

[Stan`]

@Lion.Kanzen all my references depicted wood and this image  looks like wood to me 

[Lion.Kanzen]

I mean not very expert in architecture so the name where Greek puts their mythologies outside the temple... I don't think or I think must be sacred, a relief or a painted scene, but not wood. That's good for humble churches but I'm not sure.

@LordGood you know the name of that?

 

 

[Lion.Kanzen]

I founded.

Quote

In architecture, a tympanum (plural, tympana) is the semi-circular or triangular decorative wall surface over an entrance, door or window, bounded by a lintel and arch.^[1] It often contains sculpture or other imagery or ornaments.^[2] Most architectural styles include this element.^[3]

In ancient Greek, Roman and Christian architecture, tympana usually contain religious imagery,^[4] when on religious buildings. A tympanum over a doorway is very often the most important, or only, location for monumental sculpture on the outside of a building. In classical architecture, and in classicising styles from the Renaissance onwards, major examples are usually triangular; in Romanesque architecture, tympana have a semi-circular shape, or that of a thinner slice from the top of a circle, and in Gothic architecture they have a more vertical shape, coming to a point at the top. These shapes naturally influence the typical compositions of any sculpture within the tympanum.

Bands of molding surrounding the tympanum are referred to as the archivolt.^[5]

In medieval French architecture the tympanum is often supported by a decorated pillar called a trumeau.

 

[LordGood]

You're thinking of the pediment lion, the tympanum typically goes over a doorway.

[Lion.Kanzen]

This i found in Spanish. I'm sure you know best.

 

[LordGood]

What's interesting about the Greek Doric order is that its speculated there are a lot of holdovers from when temples were still made of wood. It's theorized the stone triglyphs and metopes are representations of the wooden beams holding up the roof, and the decorations between them.

make of that what you will, there are a lot of ways to go about this, all of which very interesting.

[Alexandermb]

I am making a trebuchet on blender in case it can be used in any mod.

By now its done the attack animation, and i'm going to make it also unpack/pack animation.

 

Spoiler

 

[LordGood]

Seems we're both right lion lol

[Stan`]

@Lion.Kanzen @LordGood

Here is the ref

So I like the temple the way it is right now, but maybe I shouldn't and I'm totally wrong...

[LordGood]

I would say be careful of secondary sources, and especially reserve trait copying to primary sources. Trouble here is that all the primary source material has likely rotted away, so other contemporary inference is likely your best bet.

[Lion.Kanzen]

Which is more ancient temple that we know their characteristic? Mycenaean or archaic Greeks?

[LordGood]

Archaic/geometric period temples I would assume

[Stan`]

2 minutes ago, LordGood said:

I would say be careful of secondary sources, and especially reserve trait copying to primary sources. Trouble here is that all the primary source material has likely rotted away, so other contemporary inference is likely your best bet.

Well this source is from an archeological site called romaniadevis.ro, so I'd say it's pretty strong as far as source goes ?

[Lion.Kanzen]

18 minutes ago, stanislas69 said:

Well this source is from an archeological site called romaniadevis.ro, so I'd say it's pretty strong as far as source goes ?

But that is Dacian, mostly of Romanian was Dacian. Thracia areto the southeast. In Bulgaria.

[Stan`]

@Lion.Kanzen Dacians are thracians.

[Lion.Kanzen]

1 minute ago, stanislas69 said:

@Lion.Kanzen Dacians are thracians.

Nope at all. Dacian were mostly Germanic. And more powerful.

[Stan`]

@Lion.Kanzen "The Dacians (/ˈdeɪʃənz/; Latin: Daci, Ancient Greek: Δάκοι,^[2] Δάοι,^[2] Δάκαι^[3]) were an Indo-European people, part of or related to the Thracians."

 

Quote form @Sundiata 

Quote

What if, seen as the Dacians were essentially a specific type of Thracians, who eventually founded their own Dacian Kingdom, Dacian references could be fair game. This way we can represent "archaic" Thracians and the younger, reinvigorated Dacians, in a Daco-Thracian faction. First Thracian capital at Seuthopolis, and the second Dacian capital at Sarmizegetusa. Seen as they were culturally closely related, politically and geographically overlapping, and featured the same "Greco-Barbarian" architectural mix, it is possible to depict them as a single Daco-Thracian faction, referencing both, making research easier.   

That's the point why I made Dacians.

Edited August 28, 2017 by stanislas69

[Lion.Kanzen]

Quote

Well, you're not correct. The Celts are completely seperate from the Thracian and Dacian groups by the Centum/Satem divide. The Illyrians are also Centum, but not Celtic.

Here's, from what I've read, the basic outline of their similarities. This is from Romanian historiography, and even within this, the exact relations are undecided. However, here's what I know:
Dacians vs. Thracians: The Dacians/Getae are a group of Thracians which supposedly, through isolation or foreign factors, became distinct. They essentially branched off too greatly to be considered the same people anymore, similar to the Danes branching off the Germanic tribes to form their own people. Archaeologically they became distinct around 650BC, the late Hallstatt culture period. Nevertheless, they were still similar enough to the Thracians (probably in language) in 514BC to have Herodotus write of them as "the most manly and law-abiding of all the Thracians."

Thracians vs. Illyrians: These are distinct groups, moreso than the Dacians and Thracians. While the Dacians only branched off the Thracians in 650BC, the Illyrians either separated from the Thracians much earlier, or more likely both groups separated from another parent family, probably branching off in 1500BC, when we can finally speak of a distinct Thracian culture.

Dacians vs. Illyrians: Once again, distinct peoples, this time even further than the Thracians vs. Illyrians. One theory proposes that the Illyrians invaded the Balkans from Pannonia in 1200BC, an area close to the Dacians. Therefore, by living in proximity with the Dacians, they could have become very close, but diverged significantly by 400BC, probably due to Hellenic influence.

If we are to compare, the Illyrians are closest to Thracians probably, given their proximity. The Dacians however, are closer to the Thracians than the Illyrians. From what I know the Illyrians were actually a Centum language, but they weren't Celts, not by a long shot.

From what I know of linguistics, Romanians (arguably descended from Dacians) and Albanians (arguably descended from Illyrians) share 150 words, while we can't say the same for Italians and Albanians, so take that for what it is regarding closeness.

 

[Stan`]

Well okay then I guess I can give up and forget about it.

[LordGood]

baaah no point in being defeatest about it, Dacians are one of those contemporaries i was talking about. Only thing bothering me really with your Thracian set is the texture coherence or lack thereof

[Stan`]

@LordGood Well I guess that's because I made everything myself  Still not getting there I guess... Whole point of that building pack was to find my way of making textures.

Edited August 29, 2017 by stanislas69

[LordGood]

Don't worry too much about it, a lot of it's done post-render with a lot of tiny tweaks and tests.

[Lion.Kanzen]

6 minutes ago, stanislas69 said:

@LordGood Well I guess that's because I made everything myself  Still not getting there I guess... Whole point of that building pack was to find my way of making textures.

You do a good work.

[Stan`]

Obviously not. Don't get me wrong I'm not offended just very disappointed in myself not being able to go past the you're good but it's not enough thing. Makes me question the whole thing everytime, and I'm stuck at the same point.