Actually, I quite like it. But I get a serious headache if I look more than 30 seconds at the picture. The lower wing of the left S-foil looks a bit flat but I think that's caused by the motion. Keep it up, it's nice to see you back in the game.

Thanks. Sorry about the motion blur, but I just can't go completely without. Attack space fighters, crispy clear without any blurring seems somehow wrong to me. Dont know why. ;)

A little sleeker and slim lined, looks a good upgrade from the original.

Some seriously slick details on this one. The engine modifications are very cool, reminds me of the difference between a sedan and a sportscar. Weathered textures and decals are true to look of the original... would fit right in with a scene ILM might be working on. Thanks for reposting without the heavy motion blur. :o)

Supurb. IMHO - I am against motion blur at all - on the assumption that fururistic photograpy would totally eliminate all focus and tracking errors. Also I am getting older and things are harder to see. I always hate to see a great artist vandalize his/her own artstic efforts. You, for one, are well known and higly regarded ... HOWEVER - its your toy so you can darn well do what you want to with it. LOL. Enuff of my petty crap. Awesome work as always. thanks for sharing. Dwayne

Niiiice, i think the blur does add a sense of realism to it.

Retired: I would like to agree about futuristic photography equipment, but eventually motion blur is more of a neuro-visiological problem. Human brain has a certain frequency to handle optical input. Sure, with a camera you can still take a clear shot of fast moving stuff, but under the assumption that something should not LOOK like beeing shot with a camera this just doesn't count. A fascinating thing, by the way. Same with lense flares. Some people like em, because they just tend to make things look somehow more realistic. Others hate them, because they say it looks like shot with a camera and when there was no CNN team accompanying Luke in the trench run, then there should be no lense flares and crispy clear images eithers. So eventually it's all a question of wether one likes it, or not. I can totally understand your point and partially, I agree. Complicated way to say just that, isn't it? g

I think I can help. If you put the spaceship in a tunnel and put the camera sorta in front, but make the camera go with the spaceship's speed, you'll blur the background and not the spaceship. Would that work?

Well, it cannot look like gaussian blur, since gaussian blur is not a blur type, or direction. It's an algorythm, based on the gaussian distribution. When reduced to an area of below 5 pixels in each of the trajectory directions, the similarities of a motion blur and a general blur posteffects are much the same on one spread vector.

OK, I'll just say that it doesn't look like motion blur then, anyway, as I said before, the model looks great.

I'm working on it. :)

Altouh I have to admit, that I have to get accustomed to the shape of the wings, I like it, and it looks really great.

Kicks ass! Looks meaner, sleaker and more aggressive than the original X-Wing.