Id like to take a moment and open this topic. The has been buging me and Ive not worried about it till today. Today I read a comment stateing to add stars over the shaded part of planets. I disagree with this and would like to counter it with this:

DONT ADD STARS on the shaded part. This because in outerspace there are not stars between you and a planet. Think about it. What is a star? a star is a distant planet or sun. This mean if that star "planet" was between you and the planet, IT WOULD LOOK LIKE A PLANET. You do not want to put stars over the shaded part of the planet. This makes the planet look like its missing part of it self.

I know alot of spray artist do this so Id like to have this be a topic of discussion. What do you do in this case and if you do put stars over your planet what is your though process while doing so? I mean, what are the stars because they cant be a distant planet or sun.

Brandon, I know you do this alot. Whats your thoughts?

TK

Thomas -
Your reasoning is correct, no doubt.

The only explanation that makes sense as to why it would be done is to either 'imply' that you are indeed seeing stars BEHIND the planet, therefore implying that part of the planet is indeed missing.  OR that the stars are merely supposed to be representative of 'space dust'... smaller particles floating between you and the planet that are large enough to collect & reflect light, but still small enough to pass through your line of site.  Perhaps?

I completely agree with what TK is saying.  Stars in front of planets are unrealistic.  I have done it a few times when I was starting out, and on occasion when I get in a hurry, but I have to go with the "don't like its" on this subject.    ~99GT

ya I'm gonna have to agree with TK on this one, I can't stand it unless it's done like part of the planet is missing.  I realize that this art isn't always "realistic" but that is one thing I like to keep realistic.

Thanks for the support guys. It nice to read others thoughts on my favorite topics.

TK