The work was performed within the framework of the "Waiting for Space" competition. And I will also try to describe my experience in using the render from AMD. Once I came across a commercial RPR-2.0 and I was impressed with the result in the advertisement. But then there was no time to drive him, and after that I completely forgot. But then there is an opportunity to test it, and it was a sin not to take advantage of this opportunity. My conclusion, who is too lazy to read. RPR is still very raw and for such work, on the hardware that I have in stock, it is completely unsuitable. The results can be seen on renders. But it's a completely different matter when you need to make a scene that is not so large-scale. Object rendering, where it is necessary to show a painted surface, glass or transparent plastic in close proximity. Very decent lighting, compared to Loops, makes setting up a scene a lot easier. And after the upgrade to version 3.3.0, it began to crash less often and I will definitely use it, I was very impressed with the work with transparent materials. Compared to Cycles, the result is achieved five times faster. So, if you have weak hardware, I advise you not to use it for large-scale scenes. With the conclusion, that's all, and now about my work in more detail. The first mistake, not knowing the capabilities of RPR, I took up a large-scale scene. According to the idea, there were also interior scenes with a view from the windows to the station. But they had to be abandoned. What was my disappointment when I realized that RPR does not support vertex coloring, one mesh, one material. You can of course make textured ones in Substance Painter, but it won't take much time. The next disappointment was working with lighting, here it is exactly the opposite, compared to object visualization. My hardware simply could not withstand such a load and slowed down very terribly. I had to first adjust the lighting, and then look at the result. As a result, I had to make a separate project with primitives and adjust the lighting there, and then transfer the settings. The result of this work, you can evaluate by my work. The second disappointment is that there is no way to work with volumes, in the new version it seems to have been added, but I have not tested it yet. As a result, the atmosphere on the planet and the stars had to be refined in Photoshop, and the energy source had to be made with mesh and glass. To all of the above, we must also add frequent departures. As a conclusion, it was necessary to check the engine, and then get to work. But I was impressed after reading the book and the art was already formed in my head. I love to read, while still at school I caught the peculiarity, because of which not a single film will give what your imagination gives))). A little bit of excuses and philosophy))). As a conclusion, you might think that I am disappointed, but this is far from the case, a little bit upset, but not disappointed. As a result, not everything that I wanted to show is implemented, but my knowledge was replenished with new baggage, and there were more tools.