Pajarico wrote:And I still think the stones at the base look very unrealistic and plain.
what exactly makes you think so? please think about it for a while. that would really make it easier for me to fix that. thanks.
I will try
I will split my explanation in parts:
- Structure & shape:
The stones look to roundish. If the weight of the whole house is intended to rest over them, round stones are a weak structure IMO because they would tend to collapse and scatter because of the weight.
Also, they seem to be piled up in columns, which make the structure even weaker. When doing a brick or stone wall is always a good practice to pile the stones in a way to break the columns pattern.
Now, an important question springs to my mind: the stones are manually picked from the nature and unmechanized? or on the contrary, are cut or sculpted? Either way I present examples of both:
- Those are walls with natural stones piled:
- Those are walls with a good mechanization, specially the first is a perfect example of a good ashlar:
In brief, you should decide what kind of technic level they can acomplish and correct the shape of individual stones (i.e.: make them less roundish).
If you think of the stones as a cube, you should see at least a bit of the top surface, do you know what I mean?
I won't go into details about this point because is of no use to get a worked texture when the shape isnot even decided. I will go into this later.