PDA

View Full Version : sorry, i can only do architecture



ingo
03-01-2010, 09:21 AM
A rework of an old project i have done 2 years ago.

biliousfrog
03-01-2010, 11:19 AM
The modelling is very nice, it's an interesting building. I have a few comments...

The composition feels a bit awkward. The camera is floating quite high in the air and there isn't anything to make it feel 'grounded'. The shrubs and tree in the foreground also distract the eye and don't seem to have a purpose. Personally, I'd go with an eye-level view and use the tilt-shift camera to keep the verticals straight. If you're set on using foliage use it as framing to aid the viewer rather than to distract, give it necessary DOF blur too...the camera is a long distance from the building but everything is pin sharp.

The lighting is very grey and lacks definition. A white building is going to pick up a lot of colour from the surroundings but it looks quite flat despite being very detailed. Don't be afraid to experiment with light and shade and definitely use GI with something like the SunSky procedural to add realistic sky lighting. I was always told to follow the old-skool architectural illustration method of lighting everything slightly from the side and behind the viewer but it's not how most architectural photographers do things...they'll often use shade to highlight form. Look at this as an example: http://www.archimage.co.uk/civil_just.htm

What you have created is very good but it feels unnatural and therefore unrealistic.

ingo
03-01-2010, 12:53 PM
Thanks for the critics, i'll give you the phone number of my client so you can discuss it with them, i gave up. I used SunSky which gave a nice light-blueish tint to the white buildings, they don't wanted it. The problem with the lighting is that the building is curved, and as usual the client insists that every part should look bright white, thats why the sun is behind the camera.

Here is the second picture, a closeup. Odd enough the living room has no windows to the south, only to the west and the north.

focus3d
03-01-2010, 02:16 PM
Really nice model. I agree the composition of your render needs more space though, the last render I'd like to see more of the road I think just to give the building some space around it.

Just out of interest, did you model the tree yourself? I'm looking for a tree model just now so would be interested to know where you got it.

ingo
03-01-2010, 02:44 PM
The client builds the building, not the road :deal: Well the tree, the trunk and the branches are made with Onyx Tree, but the leaves are added with Pawel Olas's LeavesGenerator.

biliousfrog
03-02-2010, 04:38 AM
haha...clients...ok, scrap my previous comments :D

I used to work at a place that got 99% of the work from a traditional water colour illustrator and everything was very over-saturated, over-contrasted, undynamic and boring...even our boss began thinking that everything should look that way.

It was always extremely frustrating having to 'correct' an area because it was the wrong colour...even though it was the correct colour but it was in the shade...'that door should be white but half of it looks grey' :bangwall:

Luckily my clients have all given me work based on what I can do rather than what they're used to. I recently went to a networking event to meet with some developers and social planners and some of them became quite angry when they realised that their current 'photo-real 3d visuals' were not so cutting edge. They'd just assumed that 3d illustration was just a quicker way of getting the same result, not that it could actually be better...actually 'photo'-realistic...they'd just assumed that a lot of the 3d stuff were photos, especially the photo-comp stuff.

I guess it comes down to education but it's quite a confusing thing for people outside of the industry to comprehend. It's even harder when there are people/companies that will happily make a quick buck rather than push things forward.

biliousfrog
03-02-2010, 04:39 AM
BTW I really like that second view

ingo
03-02-2010, 05:21 AM
BTW I really like that second view

You don't have to ;) Well my main problem are not the clients, my problem are all the other people around like architects, graphic artists, real estate agents, means all people that dont have to pay for the pictures ... they try to "help" my client with the decision for a good picture.

With that project especially the graphic artists that make the brochures and the website were the problem. They gave me the proportions and sizes of the pictures and are responsible that all buildings on the overview get the same light, so no future buyer can prefer one of the buildings.

BTW, no DOF because i used a 35 mm wideangle lens.