There is something very particular about this image. There is authorship here! Implied movement and the saturations of color give a sense of speed and aura. Alicja did a great job capturing street life in this image.
There seems to be a lack of leading the eye properly here. Remember the basics of leading the eye by form, color or contrast. Even though there are shadows represented, lighting seems amorphous.
There is no depth or heirarchy in this. There is an equal amount of contrast throughout so one doesn't feel the depth of space therefore there is a confused sense of scale.
The initial impression one gets upon viewing this image is that is feels more like an 'art installation' than an actual space. It has that ethereal 'Escher'-like feeling to it as well almost that THX 1138 'look'.
It was not easy to view this image because there are way too many things going on and too many little elements all over. It lack a sense of depth and dimension probably brought on my the lighting. Based on the shadows, the image is back-lit (menaing the light is coming from behind the building) but the relative brightness of the foreground areas betrays the lighting. In essence, there is conflicting information about the daylight situation in this image. If one is to actually take a picture of this space with the sun behind, you either have a high contrast image or open up your aperture to lighten up the middle tones and the shadow areas. In this instance the lightening up of the middle tones and shadow areas with the relative lack of contrast is disturbing. The purpose might be a 'high key' image but there are always reasons for doing a high-key instead of a low-key image and with the white palette being predominant, I think that a low-key lighting would have worked better and enhanced the depth that is there but not perceived.
Also it was quite hard to determine what the materials are made of in this architecture. There should be some hint or suggestion of 'actual' materials in architectural rendering because this is not purely illustration.
The scale of the tree in the right is off relative to the size of the building based on the height of the people on the background building. The trimmed hedges on the left are too boxy as well and lacks randomness on the edges to suggest an 'organic' quality. Even a perfectly trimmed hedge will have a bit of 'roughness' and uneveness and this can be easily remedied with either an alpha channel texture or a clip map. The traffic sign (ONE WAY sign) is a bit low relative to the roadway and realistically these signs are in the real world will be affixed to the lamp post on the left instead of constructing a new post just for it. This traffic signage also detracts from the entrance view.
Also the lack of perceptible shadows on the people on the ground floor is disturbing because they seem to float. This is specially evident on the left side above the VW beetle car. Do the cars on the road have to be all white? There are no visible 'usage' or 'wear' or marks on the roadway. This also makes the image pristine a bit. It needs some kind of weathering of dirt to sell this area as an active roadway.
The architectural design is intriguing and should have been inviting to the viewer but the perspective/camera view chosen makes the viewer 'distant' and detached from the scene. Also why is the entrance to the space do not have enough sidewalk space to the roadway? There are regulations and code that governs these and we do experience these things in real life without thinking about them but when we view something it registers immediately that something is off. Also if people could actually corss the street from there, there should be roadway markings to indicate a crosswalk.
The strength in this image alies in the upper 2/3 without the people and the roadway below. If you mask them off you can see that the image is fairly cohesive but with the lower 1/3 below it does not succeed as much. A touch of a clouds or even a hint of it surrounding the building on top would have made a better outline and would have given depth as well. You should be more aware of how the eye perceives a scene if not, be aware of how film captures life since most of the CG algorithms in use today used the camera as a standard model in evaluating rendered images.
Last edited by Arnold Gallardo; May 3rd, 2005 at 09:45 PM.
_ _ ______________ _ _
Visual Content Creator
Author:'3D Lighting: History,Concepts
Mostly this image feels like a collection of parts without anything binding them together. The lighting is a little too strong, and overall the image lacks depth and texture. The entourage needs more thought, and the people look very flat.
An eye-level camera for this would have been more engaging; and some carfeul thought to the environment would keep this from being so detached.
While well executed, I cannot figure out what ths picture is about. It's an assembly of parts that aren't well related. Every element has its own directional axis.
There's a plaza but no way to get to it, spiral stairs to nothing that can be understood, a spaceframe that hold up nothing, birds and no sky, a one-way sign on a two-way street. The lighting is very diffuse but with strong shadows on the road.
If the trees were darker, more contrasty it would help the vagueness of the plaza, and some sky color would help define the white architectural shapes. I do think the all-white cars is a great choice. It allows the cars to be interesting without stealing too much attention.
I just think you needed to make this picture less cluttered and more more defines as to what is going on. A strong, simple statement, like the architecture.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)