Jump to content

New business portfolio


philippelamoureux
 Share

Recommended Posts

Hi guys,

 

I'm at the point where I need to make some pretty renders for my business website. Since I have no pro work to display yet, I'll have to create some stuff from the ground up!

 

I'm no architect/designer, So I'm wondering if it's ok to replicate existing and even non-existing buildings in cg to display on my site. Like, a replica of a render I find very nice (if the building doesn't physically exist). Not sure if it's a fair practice... I currently work on the Tamayo museum, which doesn't exist, but has been rendered by someone else (Glesser group). I'm doing my own modeling/rendering, so it's going to look different but still... Should I ask permission, etc?

 

I also liked the Chair house, made by architect Igor Sirotov. I'm making my model based on his renders, since the building doesn't exist. Again, same dilemma...

 

Maybe I should just change my approach and stick to existing buildings...

Thanks

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Unless you work in-house for an architect, almost all of the jobs you will be getting will involve re-creating an existing design from CAD or sketches. So being able to translate from reference to 3d model is a good skill to show. Just make sure you credit the original designer in your image. So you could put in the image description, Chair House by Igor Sirotov.

 

However, the flip side is that everyone has something to compare your render to. So you'd better make it look good.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

By recreating someone's else artwork you will already subconsciously draw from its visual quality. You will also limit your understanding of (already degenerated) reality, which actual photography will let you do more thoroughly (this has no drawback whatever to visual style you choose to pursue, mimicking nuances of photography still lets you create any, even the most illustrative, it doesn't mean 1:1 as many often seem to assume).

 

Also, just as Scott said, in reality, most jobs are created from plans and drawings (some from sketches only), with no visual cue to take from. To present something that doesn't yet-exist in both meaningful and visually appealing is far harder than simply recreating visually another visual.

 

It also makes sense to tailor your portfolio to your future market. That might also mean researching them, which in case of architects, would mean engrossing in their culture slightly (if you're not from architecture school already, or former practicing architect) to understand what they try to achieve with their visual, not necessarily listen exactly how they would do it. The few MIR interviews (plus their website) is perfect inspiration about someone who is both in tune with their client's needs, but also offered unique way how to achieve those goals.

 

This of course applies to broad range of market possibilities, from competitions, to technically well-executed marketing for real properties, interior or furniture design, each with their unique culture and needs. There is vast opportunity for existence of very specialized niches today like never before. Focusing to draw your inspiration purely out of closed cgarchviz community will not let you see the broadness of possibilities. Lastly you must like what you plan to focus on, as you get the type of work you market yourself with.

 

So my advice is to always think more deeply, not jump straight into first idea that seems reasonable. It's rarely the most rational choice.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

I have another dilemma...well, kind of.

 

I almost finished my new Tamayo Museum renderings. I've modeled and did everything from low-res jpeg plans and reference images (renderings, since the building doesn't exist).

 

Let's say I want to put my renders on my website. I wonder if it's unfair to the architects, ROJKIND and BIG, to have theses renders that are not 100% representative of their design... (due to the lack of plans, specs etc). I had to decide for some of the materials etc. The essence of the building is damn close to the original plan but not 100% perfect.

 

Am I thinking too much ? or it's a legitimate question lol. Might just write, visualization attempt at X project by X architect. What do you guys think of that?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Since you have done the modelling, lighting, textures, post production etc. I would think it fair enough to just put your work on your website. You are not in the market to offer an architectural design service or in any way claim that you have come up with the general design work of the building. You will be offering your visualization service to people and that is what your work on the website will represent: To showcase your skills in visualizations.

 

If it was in your portfolio and used to apply some where, I think it is more relevant to state who has done the design and what you have done in the picture - but doing that on your (soon to be) professional site, would just look odd.

I guess you could credit them for the design, but since you have altered some of it and it is not used to enter an architectural competition I wouldn't bother.

Good architects borrow great architects steal - wasn’t there some one who said that? Give credit when credit is due though - I'm sure some one with professional experience regarding copyright etc can give you an better answer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I guess I'm a perfectionnist...I hate to model without knowing every details/dimensions. This time I had to rely on images. Lacks details of course. I can't stop fine-tuning my renderings even tho I know it's not going to be possible when I'll do paid jobs. I think I've lost count on how many time I've rotated my hdri just to get the right clouds at the right place lol... I'm gonna have to hit the render button for real eventually hehe!

 

I think you are right Jens... I'm gonna let it gooooo let it goooo!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
  • 5 months later...

Reviving a topic hoping for more clarifications.

 

I included a painting in my scene and I'm not sure if I have the right to do so. I'm going to email the artist. But when you think about it... Why I can't use an existing painting but I can use a Beolab sound system in my scene? When you think about it, both objects are not my work.

 

I also visualized an existing project. I tried to reproduce it the best I can but it's not 100% identical. I feel it's not ok to put it on my website because someone could say it's a bad representation of someone else's work. At the same time I made it to build a portfolio.

 

Copyrights and all that is really a grey zone for me right now. What you guys think about this?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...