Jump to content

How much Photoshop do you do?


heni30
 Share

Recommended Posts

I tend to do a lot mainly due to tight deadlines. Must be nice to have a couple of years like Alex.

 

Here's 20 minutes worth on a current WIP image where someone is asking how to make things more realistic.

 

building original.jpg

building entourage.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, it was a long day. The images were not meant to be literal - just to illustrate degree.

 

Like half the building being manipulated. Like how MUCH entourage do you use? How MUCH compositing do you play with?

 

How closely do you try to nail it with the 1st raw?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I tend to do a lot mainly due to tight deadlines. Must be nice to have a couple of years like Alex.

 

Here's 20 minutes worth on a current WIP image where someone is asking how to make things more realistic.

 

[ATTACH=CONFIG]53118[/ATTACH]

[ATTACH=CONFIG]53117[/ATTACH]

 

As much as necessary.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
i can't even tell if you are being serious or not to be honest

 

Not sure what was wrong with his question(?). His photoshop artwork there is in my opinion sometimes enough for some clients. If you ever tried work for such a client, it would be totally pointless embedding these elements in 3d. He would probably easily break your budget by 200%, this typical client. Sometimes the compositional effects from bright/dark and saturation factors will mean a whole lot more than making a dull and colorless evermotion 3d element with base in the Fansworth house or whatever it is called.

 

That said, if you do good initial work with the client, you would posess an "ok" on the composition before render, and charge the client if he starts asking for (big) compositional changes after you started post in photoshop. This way, both your client and you will have an easier ride.

 

To directly answer your question, I feel that I am doing too much photoshop, and with that I mean color correcting to achieve the last 30% which makes or breaks an image. If I came closer to that in the raw render, I would be happy. This would save me some time. It is probably me just choosing to photoshop it rather than spending a lot of test time perfecting it in 3d. I know that for the artistic touch, it needs a good amount of photoshop anyway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

I would spend about 1-2 hours on it and then come back to it the next day and get fresh eyes on it and spend another 2 hours. But with the right elements you should be able to get a nice look in PS. As far as your image, i would definitely do the trees in 3D to get some nice highlights. I would also clip the building on the bottom right out of the image, a bit disturbing to me. Maybe even do some sky replacement, and them pop the building out with some nice llights and reflections. I do spend some time in after effects to. Hope this helps!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 5 weeks later...

Man some of you can be savage ;). As a beginner, all of my favorite works range from average-great without post production. However, once processed they all end up being very good-top of the line work. I don't have enough experience but I would say at least half of the time I spent setting up the scene before I render would be spent in Photoshop. I particularly enjoy Photoshop because the results are almost always near instant and you can try many things in a short time frame.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The principal and Director of 3D at my firm would tell you that all you need from your base image is the right balance of materials and a solid response to light. By this he means that your reflection and specular quality of light are all compelling and that they don't seem out of balance. Composition must be sound and groundwork is set for the final story line. The rest can be and should be driven in your post production.

 

He is very low on his opinion of technical ability and very high on his opinion of artistry. He values great critical thinking and composition over anyone's ability render the perfect image.

 

I agree with him. A great image is a flexible one. A great artist can turn a mostly mid-range histogram into the most beautiful image you've ever seen.

 

Not that one can't be both technical and artistic at the same time.

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...