Joel Gray

Quite a lot I would imagine, based on the number of architects I know that can't or won't draw without some form of CAD (even "redlines").

We're on the same page, David. The older people get the more they resist change - myself included. When I started in this industry, the guys using graphite and vellum were the "dinosaurs," now I'm the "dinosaur" because I know AutoCAD and didn't have any need or desire to learn Revit. And in other circles, 80s music is playing on the oldies station now! [face palm!]

I agree! If you know basic architectural detailing and dimensions (if not get a copy of Architectural Graphic Standards) then modeling from a hand sketch can be quite liberating and enjoyable... and fast!

Thanks for putting this list together! Colorado: www.joelgray.com

Thanks. Hmm, that's kind of a bummer. Not sure how to go back and search through the business conversations now.

The title pretty much sums it up. I was just curious where all those old posts went and if that sub-forum got removed because it wasn't getting enough traffic. Joel

Scott, I didn't condone the use of copyrighted material randomly acquired on the internet. You're reading too much into my comment and taking the question into a larger debate. If I'm a professional photographer taking pictures of the finished interior, and that interior happens to have a Jackson Pollock print on the wall, I don't see how that is any different than a virtual representation of the same space.

I would chalk this up to fair use as well. You're selling the interior design concept, not the artwork on the wall. I would equate it to cars in exterior renderings - it's highly unlikely an auto manufacturer will be gunning for you because their latest make and model are parked in front of your building. Joel

You're correct in that you're not going to get the same results between V-Ray and Mental Ray when it comes to using HDRs. This is one area that Mental Ray really suffers. V-Ray, on the other hand, generates really nice results in terms of lighting AND cast shadows from the Sun. In Mental Ray, you always have to supplement the HDR sky with a Sunlight source, if only to generate shadows, and the lighting solution is sub-par at best (and I'm a big fan of Mental Ray). I think the owner of Vizpark is located in the UK, so I'd give him some time to get back to you. I don't think he "went dark." Also, check out Peter Guthrie's Skies. People are asking the same question over there and some have offered different techniques for using HDRs in Mental Ray. I've yet to see a good workflow though. Joel

I can add to this conversation by backing up some of the data other people have shared. I use Squarespace for my website, it's minimalist, inexpensive and has robust features if you need them. As far as generating work from my website (as a result of a Google search), hardly any over the past 16 years, but whenever I make a new contact, that's where I send them so they can see my level of quality and personal style. It's also how I communicate my progress with clients - I create a password protected page for them where they can review progress images and download the final rendering(s). I landed a full time job through Twitter once, which was helpful back when the economy was really bad and architects were shutting down at a ridiculous pace. Once the economy started to improve I jumped ship and re-booted my business with a fresh new outlook and enthusiasm to make a go of it again. Business has been shaping up nicely ever since. Joel

I use 3ds Max but the principals should be the same. I'm guessing you have too few light samples in one or more of your lights and that's how you get the undesirable disco light effect. I've also had this happen with bright lights passing through glass objects. It's possible your light fixtures with the glass shades are causing this. Maybe try rendering without the light fixtures in the scene and if that's not the problem then check your light samples.

First and foremost, my understanding of Copyright law is that you are the sole creator of the rendering, therefore you own the copyright. Period. If you had been an employee of the architect and were paid on a work-for-hire basis then the copyright would belong to them. The fact that you put their logos or names on the rendering doesn't give them any copyright privileges unless you specifically added "Copyright 2016 So-and-so Architect." As for watermarking your images. Most people are ignorant about copyright law and will unknowingly use (steal) your work. My personal opinion is that a small watermark or copyright notice is appropriate and professional. Large watermarks across an entire image is distracting and cheapens your work (remember, this is just my opinion). A case could be made that if you're that sensitive about copyright, how difficult are you going to be to work with? Do you also have 20-page contracts and lawyers on speed-dial? I see my copyright mark cropped out and even cloned out of my images on occasion and it ticks me off, but I handle it with a polite call to the client and express to them how this hurts my business which in turn hurts my ability to do great work for them too (I've gotten a lot of new clients through the copyright watermarks on my renderings in the past). Also, if you're really, really awesome at what you do and your work is blatantly stolen and used in someone elses portfolio, your fellow CG artists will catch this and oust the offender in the equivalent of an online lynching by your peers. I've seen it happen over at CG Society quite a few times. The most important part of this post though is that you should never work for free. That in itself hurts the community and the people who work very hard to make a living doing this work. Joel

I agree with Francisco on all points, but you should experiment for yourself, Paul. You may find a new technique that works well, then you could share it with the community. Joel

People-N-Motion was the moving people library that got3D made. That collection is still available through Marlin Studios http://www.marlinstudios.com/ Joel edit: After looking at the product on the Marlin Studios site, I see that the people textures are quite small by today's standards. Just something to keep an eye out for.

You were right, I had to watch it twice. I'll probably watch again later too. Joel