ingo

I agree, ArchiCad modells are always a nightmare, although its getting better. I do model with FormZ too, solid modelling at its best. For other modelling i use LightWave, because its easier for more organic stuff like vegetation and so on. ArchiCAD, AutoCAD and Max are no option for me, way to pricey. Hmm max.m, if you don't want to learn a new program why do you post the question in the general discussion forum ??

The work for Vray users may now got a bit easier, but will it change the industry just because even now Vray has a realtime previewer ? I think no, i work now for around 3 years with a realtime previewer (FPrime for LightWave) and it made changing things faster and easier, but i still have to test things and need the knowledge about lighting and texturing. And the clients use it to make now 4 changes/hour instead of only 2. Its a pretty nice and helpful tool, nothing more.

I am not sure about the 63 levels, i think Bentley changed that in the past. Otherwise Microstation users can easily read and write AutoCAD files, without any translation needed.

Bringing them coffee and donuts every now and then ??

It needs more work on the lighting and reflections, just get an impression here -> http://www.carlngray.com.au/panorama/qpac_city/index.htm

Okay i also wanted to fire myself, but my contract with me doesn't allow this. But seriously, in the last years in my area archviz was more integrated into the planning process than before, and since i am a studied architect i often have clients asking me for a suggestion (odd, i know). Thats simply because if you build the 3D model you obviously have a lot of knowledge about which details work and which not, and many architects are still not capable of thinking in 3d space. So i guess for an inhouse archviz guy the best thing to survive is to work more with other people, be it either in marketing or development. That makes you more "visible" and you look less like a guy hanging around waiting for the lay-offs.

Well i would suggest either Lightwave or Modo, C4D seems to expensive nowadays. And for LW you can get LWCad ( http://www.wtools3d.com/ ) for modeling and FPrime ( http://www.worley.com/ ) or Kray ( http://www.kraytracing.com/ ) for rendering, so no need for $$ Vray.

Hi Claudio, you don't need a tripod with an expensive head, it just helps you if you really want high quality pictures. Otherwise you can shoot manually and use a "simple" program like AutoPano ( http://www.autopano.net/ ), that works pretty well. Just look at the top of my old website at http://www.im-graphics.de/p/he.html , all photos under the menus were made that way. ingo alias ingo

Here is a thread about it from cgc

Well youre right nisus, one can say the critic in a nicer way. But otherwise i understand seismos frustration too when Jeff post the message against no support for illegal software but on the other hand does himself things like putting a cga frame above a new window from a different website or do deep linking, which as every serious webdesigner knows are illegal too. So i hope both sides calm down a bit and think a bit more before posting a message. Regarding the sponsoring of one sponsor only this is surely a nice opportunity, but on the other hand one have to take care that it fits well and doesn't distract other people from visiting the website. And as said in my messages before a vendor forum with paid access for the vendors to post their press releases or other messages will be an option too.

Well youre right, its much better to do it in your image editor, so you can easily fit it to your clients needs. I only use the nice tool called "corona" in Lightwave when i need a smoother look, because it renders in LW's 128Bit color space instead of the usual 32Bit. Much smoother and less banding visible, but you have to rerender the picture if looks not ok.

Hi Fran, thanks for the clarification with the pictures. I guess you meant the shadow from the wood (part of a children safety door ?) on the wall. Still no sun here, i guess nisus soaks up the sun in Belgium so we didn't get the sun here Do you use the area light only for the sun or also for the lights in the windows ? Compared to your photos i would also brighten up the sun spot on the floor on your renderings, i guess that will start to give your scene the wanted warm and fuzzy look, addditionally some warm yellow light reflection from the floor (without shadows ).

Hmmm....sadly we had no sun today, just a nice ambient fog light, so i can't look at it. Still a bit irritating for me to get a shadow from a nearly horizontal shining light while the sun shines from a higher angle. But if you insist on it

Airline tickets for the website ? Seriously you think about the cga as a whole, while we talk "only" about the website. So i'm not sure if i would see the website as a marketing tool for the rest of cga, ie leave it free, or if i would like the website to be a "professional" solution, means we should pay a monthly/yearly fee for access to the forums, or parts of the forums (fori ?). I guess if you do the last you will initially loose a lot of members, but time will tell. My main concern is that you now try to make the website nice for advertisers first, while on a paid website you can concentrate on your clients; and a special forum for advertisers with a special fee where they can post their ads would be an option too, and give the advertizers direct contact to the clients. Just my two european cents (= 4 american cents )

Hi Fran, i still don't understand the shadows on the wall, they come from a direct light, but since the sunlight ends in the lower right corner it can't be the sun. So if the shadows come from the lights you placed in the windows they should be nearly invisible, me thinks you should make them softer.