Jump to content

jwaustincrowe

Members
  • Posts

    11
  • Joined

Personal Information

  • Country
    Australia

jwaustincrowe's Achievements

Newbie

Newbie (1/14)

10

Reputation

  1. The best thing is when you see an Evermotion scene included in the folio work of people applying for jobs! (Or worse still, when we are being spruiked to by outsourcers....) I'm getting off topic here. Also, thanks for the tips - Design Connected and Model+Model are sweeet.
  2. Yeah! Nice quote*. Seriously. Doesn't that sum it all up though? Let's introduce into the competition the commissioned jobs versus non-commissioned. Then, let's get the results of each and hold them up to the customer and say "Well, you are used to seeing your Revit/ArchiCAD one-click export polished with these vray materials, (IES lights only a fistful of dollars more), only because you are only talking to us because you haven't got a photo because it hasn't been built yet." Then, we can show them what they, collectively, the customer, AREN'T asking for, and AREN'T getting, and say "Now, how about something a little more emotive/creative/interesting....?" Then, as an industry, we can go forward and push some boundaries. How do we go about getting this creative stuff into the mainstream? How do we convince developer/estate agent/builder 'X' to invest in the slightest piece of web or print space in which to put the avant-garde? Even if it is offered for free, as part of the mainstream work, it is treated as nothing more than an artistic amusement. Especially, before someone releases "Autoarchscenegenerator for ArchiCAD/Revit/Sketchup/MSPaint version 1"? Joe *I have to say that as far as quality stock 3D content goes, Evermotion is the best I know of.
  3. I tried to be more arty, but I keep getting my work rejected by my clients. Could the audience please help with this one? [ATTACH=CONFIG]43664[/ATTACH]
  4. As the originator of this thread, may I try to keep it on course? What is with the justification of 'spatial' being the main criterion? So, what, "considering viewer and camera"??? How does this make this an architectural visualisation? For the 'Elevated Brood' it was, as Nicholls states, a "Personal project from way back". So, pure fantasy. Totally cool and moody, mind you, and would look great in a modern nature park, but, sadly, pure fantasy. Cool, if you can convince a client to say "Er, okay, you can make that fantasy pic if you WANT, but really we need x,y, and z. A post-apocalyptic image of the country club we are proposing would, er, um, be NICE, so make it if you like, but we really need something more mainstream. I've seen your work in making global meltdown scenes, but now, how about something that JUST DOES WHAT IT IS SUPPOSED TO, THAT IS, REPRESENT THE ARCHITECTURE!" I think that is far more to the point.
  5. If it is atypical, why is it in the awards, then? There has been magnificent work in the past, not being ashamed of achieving the aim of showing a representation of buildings. http://www.home-designing.com/2009/09/architectural-visualizations (Shows previous award images - just one of the first googles to appear). So, what has changed? If CGA wants to mix it with the likes of KRob, then perhaps I'd suggest that there are more categories offered.
  6. I agree that they are 0.1% of the work ever done for arch viz. I think the sad thing is that most of the images in the award nominations list are nothing like the images posted in the thousand plus pages of images in the gallery. What does this say about the CGArchitect panel's view of 99.9% of the work being done by their members? It shows contempt for the very work being done for the purpose of architectural visualisation using 3D as a medium. It says, "thanks everyone for posting their hard work, but it really means little if it doesn't look like these." Tell me if I am wrong, but I have never seen images like 'space flotsam', or whatever it may be called, posted to the galleries. If such an image were, then it would be directed to a more mainstream 3D art site. Joe
  7. Even those great works resemble buildings. How did Paul Nicholls' space image get in? Even the footnote states "Concept image for a film I made last year titled 'Royal Re-formation'". Again, nice pic. Not arch viz.
  8. Thanks, that's exactly what I'm saying. We have a saying, "you can't polish a turd", but we often have to. Again, they are nice images, but how an exploding 'whatever' in space is architectural visualisation is really stretching it. You could put any image into the competition and brand it as arch viz. And what is with the post-apocalyptic ferris wheel? Yes, it is an image of the built environment, or should I say, a post-the-built environment. But is it visualising architecture? I'd argue that some of these are not. The competition outline states: "...outstanding achievement in the field of architectural visualization." Could someone explain how an exploding spaceship is architectural visualisation? But, try to do it without the collection of arty-farty shiboleths that normally accompanies the question "what is art". Joe
  9. This is clearly a commercial work, and is magnificent for that purpose. Australia frequently has cloudless skies, and I picked it as Aus right away.(Also, putting a posh car like a Maserati in a pic is very un-Australian!) This seems to be a very honest image, refreshing for the industry.
  10. Hi, Not sure if this is the right place to post this, but there is no way most of those nominees for the still image award could be considered as 'architecture' images. They are nice, sure, but as an arch-viz professional, if I could find a customer who would commission such a work I would be in heaven! How about images that represent the state of the industry? Joe
×
×
  • Create New...