2 day project log

[Brian Cassil]

I've got this extrememly short amount of time to do two views of a new rural hospital and I thought I would take everyone along for the ride. They will probably not be really detailed and my in fact wind up being somewhat stylized. I'm bound and determined to NOT work really long hours on this. Here's my resource material: Two sketched elevations and a floor plan. Someones going to give me a very rough site plan in a little while. Wish me luck!

[Chad Warner]

I'm excited to see the progress!

[Brian Cassil]

Ready to start modeling.

[Tim Saunders]

brian,

suprisingly, lately, that is exactly what about 50% of my work has been lately. no problem modeling it up and making it look good for them, the problems i have been running into is the fact that this is very early in the design process and i have had to nearly re-model them after they have made pretty significant revisions.

[pmanahan]

Brian, I have a question about your setup. When iI setup a plane with a map on it the image is very pixelated. Is there a setting in Max to bump up the interface map resolution?

 

Thanks for doing this for everyone.

 

pmanahan

[Brian Cassil]

I've got enough modeling to get the views set up. I'm not as far as I wanted to be right now because of an unexpected meeting I had today.

 

the problems i have been running into is the fact that this is very early in the design process and i have had to nearly re-model them after they have made pretty significant revisions.

 

Oh yeah, it's just a part of the buis when you work for an archicture firm. By the way, we still need to do lunch... this week works out a lot better for me.

 

Is there a setting in Max to bump up the interface map resolution?

 

It depends a little on what video driver you are using in Max, but you should be able to go into your driver setting (customize - prefrences - viewports - configure driver) and make an adjustment to material texture size. By default it is pretty low so just crank it up to one of the higher settings and reload your scene.

[ecastillor]

lookin GoooD!

[Ernest Burden III]

I usually like really close views, get the feeling of being there. But those elevation sketches are really elegant. Maybe you'ld be better doing views from far back.

 

I admire the fast model. I cannot let go of sub-atomic accuracy (more truthfully the illusion thereof) to just get it done. You are doing great so far.

 

I would guess you will have materials that match the hills (that magenta-red stone, or the golden one?), so your model looks too 'hot' to me. I know, prelim colors, but with a short clock the sooner it starts to resemble a final the better. So it may be a good time to get the materials set.

 

Maybe go with a specular-less render. Do away with the shading, let it render with pretty flat tones, like you painted it. Then do the background in a similar look.

 

Or not. You'll be fine.

[Brian Cassil]

Well I got a late start today because of my continued fight with a flooding basement. Here's an update though. I think I've got all the detail modeled that I'm going to get. The only thing I'm missing is some scoring in the stucco walls (I hate modeling that!).

 

I need to do some site work reeeeaaaaly fast. I've got a thumbnail sketch to go from now.

 

So it may be a good time to get the materials set.

 

I agree, if only I knew what they were. I've been trying to nail the designer down all morning about that. I do agree about getting them going soon but for some reason I have a hard time getting into that habbit. I guess it's just my personality that once I start one phase, I have to finish it before I move on to the next. But I am trying to force myself to do it on other projects.

 

As far as the views go there was a specific request: one overall view, and one close up view, so here's what I've come up with. If anyone has input on improving them, now is the time to hear it.

[Ernest Burden III]

As far as the views go there was a specific request: one overall view, and one close up view, so here's what I've come up with. If anyone has input on improving them, now is the time to hear it.

 

sump pump: about $150

 

Views: perfect. move on.

[Brian Cassil]

sump pump: about $150

 

Actually for the one I need it's about $400. But I think I have another better solution anyway.

 

As it turns out, I've got another day to work on this... apparently it only needs to be mailed out tommorrow by the end of the day. So I may end up taking this a little farther than I first thought.

 

I ended up getting the materials sorted out before I got to the site. I realise that some of the windows in the overall view are too dark, in fact I want to make some adjustments to the glass in general. I may add some more "wear and tare" to the roof as well.

 

I'll be working a couple hours this evening on the site and then probably leave the rest for tommorrow.

[skogskalle]

lookin good... and im impressed by your speed!

 

I would change the sky in the closeup pic in your last post.... the colors are pretty cool, but the clouds are a little too much (IMO) - almost looks like theyre flames and the building is on fire....

 

really nice of you to make this thread - always good to se other artists workflow...

[Crazy Homeless Guy]

if time allows, the stone in the closeup view would look sweet with displacement mapping.

[Ernest Burden III]

I would change the sky in the closeup pic in your last post.... the colors are pretty cool, but the clouds are a little too much (IMO) - almost looks like theyre flames and the building is on fire....

 

I completely disagree. I think the sky in the closeup is spot-on. The dynamic arrangement and color work well with the perspective.

 

However, in the far shot the sky need to be flipped. It will feel more balanced if you do, and, look at the light/dark of the clouds--flipped.

 

Also with the farview--the glass is lost. Your solids have a good reading in sun/in shade, so do the same with the glass. Who cares what would 'really' happen. It must read. Make one side darker, experiment as to which (or pick one and run with it).

 

This is fun. Of course it is, it's you with the deadline, not me!

 

Looking good, BillyRay!

[mwhite]

Brian,

 

Thanks for sharing this project - I'm looking foward to seeing the next stage of renderings and the final work. This is a nice well rounded project with great concept hand sketchings, nice design, and a design that lends itself well to 3D visualization.

[Brian Cassil]

Ok, time is really winding down now, so here is my final wip for the close up view. This is straight out of the render with no ps. I would of course adjust levels, add the people over where thier shadows accur now and get rid of any artifacts. Also the GI is still pretty low on this image.

 

the stone in the closeup view would look sweet with displacement mapping.

 

Wouldn't it! I have spent some significant time trying to get displacement to look right in final-render with no luck. Actually, on planer, cylindrical, or spherical objects it works good but anything that has an angular edge to it looks awful.

 

I would change the sky in the closeup pic in your last post.... the colors are pretty cool, but the clouds are a little too much (IMO) - almost looks like theyre flames and the building is on fire....

 

I'm always taking heat for the skies I use but in this case I'm pretty attached to what I have in there already.

 

Ernest, I agree with all your points and I'm working on them now.

[Continuumx]

Ok, time is really winding down now, so here is my final wip for the close up view. This is straight out of the render with no ps. I would of course adjust levels, add the people over where thier shadows accur now and get rid of any artifacts. Also the GI is still pretty low on this image.

 

 

 

Wouldn't it! I have spent some significant time trying to get displacement to look right in final-render with no luck. Actually, on planer, cylindrical, or spherical objects it works good but anything that has an angular edge to it looks awful.

 

 

 

I'm always taking heat for the skies I use but in this case I'm pretty attached to what I have in there already.

 

Ernest, I agree with all your points and I'm working on them now.

 

 

Looks good Brian,

 

I have two recommendations:

 

Can you add a small bit of blur to the sky background to make it recede more from the building- add a bit of depth.

 

The landscaping near the shrubs and rocks in the foreground is very flat, a bit of Photoshop hair brush can give it some uneveness and a bit of height.

 

Overall, fantastic for two days of work!!!

[mwhite]

Nice job, in my opinion though the cars are not needed and really distract/interupt my view of the structure. Also, the roof line on the right side of the image seems to be a bit lost in the sky. Otherwise a very nice rendering under a short turn around time.

 

Brian,

 

Hope you don't mind but I really liked the image and lighting except for the cars and wanted to try my NPR techniques on your rendering with some people instead. If this is an issue please let me know and I'll remove it. Otherwise I thought I would share it and would appreciate all comments. I think the tree is to dark.

 

Mike White

[Tim Nelson]

I like the sky, but I think in this case it would be better with more of a solid background color to let the profile of the building have more of an impact.

 

Or maybe not solid, but just a little lighter on the clouds so they are not stuck all in that big mass right in the middle.

 

I like the color of your lighting and it matches the background well.

[Brian Cassil]

Thanks for all the suggestions everyone. I'll get to them in a minute, but first yesterday afternoon and evening:mad: were a nightmare. But in the end I've learned something that has been bothering me with the rendering GI for a long time. In certain situations, usually in exterior scenes with covered areas like the canopy in the close up image, whenever I render the high-res high GI setting image I would get these black spots that I just could not understand where they came from (this is using FR stage-1 by the way). In the past I've always had to just LOWER the GI settings to get rid of them wich really doesn't get rid of them but rather blends them in with each other creating a really not very good finished result. This time though I was bound and determined to get it figured out, and I did! The problem is I need to turn the glass to not send GI because it is always very dark in the diffuse and that's whats causing the mess. I've posted an example.

 

Ok, to your suggestions:

 

Can you add a small bit of blur to the sky background to make it recede more from the building- add a bit of depth.

Good idea, I even created a gradient mask so that the blur increases a little from top to bottom to enhance the effect. I made it very subtle though so it may not be showing up much in this low res version.

 

The landscaping near the shrubs and rocks in the foreground is very flat, a bit of Photoshop hair brush can give it some uneveness and a bit of height.

Yep, I was already planning on that... the previous images were posted with no PS work.

 

in my opinion though the cars are not needed and really distract/interupt my view of the structure.

I hate adding cars to views like the close up but my hands were tied on that one. Somebody above me insists they stay. I might do another version of the close up view for my own use that would be everything I would want it to be. Also, no prob with you doing the NPR study of it... in fact it's kind of fun to see.

 

I like the sky, but I think in this case it would be better with more of a solid background color

I guess I need to learn the value of subtlety a little better, because I am LOVING that sky, but I know not everyone does and it's something I hear a lot about the work I do.

 

I'm pretty pleased with the close up, but I think the overall view is a little lacking. I'm not quite sure what it needs though. What do you guys think?

[Brian Cassil]

It's funny how I notice things when I post an image on this forum that I wouldn't notice otherwise, because after looking at the overall image I saw that the trees were waaay to green. Here's an update.

[skogskalle]

hey brian!

 

still think another more subtle sky would be better, but it all comes down to personal taste... and I have to say that its nice to see an architectural exterior that doesnt have the old standard sunny-day-light-blue-slightly-cloudy sky too - so keep the one you got, its a cool and personal style!

 

the closeup view is really nice, and for the short time youve worked on it, I dont think it could be any better. very nice work!

the other view is good too...

//

[ecastillor]

hey brian!

 

still think another more subtle sky would be better, but it all comes down to personal taste...

//

 

I have to agree on this one...the sky makes the image look a little weird..

 

But i also agree is nice to see a different aproach than the regular sunny D

[Brian Cassil]

I promise that the next image I post will have a more subtle sky... just so I can say I've done it that way once. I guess I have always wanted to use clouds as a part of the composition to draw the viewers eyes where I intend to. Anyway, thanks everyone for all the feedback, it was very helpfull.

[jophus14]

I know your still working on the image, but the left side of the image (mainly the building itself) is sunny and bright, but I believe that the sun is way on the right behind the hill. Maybe i'm wrong.......Great image regardless. I wish I could work this fast.