Professional Architectural Visualization

[ubersubtle]

Hello all,

I am a digital artist who wants to learn about Architectural Visualization. I learned of this forum from the Vray forum, where I posted the fallowing questions:

 

1) Is the majority of 3D Architectural Visualization done “in-house” or out sourced to a 3D firm?

 

2) What do you work from most of the time, an AutoCAD file, a technical drawing, Concept Art, Photograph, or something else? If you do work from some type of technical drawing or AutoCAD file, is there a standard, something that a person who wanted to do this should know how to read?

 

3) What do you deliver most of the time, stills, video, or something else?

 

4) Why are high quality 3D architectural visualizations needed? Are they used only as a “selling” tool or do they serve other purposes as well?

 

5) What is the demand for this kind of work? In other words If you work directly for an Architectural firm would you be doing 3D full time or would you be more likely to be handling all of the Graphic tasks: Web, Print, etc. as well as 3D when it is needed?

 

I’m sure there is more than one answer for these questions, but I know nothing about this industry so any information, be it from a veteran or a novice, would be helpful. I know that whoever does this work professionally is probably very busy; I want to say that your comments and time are appreciated.

 

Thank you

[Tim Saunders]

i'm no expert, but this much i do know:

 

1) in my small city there are 5 big firms, 3 have in-house illustrators the other 2 out source. many smaller firms and i only know of 1 that has a superior viz team (who are also architects). so over all my guess is out of the illustrators in my small state, i would say 50/50.

 

2) personally, 60% cad drawings, 30% hand drawn elevations, 5% photos, 5% sketched perspectives.

 

3) 70% stills, 5% animations, 25% "come over to my computer and lets design this element in 3d."

 

4) my guess is 70-80% of my renderings are for jobs we have allready been awarded, and 20-30% are to win a job. we mainly use it to see if the client likes what we are designing. they can't understand a 2d elevation.

 

5) depends on the size of the firm. with reference to the answer to q#1, those firms who have full time 3d guys, we do it all day long. usually we have either marketing poeple or graphic artists handle the photoshop layout of presentation boards and coloring plans and elevations, etc. it is not uncommon for an intern or a drafter to work into doing renderings for a small firm or even some of the larger ones.

[ubersubtle]

Thank you for the response. That was good informaion and helpful to me.

I have a fallow up question. If I was going to use Max to do a precise architectural scene I would probably start by snapping splines down on to a grid from the top view, and then extrude them. If I had a bitmap of a floor plan, I would probably open it in Max and trace over it. My question is:

 

How do you work from a cad file? Do you make a bitmap from it? Do you import it and just freeze it to use as reference only, or do you actually use part of the AutoCAD file to make the Max scene – You know like convert the “AutoCAD whatevers” to editable splines and meshes?

 

I would think that to be forced you use someone else’s geometry imported from another program, instead of making it all yourself in Max, would be problematic- but if this is “how it’s done” I wonder if there are any tutorials that outline the import/conversion process and any place to get AutoCAD 2D files to practice on?

 

Thanks again for the info

[jsf]

Use the File Link Mangager to bring a .dwg or .dxf file into 3ds Max.

 

You will find the File Link Manager in the Utilities Tab (of the Command Panel) under the More button.

 

To work efficiently don't bring large Autocad files into Max, they with slow your ability to create, edit and navigate in the viewports. Instead create a throwaway DWG file that can be updated as you work. For example if you are creating interior walls only link the floor plan layer you need. When you are done modelling that element, delete that layer from your DWG file and replace it with another layer, such as your exterior elevation view, and then RELOAD the link.

 

Generally it is better not link the DWG to 3ds Max because you will lose linked geometry when the DWG file is detached. If you want to keep linked geometry in your scene use the Bind function.

 

Walls can be easily created with closed splines that are extruded or a solid like a box, both can be converted to Editable MESH or POLY and modified on a Sub-object level.

 

Use object snaps and axis constraint to manipulate objects and sub-objects.

 

Finally name your objects and use selection sets this will give you ready access to objects in your scene.

[Nats]

Use the File Link Mangager to bring a .dwg or .dxf file into 3ds Max.

 

Walls can be easily created with closed splines that are extruded or a solid like a box, both can be converted to Editable MESH or POLY and modified on a Sub-object level.

 

This I take it is assuming you build the model in 3dsmax rather than AutoCAD - dont you find 3dsmax is quite inaccurate for architectural modelmaking? I suppose working to the nearest 10mm would be acceptable for most models though but you dont seem to be able to draw lines rectangles etc to certain dimensions in the same way as you can in AutoCAD - seems that all of the accuracy comes from adjusting the size afterwards. Grids seems to play a large part in 3ds whereas in AutoCAD theyre not too important.

 

So heres the crunch question then - which is the easiest and fastest way of working (ie as a professional to save time and money) - doing the 3d model in AutoCAD first or creating the model using extruded lines in 3dsmax? And which software would be most intuitive to someone coming from a 2d CAD background?

 

Nats

[notamondayfan]

i personally use vis, and build the whole model in there. i import the cad drawings and use them as templates, and use the snap tool to accutately position things. i find i make up in time using vis, especially when it comes to texturing, as i use sub object materials a lot, which i set up as im modeling.

also ive tried using cad models created before i started at this practice, and i find it more hassle trying to adjust and modify models.

as for accuracy, it isnt as important as cad drawings, the client isnt going to notice if the wall is 10mm out of place, they r more likey gonna notice poor texturing and lighting.

[SunGlare]

which is the easiest and fastest way of working

if u have autocad background,

try to model it in autocad, solid modeling comes very handy, build blocks whenever u can, include sepate layers for each material inside, purge scene at the end.

file link with MAX/VIZ engine, aply materials, sky, mapping, u can use your blocks now as a instace of many blocks in your scene, meaning: open one of the blocks-apply materials-close block, and all the blocks where uptaded the same way. very accurate. i'm using this feature for lamps, door knobs, and many many small parts that are multiplied.

Yes, u have to come back to autocad and edit your source, if you want make any changes, but after refreshing your viz scene all the materials stays.

so use autocad, take adventage of viz.

 

 

 

simply I'm not buying quotes like

the client isnt going to notice if the wall is 10mm out of place

i'm working on a software that gives me 8 digits after zero of accurancy, why not make use of it?

 

i believe that interior designers are in great peace with 3dsMAX, but as an architect cant afford to being pointed for inaccuracy.

[jsf]

This I take it is assuming you build the model in 3dsmax rather than AutoCAD - dont you find 3dsmax is quite inaccurate for architectural modelmaking? I suppose working to the nearest 10mm would be acceptable for most models though but you dont seem to be able to draw lines rectangles etc to certain dimensions in the same way as you can in AutoCAD - seems that all of the accuracy comes from adjusting the size afterwards. Grids seems to play a large part in 3ds whereas in AutoCAD theyre not too important.

 

Snaps will provide the accuracy you are looking for in 3ds Max/Viz.

The magnet symbol in the main toolbar with the number 3 (or 2, or 2.5) next to it will toggle your snaps on and off. Right clicking that button will open the standard snaps window where you can set snap to endpoint, midpoint vertex, etc.

 

Axis constraints will restrict your movement orthogonally along the x,y,z, axis.

(this is located in the options tab of the grid and snaps settings popup)

 

And using the lock selection toggle, (the padlock symbol located under the timeline) will keep your object selected as you move, rotate, or otherwise transform it.

[3D_IC]

I too disagree that accuracy doeasn't matter in 3d models.

 

I'm backing Autocad for modelling

[Brolloks]

Accuracy in the design yes, but not accuracy in Real World Measurements. A Perspective has no dimension and you can often get away with small errors. It's called Artist Impression or Artistic License

[3D_IC]

try telling that to the architect who designed the project, and who eats and sleeps every mm of the design.

[Brian Cassil]

in my small city there are 5 big firms

 

It is worth mentioning that a "big" firm for Salt Lake means over 40 people. Which is still a small firm for most cities. A truly big firm would have hundreds of people spread across many cities, and would certainly have a staff of people dedicated to visualization. However, even they do hire free lance artists or visualization studio's from time to time to do really high end work that they feel the full time staff either would not have time for or the ability to do.

[JamesTaylor]

Accuracy in the design yes, but not accuracy in Real World Measurements. A Perspective has no dimension and you can often get away with small errors. It's called Artist Impression or Artistic License

 

 

They seems like very rash comments, accuracry in the design and accuracy in real world measurements are, surely, inexplicable linked. If you are contracted / employeed to create a visualisation of an architects design then a wall, stair tread or any other element that is specified as being XXXmm long should be visualised at XXXmm long, not XXX+XXmm

 

Secondly, of course a perspective has dimernsion, it is the dimensions of the model you are rendering which is inturn the representation of the building the architect has designed and detailed. There are more and more pieces of software that can be used to calculate measurements from perspective images, we all know that the further away something appears in perspective the smaller it becomes etc. which again relates back to dimensions.

[FlytE]

They seems like very rash comments, accuracry in the design and accuracy in real world measurements are, surely, inexplicable linked. If you are contracted / employeed to create a visualisation of an architects design then a wall, stair tread or any other element that is specified as being XXXmm long should be visualised at XXXmm long, not XXX+XXmm

 

lest the architects get sued for producing misleading information on the look of a scheme which incidentally HAS happened in the past....

 

One thing I will say is that autocad is better at handling alot of information in DWG form than viz. This pretty much goes without saying but when you consider a survery drawing of an existing building that you wish to model over, (which generally will contain alot of information) viz will choke on the size of the dwg 'template' whereas autocad will handle the same file with relative ease. Generally speaking im a viz user, but there are numerous benefits to using autocad which are hard to ignore....

[IHAB]

i beleave its time to 3D to take the lead in the design process ,

3D model is to be made firstly with the approx. dimms. , adjusting shots

finalizing the model then the correct architectural plan is the final output of the process..

[FlytE]

Yes I think thats the way things will go as well. You should check out the revit site, the video overview shows demonstrates what you are talking about:

 

http://download.autodesk.com/global/revitbuilding/interactiveoverview/Autodesk_Revit_Building.html

[IHAB]

Thanks for the link;)

[exception]

Yes I think thats the way things will go as well. You should check out the revit site, the video overview shows demonstrates what you are talking about:

 

Yes, 10 years ago archicad could already do it. The problem with archicad/revit and BIM's is that they're easy for standard stuff but almost impossible for out of the ordinary things...

[tecton3d]

I too disagree that accuracy doeasn't matter in 3d models.

I'm backing Autocad for modelling

 

I agree... you gotta love that high Floating Point Precision a real modeling (not visualization) software gives you.

[e-YELLOWCABS.COM]

...i'm not so sure that 3d is ready to take control over design...

Being architect and "3d operator" as you want to name it, i see no

opposition in the 2 jobs! The 3d model is there only to check what we design, supposing that we're unable to imagine what we create!!!

after the sketch, we draw sections and plans: this is the ultimate representation of SPACE: an architect works on volume, space and light, no more, no less. The 3d tools are the reflect of our modernity, the concept of

"perpective" in the 15 century was the reflect of THEIR modernity...

[FlytE]

Yes, 10 years ago archicad could already do it. The problem with archicad/revit and BIM's is that they're easy for standard stuff but almost impossible for out of the ordinary things...

 

It is a shame. ArchiCAD was well ahead of its time when it tackled the subject of BIM... I dont really think the profession/community was ready for it at that time. Autodesk held off and later on pushed BIM at a time when people were more understanding or accepting of it, effectively leapfrogging ArchiCAD...

 

However it was one of the biggest misconceptions in the industry that you cannot use BIM for anything other than standard buildings - it can be used to any degree of complexity if you are accomplished enough with the software.

[STRAT]

Hello all,

I am a digital artist who wants to learn about Architectural Visualization. I learned of this forum from the Vray forum, where I posted the fallowing questions:

 

1) Is the majority of 3D Architectural Visualization done “in-house” or out sourced to a 3D firm?

 

2) What do you work from most of the time, an AutoCAD file, a technical drawing, Concept Art, Photograph, or something else? If you do work from some type of technical drawing or AutoCAD file, is there a standard, something that a person who wanted to do this should know how to read?

 

3) What do you deliver most of the time, stills, video, or something else?

 

4) Why are high quality 3D architectural visualizations needed? Are they used only as a “selling” tool or do they serve other purposes as well?

 

5) What is the demand for this kind of work? In other words If you work directly for an Architectural firm would you be doing 3D full time or would you be more likely to be handling all of the Graphic tasks: Web, Print, etc. as well as 3D when it is needed?

 

I’m sure there is more than one answer for these questions, but I know nothing about this industry so any information, be it from a veteran or a novice, would be helpful. I know that whoever does this work professionally is probably very busy; I want to say that your comments and time are appreciated.

 

Thank you

 

 

 

answering from a personal point of view -

 

1) in our firm we do 80% in house, and about 20% sourced out when we're too busy.

 

2) i work from all of the above mentioned as per normal. generally, autocad DWG plans, sections and elevations are the material i start out with. i like to print these out to scale onto paper, then scale off with my ruler to start a fresh new 3d drawing.

 

3) 85% of what i deliver is stills. 15% animations. the stills are generally A3 colour prints and the anims are usually MOV files.

 

4) read my web site description. i give a full detailed list of why archi cgi is a benefit. (link in sig )

 

5) i work full time in a firm drawing pretty 3d pictures/models all day. it's generally a full time job for a single in-house guy. I can also pick and choose any after hours private work i do. work is pretty plentyfull in my part of town. but then, the bigger and better your reputation and experience the easier it is to find work.

 

 

in general, it's a great proffession to be in, but you WONT get rich quick and thats garanteed!!!!

 

it's taken me over 15 years to really start to enjoy the fruits of my labour.

[tdarcy]

Hey Strat I think you're living my life.....HEHE

 

Cheers

TD

[FlytE]

ever seen fight club?

[IHAB]

Yeah,(the movie you mean?)