architect vs. artist

[max]

Hello,

 

Me and a few friends recently started a 3d architectural illustration company, we are all animators/cg artists. We have limited knowledge in architectual design. I've been reading a few postings on cg architect, and ive noticed that there are quite a few companies that only have an artistic background. I feel that when it comes to the kind of work that we do, having knowledge in computer generated graphics/photo realism, and providing an accurate representation of the particular property that you are virtually creating is what architects/contrators/developers essentially pay for. As for now im planning on taking a few course to gain more knowledge in the technical side of things.

 

I need some advice on this topic....thanx for your time.

 

Max

[Ernest Burden III]

ive noticed that there are quite a few [rendering] companies that only have an artistic background. I feel that when it comes to the kind of work that we do, having knowledge in computer generated graphics/photo realism, and providing an accurate representation of the particular property that you are virtually creating is what architects/contrators/developers essentially pay for.

Traditionally most renderers have been architects--many licenced. People who came into the field through art are the minority. My father was an architect who decided to give up design in favor of illustrating. I had no interest in architecture, but in being an illustrator. I wanted to do technical and sci-fi work. So I ended up in architectural rendering by an accident of employment. I did find it was a place to use technical interests, and that led me into computers to be even more accurate. I've gone too far, unfortunately.

 

You can know art and you can know computers, but what you NEED to be an architectural renderer is the ability to understand what-the-hell architects are saying. You must know what they mean by mullion without having to ask 'what's a mullion'? You must be able to read blueprints (aka CAD files), understand orthographic projects and scale and the various graphical conventions of the AEC business. You must also be able to figure out what the client actually wants--which is not always what they say. That comes with practice, but is never an exact science.

 

So the single most important thing: you must be at least conversant in archi-speak.

[STRAT]

EB hit the nail on the head. i've personally interviewed cg artists for our firm with no previous architectural experiance - they new not what a mullion was, or a barge board, or a gable ladder. basic knowlege. needless to say they never got employment with us.

 

also, an architecturally trained mind can 'visualise' 3d buildings in their minds as soon as look at a set of flat 2d drawings. you need to 3d sketch in your head.

 

and how many non architects can understand an architect's scribblings (by that i mean tech drawings)? it's like trying to read a doctor's hand writing.

[quizzy]

I did 6 years of architectural engineering, and then went into the animation business. Did some mainstream animations for television, feature films, company ID's, etc.. Then I worked at an architect for 2,5 years. And now I'm working as a full-time architectural visualizer/animator/company owner/hobby-(qu)ist. Many cg architects I know are licensed architects...

So Max, get your architectural and engineering skills up to date/level..

[nisus]

Hi all,

 

I agree on most previous comments, but imho those cover only a part of why one needs architectural training. I'll explain...

 

Sure one has to be able to read plans, talk 'archi', understand construction well, but most of the time architects also want a kind of design aid. In my experience the outcome of an architectural design is hardly what the architect imagined and more often than not the client (architects) wants us to 'correct' the design to his feelings. This can range from change of design (volumetric design), material choice or color design.

In visualisation, not all details are designed yet too, so the visualiser has to be able to 'solve' (and brief) design irregularities.

Most of the time we (visualisers) understand the design better than the architect who is more involved in the construction and selling. Therefor it is our task to aid.

 

To fill this gap one has to think like an architect, understand the way how they tell stories, understand there milestones and design strengths, know how to sell the archi-way etc...

 

In fact, one has to be an architect to understand the full range of architectural design imho.

 

Not to say artists don't do a great job of course, but there are so many preoccupations that architects have embodied that even the slightest abscence of familiarities work against artists without an architectural knowledge. It's like talking a different language where one is not able to fill in all unspoken gaps.

 

So basicly, it's not really about being able to read plans or understand construction well, as this is expected. It's not like a shopping list where one has to gather all qualities. Even managing all things on the list prepares you for only about 10% of the job. It's all about the unspoken, common language of architecture, architectural design and visualisation.

 

So being a great artist does not really fills in the need of architectural visualisation. It takes about half a second to see whether an architect or artist made the visualisation. Hard to explain why of course, but that is what the UNSPOKEN is all about.

 

rgds

 

nisus

 

 

my advice: Get an architectural training or you will end up fighting windmills.

'Sure one can (theoritecally) try to win the Tour the France (cycling competition) using an ordinaire city-bike, but is it worth trying to compete professional cyclists?)

 

[ June 01, 2003, 04:46 AM: Message edited by: nisus ]

[supaslims]

Great topic!

 

I have my own sad story of artist v architect...pls bear with me

 

About 2 years ago i completed my masters degree in fine art and like alot of students who study contemporary art i found myself lost once out of the "institution" in terms of making a living. But i was one of the lucky ones, much of my artwork was digitaly based so i had a working knowledge of PS, Illustrator etc, and was luky to pick up work from a graphic design firm who saw my masters as being a good thing and not seeing me as over qualified or some crap!

 

Then after a couple of years there i decided to put my many years of tinkering with LightWave into

good use, there was a local viz company who were looking for Microstation and LW users to join their company. In the time leading upto that i had been puting togeather a portfolio, getting tips from a architecture student i share house with and looking here ofcourse and managed to put togeather a half decent portfolio in a relatively short time. I got an interview the day after i faxed my resume and went in on the following morning. Sitting there in the makeshift reception area i watched my prospective boss modelling away on lightwave while on the phone with what i guess was an architect, because...i had absolutely no clue what they were talking about!!! my prospective boss later told me he was also a registered architect.

 

 

Needless to say i didnt get the job i wanted, my interviewer said that my lack of architecture background was a HUGE downside and admitted that they would have never have hired me to do there archi work but that they wanted me to come in and model furniture and fixtures etc on a contract basis.

 

Anyway i do have a question! :ebiggrin: I am still very interested in this field and am wondering if an intensive drafting course at my local colledge, or something similar etc will give me enough knowledge to communicate with an architect?

 

I just cant see myself going back to school again for any significant ammount of time orangecry

[kid]

Originally posted by supaslims:

Anyway i do have a question! :ebiggrin: I am still very interested in this field and am wondering if an intensive drafting course at my local colledge, or something similar etc will give me enough knowledge to communicate with an architect?

Given your background in fine art you'll probably have no problem understanding the architect when they are talking about the intangible parts of architecture (like mood, atmosphere, composition, etc) - that's the part of the conversation where a lot of arm waving and making shapes with your hands goes on , but you might get lost when they translate that conversation into the physical elements of a building. A drafting course would help you understand this technical side of the conversation.

 

But there's still the challenge of bringing the artistic side and the technical side of the conversation together if you know what I mean...

 

 

...or you could just hire a translator :ebiggrin:

[Richard McCarthy]

It's relatively "easy" to use all kinds of renderer nowaday to get particular effect (photo-realism, sketchy, toon..etc) with just press of button so to speak. And there are more and more general CG ppl coming into Architectural Rendering field. The way I see it, is that unless you put in some serious time learning all the manners of the architectural / construction elements, chances are, you won't get the job you want in this field. Architects are always short of time and they DO NOT want to spent time explaining technical terms to you what certain architectural elements looks like. Sometimes, this happen too, when they request 3D sectional view, or exploded view, and you are required to visualise it. Unless you have sufficient knowledge in construction, you are not going to be able to understand heads or tail of a lot of sketch / C.D. drawings architects send to you.

 

There are some books that are going to help beginners coming to this field :

 

Building Construction illustrated 3rd edition, 2001, Francis D.K. Ching; John Wiley and Son Inc.

 

A Visual Dictionary of Architecture, 1997, Francis D.K. Ching; John Wiley and Son Inc.

 

Hope these help

[nichchris]

I think it's really simple.. and it has already been (indirectly) stated in most of the posts in this thread. An architect must be first and foremost an Artist first.

 

And from the replies I have seen here I am quite conviced their are quite a few real Artist Architects on this forum without having to mention any names.

 

nichchris

[Ernest Burden III]

I am still very interested in this field and am wondering if an intensive drafting course at my local colledge, or something similar etc will give me enough knowledge to communicate with an architect

No, school only puts off the inevitable.

 

I came into rendering quite by accident. I was a high-school art student (NY has specialized high schools, has two for artists) and needed a job. My father got one of his renderer friends to hire me to do entourage. But he taught me how to set up a perspective so I would be more useful. I picked up the 'archi-speak' as a result of working in an architectural rendering business. This was all before I was 18, by the way. And since I was working for an Aussie, Friday was pub-day, didn't get much done Fridays.

 

So I would suggest getting a job in a rendering environment doing whatever you can to be working there, but make it clear to the employer that you want to be learn the 'trade-talk', even if you have to spend some time off the clock to learn it. You will pick up in a week or two what a semester wouldn't teach you. Get paid to learn, not the other way around. Your motivation and hard work are your tuition

 

There are some books that are going to help beginners coming to this field :

 

Building Construction illustrated 3rd edition, 2001, Francis D.K. Ching; John Wiley and Son Inc.

 

A Visual Dictionary of Architecture, 1997, Francis D.K. Ching; John Wiley and Son Inc.

Those are good, but go for Mr. Ching's Architecture: Form, Space and Order VNR

I have always felt that book is a BA in architecture in one book.

[Crazy Homeless Guy]

the technical issues are important, but you are expected to know those. just as important, and harder to grasp are the elements of good design. there are several rules that govern the type of details used, the materials, the feel of the space, ect... i would recommend taking a couple of architectural design classes as well as a technical class. the design class will help you understand the thought process behind the design, and what is trying to be accomplished.

[kid]

Originally posted by Ernest Burden:

And since I was working for an Aussie, Friday was pub-day, didn't get much done Fridays.

Yep, we have a great system.

 

Where I used to work there was a great pub just down the street, and a few of our consulting engineers were located across the road from us so we would quite often drink together. I think I learned more engineer babble/lingo in the pub on Fridays than I did in any formal meetings.

[ferox]

hi max

 

1. Buy a copy of the construction/building standards for your region, state or country. Construction knowledge, esp. the structural engineering aspects of building, is quite straightforward. In the interim (as a recently-started company), sub-contract the working details to an architectural draughtsperson. There are usually surplus freelance cad-jockeys, hire them to work on the details, using your office cad-station. You can also learn from their skills/knowledge as well. Hire skills u dont have (that's why architects hire u....)

 

(2) Focus on your lighting skills and knowledge - both artificial and natural. If there is a local branch of the illumination engineers society (ies), join it.

 

(3) Also focus on the visual relationship of the building to the site, and the landscape. There is more to architectural visualisation than the decorated shed. GIS is a complementary skill that is well worth acquiring; esp. if you are contemplating services for professional engineers and planners. Also helps with terrain modeling and other visual 3dfx.

 

business is fun.

[garethace]

I would like to concentrate on something here, which is quite important to know. Contrast the following statements:

 

Those are good, but go for Mr. Ching's Architecture: Form, Space and Order VNR

I have always felt that book is a BA in architecture in one book.

I get from Ernest's post, that he has developed/learned/grew as an artist through rubbing off of the people he met in practice.

 

However, because alot of architects, draughts people and engineers in building construction spend so long trapped in their office jobs - they rarely get out/deal with the physical environment around us. Ching's book about architecture, form and space is one of the better books to deal with interior spatial composition INSIDE a building. But I support also the views suggested here in this post, dealing more with the 'situation', environment, site of the building or development.

 

 

 

Also focus on the visual relationship of the building to the site, and the landscape. There is more to architectural visualisation than the decorated shed. GIS is a complementary skill that is well worth acquiring; esp. if you are contemplating services for professional engineers and planners. Also helps with terrain modeling and other visual 3dfx.

This statement is certainly very interesting too. Why, because, architects are becoming more involved nowadays than ever before in matters of urban planning etc. For a long, long time this was never the case. Projects like public housing, transport infrastructure, the city and how everything 'gels' together as one, was handled by politicians, buerocrats and people called 'planners'.

 

However, that area has begun recently to level visual presentation for discussion with the public, other designers etc, etc. My post here tries to deal with that a bit.

 

Planning goes on-line

 

A very good on-line resource to give you a 'feel' for 'planner-speak' aswell as some architect speak even, is -

 

http://www.cyburbia.org/

 

Perry's corner and lots of other forums there. My own posting here, tries to show perhaps how cgartists can help to show the building in context very well.

 

Site and building.

 

[ June 01, 2003, 02:06 PM: Message edited by: garethace ]

[nisus]

Hi supaslims,

 

Imho following any technical draughting classes is but a slight help to understand arch-talk. Subscribe in a DESIGN class to get you on that extra level needed.

 

rgds

 

nisus

[supaslims]

thanx for the replies!

 

hmmm, sounds like it's sumthin im just gonna have to do.

[ferox]

(supaslims) arch talk

 

(1) will it stand up?

(2) does it look ugly

(3) who's paying?

 

(1) architectural construction and working details.

if your job description requires these skills, then would recommend a recognised architecural draughtpersons course.

the issues are more than casual technical drawing; there are public safety issues, indemnity and liability issues; such issues deserve (let alone require) adequate training.

u need to make the connection between engineering and architecture. and with those skills, become a productive contributor to the building design process. if u are going to contribute to the construction decision-making process, dont wimp on the technical education. treat it with respect.

 

(2) God is in the details. leverage your MFA qualifications.

the archi firm recognised your aesthetic+3d skills with the offer to contract furniture and fixtures? i would accept that opportunity to freelance - plus u will be exposed to the architectural workflow;

 

(3) there are only three things to know in business:

getting the job

doing the job

getting paid for it

 

u already know the second one......

[garethace]

But whats unfortunate at the moment, is most great cg artists i know are either non-architects altogether or previously worked as a technical draughts person. The idea of the 'architect' himself/herself actually taking up cg tools to this extent is not happening. Well, i suppose, by the time you have got through years of architecture design training - it is more than time to stop training any more. To hire out help in cg, or whatever other expertise you need. Architects have too much to do after qualifying, to become established with firms or on their own - than to spend time learning about cg apps.

 

getting the job

doing the job

getting paid for it

That rule definitely applies to professionals who have spent a considerable chunk of their youth, becoming professionals.

[Sawyer]

WHAT!!!??

 

Friday is Pub day? I need to move. Always thought I would eventually move to EU someday but now I see it must be Australia - so be it.

 

Good stuff being said here. Really you need a technical background. More than just a curosry glance too, you really need to know what you are looking at. Any good artist can sketch a good looking house but you would need technical knowledge to sketch a house "CORRECTLY" from an architects plan.

 

And yeah then you need to be able to show form and grace and beauty.

 

Me I got into this stuff because I really don't like drafting. I got into drafting because I really don't like waiting tables. I thought that someday I could do residential design & after a few years it became clear that I would most likly never design. I do not have an Architectural degree (just 2.5 years community college for cad drafting) and I never will so I would most likely just draft till I got really good and then daft some more. I started looking into renderings and

saw that was a heck of a lot more artistic than what I was doing.