Private house vizualization

[bloomlun]

Here is a link to a house I'm visualizing for an architect:

 

http://shahardavis2.brinkster.net/1/4.html

 

they just told me on the phone:

"It is not good - it doesn't seem realistic it looks too good, too plastic, it should be older (more adult) and more serious"

 

what do you think I should do ?

 

they also said:

"maybe the lighting should be more dramatic and not have the scene evenly lit"

 

I don't really understand them

maybe someone can help me get into this architects head?

 

Last thing:

I sent them a desaturated vrsion and with more contrast:

http://shahardavis2.brinkster.net/1/5.html

 

 

I'm waiting to hear their comment.

 

please help me

[Paul Griger]

Hi bloom,

 

Myself, I prefer the second submission more than the first.

 

The first submission is too saturated, the second is better IMHO. The materials are still unrealistic or a bit surreal IMHO though. The purple stools, the purple shelving, the red cab fronts all seem a bit over the edge to me.

 

There are some areas that the modeling or materials look unfinished to me, which may the case since this is a WIP. The stairs that are butted up to the glass wall, I’m not sure how they attach to the windows, or is there a stringer that we can’t see? There is no tile in the walk in shower, the glass rail at the stair opening has to support balusters. But this is a WIP, so maybe these things are to be addressed down the road.

 

RE the materials; if the architect has something in mind, he should give you a schedule with the materials called out for all of the objects. Otherwise he should give you a picture of what he has in mind.

 

No one can get "into his head" but him.

 

But if he wants you to keep presenting options to him till something looks good, that’s a waste of your time. You’re an artist, not a mind reader.

 

You should have him sign off on all of his specific requests; anything not covered in his specs is up to your discernment. Any spec he changes of his or doesn’t supply a spec for but doesn’t like what you provide should be handled as a change order as far as I’m concerned.

 

If you didn’t write your contract that way, than approach the client with this. The worst he can say is “no” and then continue to waste your time, which appears the direction that this may be going anyways without a good contract or an established working relationship

 

Hey I’m learning all this myself too. I’m finding that clients feel more lax in the details that they supply to you at the beginning of the project compared to a set of plans that they need. And they feel that changes are no big deal is visualization projects compared to CD’s. that has to be nipped in the bud right off, or else the client will treat your time as an “all you can eat buffet”

 

best,

 

paul

[JPS]

Very nice work Bloomlun, I also agree with Paul as to the images. The second set defenetly looks better. Especially the exterior. On the otherhand I'm not so sure about some of the furniture, your getting some weird shadows on some of the white peces and they look too hard...maybe something can be done about it. Maybe its the lighting, what type of GI did you use? Maybe a subtle low multiplier omni can help fix the shadow problems. I'm also curious what did you use to model this project? Is it done in Auto CAD and then linked or did you do it all in Max/Viz?

 

Regards,

J.

[bloomlun]

Thanks for the replies

I'm working on max5 this is a radiosity solution

 

the second set is only abit of photoshop to get the feel, just to try to find the direction,

if it is i'll have to go through all the maps and desaturat them

 

also render the scene with darker and more contrast in the Logaritmic-exposure dialogue

 

Paul Griger :

about the missing detail:

some info is missing: the stairs are connecting to the elevator wall(on the right) on the left is a 7m high milky glass wall- I know this image is not good

about the glass rail in the stairs opening: there isn't supposed to be any blausters it is just glass connected to the wall with metal cylinders.

about the bathroom I asked the architect about tiles: he said "they didn't yet get to that" so for now it'll stay like that

 

 

anyway I sampled some still frames from a video of a simulation the architect sais is genius:

http://shahardavis2.brinkster.net/1/6.html

 

sorry for the poor quality

theses are old simulations but when I try to learn from it i can see the the architectural shapes are more clearly shown because of contrast and all the colors are more earthy (but maybe its the video)

 

would you agree?

[Paul Griger]

Originally posted by bloomlun:

architect sais is genius:...

would you agree?

~

Genius eh?

 

Um, no. But beauty is in the eye of the beholder [or the archi's eye in this case], so maybe you need to have him point out what is genius.

 

The ligting? [it's not GI, so that'd make it faster to render for you ]

 

the furniture? Yes, LC3's are nice

 

make him be specific or charge him by the hour. Hey, the "by the hour" clients can be a nice way to line your nest egg if they want to chew up your time

[Sawyer]

Real quick: It looks to me like you are relying on a really good lighting setup to make this project work. I think you need to place real world materials. Most of this is just "colored". Most of it seems to be overly lit as well. Drop down the GI till and add hard shadows where you can. It is a real good start just keep going.

[bloomlun]

thanks again,

 

I got an advice from another architect

he said:"

1. the colorfull furniture are taking the attention away from the house and are interfiering with the perception of the 3d space

2. i should have more contrast in the places of connections between surfaces of the building (floor and scelling for example) also so we can precept the 3d better

"

a view point of an architect does remind me i'm doing a simulation for the house and not for the furniture

- is that right?

 

I am going to take the picture with the brown dining table as my test case - I'll post the improved tommorrow - after I work on it.

 

see ya

[kid]

Well, I couldn't see every image because I can't wait that long for so many images to load up on my 56K line, but I agree with the architects.

 

Your lighting is blown out, too saturated, and even when you desaturated the images they were still too hard to read in terms of space. It's hard to tell where elements meet, if they meet at all, or are they just floating there. There should be more contrast. There's absolutely no darkness anywhere, it's like a nuclear bomb just went off in the backyard.

 

I would suggest you don't touch Max 5's Radiosity for this project, as it looks like you have very little understanding of it. I would suggest just a traditional lighting rig to fake radiosity.

 

The captured video frames you posted are not great either, but they are easy to read in a spacial sense. The furnishing is enough for you to read the use of the space and gauge its scale, without overpowering the scene.

[bloomlun]

Kid:

I see your point,

 

what i did with the radiosity is this:

 

I wanted to have sunlight from the windows and not only one big shadow inside,

so I used a soft sunlight -18000 instead of 90000

this is so I can see the effect of the inner light

 

what happenned is of cours that the bounced sun light caused for too much light and flattness,

 

maybe, should i have a solution without the sun and then add it as a regular light just for the direct illumination?

 

the problem with radiosity and sunlight is creating a good scene that is exterior AND interior.

if I turn on exterior scene in the exposure controll I get black shadows or white out side - in reality you could be inside the house and see the garden not burnd from light.

this is why I softened the sun light.

 

anyway I'm gonn give it a try- desaturating and softening the visual impact of the furniture and creating more contrast between surfaces,

although i don't think I'll use traditional techniques,

because i want it to be the best possible and I take it as a learning process.

[Sawyer]

Originally posted by bloomlun:

the problem with radiosity and sunlight is creating a good scene that is exterior AND interior.

if I turn on exterior scene in the exposure controll I get black shadows or white out side - in reality you could be inside the house and see the garden not burnd from light.

this is why I softened the sun light.

I don't know what your time line is for this project but here is what I would do. Turn off all of the radiosity settings, go back to default lighting. Add 2 omnin light grids inside of one room. Make 8-12 omnis in each grid and have the indvidual omnis instances this way changing light values will be quick. Delfoz has set up a great tutorial for an exterior scene:

http://www.cgarchitect.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=33&t=000014#000010

 

If you are having problems with shadows being too dark you need another ring or grid of omnis underneath the model low multiply settings (turn cast shadows off). And remember that if you are having problems with outside scenes do them seperatly. Render them and apply them as a background or even a material on a plane.

[bloomlun]

Hello people

I just uploaded The latest renders,

please check them out

I'm still workling on them but I'd be happy to hear advice about how to get to my detination.

 

my guidlines are:

to make a scene that visualizes the space

but that it feels appealing - that it looks fun to live there

and...

that its not too sweet or too slick/smooth

 

ok, thats it for now

looking forward for your comments

 

the link:

http://shahardavis2.brinkster.net/1/7.html

[bloomlun]

Sawyer,

thanks for your comment,

I read Delfoz method it looks good

but only for out side:

and faking radiosity for the whole house with so many omnis would take alot of work to set up and might even increase rendering times.

now my times are 2.5-12 minutes per image.

 

another problem is the way the flythrough camera goes in and out of the house afew times - it has to be the same scene