aaron-cds Posted February 7, 2007 Share Posted February 7, 2007 I think you gave the opposition more reason to fight. The rendering clearly illustrates how awful the water towers are. No offense to the rendering, it's very realistic. That's the problem with showing reality. Sometimes it doesn't work in your favor. I imagine the opponents saw that and said "Yeah, you see, it would be a huge eyesore." That doesn't mean you didn't do your job right. It is what it is. I'm not sure how you could make two water towers side by side look good. One is usually ugly enough. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pipjor Posted February 7, 2007 Share Posted February 7, 2007 yea the towers are pretty scary looking, but I"m only the messenger..We did some alternate sites, here is another... I'm not sure were they stand now, probally lawyers, public meetings etc for the next few years... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Virgil Johnson Posted February 7, 2007 Author Share Posted February 7, 2007 Virgil, i've only been asked to do 2 "visual impact" illustrations so i'm certainly no expert.... but the down side is on both of my studies there were protesters with signs opposing my companies proposed projects, and i personally didn't like the the negative vibe..... If you think it sometimes gets bad in the field you are in for a real treat at some of the public hearings. At those times you are going to be real glad your job was done right. virgil Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Virgil Johnson Posted February 7, 2007 Author Share Posted February 7, 2007 How do people feel now about the water towers? That image didn't make me think it was 'no big deal', quite the opposite. For anyone who attended my talk at the DVC last summer you'll know that I showed a rendering by Elizabeth day that managed to show a massive water tank right in the middle of the picture but you'd never know it. Art can do as much to allay people's fears as force-fed scientifics. You have put you finger exactly on the heart of visual impact drawing. All of this drawing takes no sides. You have nothing to sell and nothing to hide. You just make your very best effort to show what will be and let others decide what to do. Not too many years ago a drugstore came to Woodstock,NY and presented an artist's rendering. It was way out of scale and way too lovely and was more or less laughed out of town. The drugstore never got built. v Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Virgil Johnson Posted February 7, 2007 Author Share Posted February 7, 2007 Virgil That is a good description of what you do. Three questions : 1. Ref points reliability. Are balloons good enough for ref.points? Has anyone ever challenge this in court? Will a gps & altitude-meter-equipped remote helicopter be better? It is much smaller than balloon and more precise in its positioning. On a clear day, GPS is quite precise. Less than 1 m is guaranteed, and 1m deviation taken from 1km away is 0.001%, good enough for me to claim 98% accuracy. 2. Camera tilt angle I found compass is not quite good enough for camera angle. What tools do you use to measure the tilt angle? Does it have to be level at all time? No Tilt of camera? I have sometime ago heard that Hayes Davidson use stitched photo for their VIS and they have got a way to legalize this. Not many project can fit in 50mm lens, especially in historical district. Can you fill in the details for this? 3. Legal and Liability insurance Under which category should we take the insurance? Under building & construction? or Architecture? I have been asking around and everything under construction business will be charged in similar rate as the builders, huge $$$ I am really interested in this issue, but unless there is a way that I can say that I have redundantly cover all the accuracy issue, I don't feel safe. Even with legal and liability insurance *********** 1. A helicopter was always my dream. Give me one that tells me its exact position (gets windy in the sky) and is visible to the camera at several thousand feet and I will give you my left...hand. Balloons are like trial by fire. Yes, they get challenged all the time. That is why we are always so careful. The location of the balloon was always recorded at the time of the shutter clicking. There might be an error of 1 maybe 2 feet but balloons may be your only choice. I might add...for those of you that have never experienced a balloon test - It is a nightmare of bringing in very heavy helium tanks (think of a remote mountain top), filling 4-6 foot weather balloons, snaking them through small openings in the vegetation and watching them constantly all through the photography. We usually hired a three handed person for the observation job because when the radio crackles that the cameras are ready to click you will be juggling several pieces of equipment to locate the balloons and spewing a constant steam of numbers over the radio to be recorded as the photos are taken. About that time of course the wind gusts come and photographing is stalled until calm returns. And you have to set up all in predawn because by late morning the sun brings the winds and the photography best be done before the balloons do the serious bobbing and weaving. In general we strove for 2" of accuracy in the field. Not always possible of course but often you can use various techniques to accurately locate critical references. (Maps, surveyors, measuring tapes, wheels, etc.) 2.Camera tilt is often an issue. When you are standing at the Hudson River and photographing a mountain top where someone wants an open pit mine and you to tilt up at the target. (Example: the Tilcon mine at New City, NY) The photographer (who has already extensively previewed the site) takes great care to center the target on the photo. In the field we used a clinometer to measure tilt. In the office I build my model (remember my model is a working equation) using the located references and calculated tilt. With luck my model camera matches the field camera - the photos as always rule the day. If things are way off it means another trip to the field and see what went wrong. The problem has to be solved. Yes, you will have to do photo stitching from time to time. Hard to capture an 800 foot building from 300 feet away with a 50 mm lens. The way we dealt with it was to move the camera in a precise line shooting overlapping FOVs (calculated using a digital map) so as to have common references in each photo. You may change the azimuth of the camera out of necessity but the tilt and elevation have to be constant. You do this very very carefully And you do it quickly because the sun is moving, changing lighting and shadows which makes things weird to say the least. You could use multiple cameras but remember each camera and each film provides a unique photo and things may not match up too well. Don't you just hate it when you look stupid in public? 3. The first thing I did when I began computer modeling as a business (more that 14 years ago) was become a corporation. The corporate veil will be one defense. For insurance you have to see an agent. Yes, it will cost. Visual impact studies are expensive for good reason. Make sure the lawyers you are working with have you well defended as well. Consult (as least in the beginning) with your own attorney about contract writing. As an example of what can go wrong... Another company did a visual impact study of a tower for AT&T on a mountain in VT about five years ago. When the tower was built it did not match the study and I was told the tower had to be dismantled. I don't know who paid for it but the loss was said to be about $2 million because of costs and lost revenues. A whole new study had to be done. You can believe we got calls for our studies of towers we did in the region and someone went around and checked the as-builts for problems. (Our studies were accurate and you could hear the sigh of relief in two states.) Hope I answered your questions. virgil Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mohamad Posted February 7, 2007 Share Posted February 7, 2007 there is cool topic here. so hello subscribers and thanks for your great discussion. I read last posts and see that you speak about mix photo and render together for mixed exterior present. I have some project that customer needed exterior mixed render with exactly real measure. I upload two image of this project and if you was interest, tell me to speak about and my experience around. (I usually have some mixing project). Can you say witch part are visualization? (I attack Mother Render of too) (sorry for lable on images, images are commercial...) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Virgil Johnson Posted February 7, 2007 Author Share Posted February 7, 2007 I think you gave the opposition more reason to fight. The rendering clearly illustrates how awful the water towers are. No offense to the rendering, it's very realistic. That's the problem with showing reality. Sometimes it doesn't work in your favor. I imagine the opponents saw that and said "Yeah, you see, it would be a huge eyesore." That doesn't mean you didn't do your job right. It is what it is. I'm not sure how you could make two water towers side by side look good. One is usually ugly enough. You are correct in what you say Aaron. There were many times I was personally disgusted with what a project would do. But the job was to show what things are really going to look like. You are not selling a job. You are providing hopefully accurate information for decision making. In not one case over the more than 12 years of this work did a client ever ask us to doctor a photo to make it look better. There is way too much at stake to ever deviate from accuracy and no one wants to get caught introducing deliberate error to a study. If you do it you will soon be out of business if not sued as well. Visusal impactors work both sides of the road depending on projects. Sometimes you work for the opposition. Integrity is everything. v Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mohamad Posted February 7, 2007 Share Posted February 7, 2007 ....Integrity is everything... that's it! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tommy L Posted February 7, 2007 Share Posted February 7, 2007 So Virgil, when we gonna see an image youve done? Just one.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Virgil Johnson Posted February 7, 2007 Author Share Posted February 7, 2007 So Virgil, when we gonna see an image youve done? Just one.... Hey I tried to get some up a few posts ago. But could seem to do it. Give me some help and you give you some pics. Will this site take on 3000 x 2000 images? It might be hard to see some field references it the photo gets too small. virgil Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nic H Posted February 7, 2007 Share Posted February 7, 2007 So how is the model composited into the photograph? How are the points lined up? I always find the biggest margin of error comes down to pixels printed on a page. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jackb602 Posted February 7, 2007 Share Posted February 7, 2007 Virgil, at the beginning of the thread you stated that visual impact studies are among the highest paying jobs in digital visualisation. The intricate process you're describing though, seems to require an enormous overhead, from surveying to weather balloons to liability insurance. Do you find that after all of these expenses and additional risks, it's still lucrative profitable work? More profitable than architectural visualisation? You also mention that you're getting out of the business. What made you decide to leave? Jack Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Virgil Johnson Posted February 8, 2007 Author Share Posted February 8, 2007 So how is the model composited into the photograph? How are the points lined up? I always find the biggest margin of error comes down to pixels printed on a page. If someone helps me with my upload challenge I will be sending along another study that illustrates how we did it. Now remember in field work things are inperfect. All kinds of things go wrong. Only the drawing can be accurate - but it is based on data entered of course. But I will give you an example of how we found to best find field accuracy. --If I can figure out how to upload files that is. v Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Virgil Johnson Posted February 8, 2007 Author Share Posted February 8, 2007 Virgil, at the beginning of the thread you stated that visual impact studies are among the highest paying jobs in digital visualisation. The intricate process you're describing though, seems to require an enormous overhead, from surveying to weather balloons to liability insurance. Do you find that after all of these expenses and additional risks, it's still lucrative profitable work? More profitable than architectural visualisation? You also mention that you're getting out of the business. What made you decide to leave? Jack Yes, Jack there is a lot of overhead. This is an expensive process. However you are in a business where the costs of the study are dwarfed by the costs of attorneys and the project itself. You are dealing in an area where often millions of dollars change hands and you are providing a key element. So the money is there. (Never work for poor people - they don't have any money.) When I finally get some images posted here I know there will be people who will want to critique the model they see. But the important part to visual impact studies is the you satisfy the needs of the client. So pretty pictures are not the final product. An accurate study is. And you need the tools to do the job - Computer software is just one of many tools. (Bore you for a minute...you will need a couple of trucks capable of hauling a crew and equipment to often rugged conditions. We often had 3-5 crew members in the field at least 2 days a week. (We often turned out 2-3 studies per week.) The trucks carry helium tanks, balloons, cameras (we used film cameras since they seem to stand up better to field conditions), all types of measuring devices, orange vests and cones, ladders, rope, telescoping poles, multiple radios and batteries, flagging, and so on. The office has 6 computers. Lots and lots of maps. Piles and piles of files. Telephones in constant use. Two 9 color printers. Film scanner. and so on Why did I leave it? Virtually Real, Inc is just one of three businesses I have. The other two are great fun as well and I just sort of got bored with visual impact studies. I still do a little drawing for other purposes -just like the process and is a nice hobby. I felt that I had conquered a lot of problems, built a nice business (always remember I am first a businessman so the bottom line is my goal). ...in short I needed more of a challenge. v Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Virgil Johnson Posted February 8, 2007 Author Share Posted February 8, 2007 OK I am going to try for an upload. These files go with the Adirondack study I put earlier in this thread. If things don't work I will keep trying. v Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Virgil Johnson Posted February 8, 2007 Author Share Posted February 8, 2007 OK maybe one at a time? nobody said I was smart just tenacious[ATTACH]18503[/ATTACH] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Virgil Johnson Posted February 8, 2007 Author Share Posted February 8, 2007 [ATTACH]18504[/ATTACH] [ATTACH]18505[/ATTACH] [ATTACH]18506[/ATTACH] Sort of a clumsy approach I admit. I will improve for next image postings but for the moment i think these will serve to illustrate the principles/techiques we used in the Adirondack study ---which was my goal i will try for pretty pictures when next i get a chance v Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tommy L Posted February 8, 2007 Share Posted February 8, 2007 Hey I tried to get some up a few posts ago. But could seem to do it. Give me some help and you give you some pics. Will this site take on 3000 x 2000 images? It might be hard to see some field references it the photo gets too small. virgil have you tried clicking on the 'manage attachments' button when you write a reply? Its all very self explanitory, it tells you what file size for what attachment etc. Im sure you know how to make an image smaller in photoshop..... Virgil, my apologies, refreshed my browser and there is your work. To be honest tho, I dont really see anything that i dont do at work all the time? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Claudio Branch Posted February 8, 2007 Share Posted February 8, 2007 Now that I have seen some images, I guess that I have been working in the visual impact industry to some degree all along as well... ...but I have never had to deal with all the headaches and hassles described in this post thus far. The clients I serve are usually municipalities and water authorities that need either a water tower, a dam, or a road built. I do these projects regularly and my clients accuracy requirements are nowhere near this stringent. I consider myself lucky... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Virgil Johnson Posted February 8, 2007 Author Share Posted February 8, 2007 have you tried clicking on the 'manage attachments' button when you write a reply? Its all very self explanitory, it tells you what file size for what attachment etc. Im sure you know how to make an image smaller in photoshop..... Virgil, my apologies, refreshed my browser and there is your work. To be honest tho, I dont really see anything that i dont do at work all the time? Actually these pics should be very crisp and clear. I will work on it. v Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Virgil Johnson Posted February 8, 2007 Author Share Posted February 8, 2007 Something important I left out... Use a crane instead of balloons when you can. Attach a marker to the boom. Work with the operator to get the location right - boom operators can very precise - and you have a reliable marker in the sky for the tower you are going to show. virgil Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Claudio Branch Posted February 8, 2007 Share Posted February 8, 2007 Here is a recent example of my own "visual impact study" work. The tower itself is modeled off of engineering prints. However, the accuracy of the tower elevation, as it sits on site, is probably +/- 10'. My client was just fine with it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Virgil Johnson Posted February 8, 2007 Author Share Posted February 8, 2007 Here is a recent example of my own "visual impact study" work. The tower itself is modeled off of engineering prints. However, the accuracy of the tower elevation, as it sits on site, is probably +/- 10'. My client was just fine with it. Those look really good - just the type of rendering level that is used for most visual impacts that I have seen. The key is that your client is fine with it. You have to meet the customer's needs. We didn't go through all the trouble we did because we just felt like it. For our business accuracy was always the first order of the day. Just was the type of business we had gone after. Many people did not use us because the expense of our work was too great for what was needed. We chose to stay at our level as a product to sell. But surely it was not for everyone. Just a market niche. virgil Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ernest Burden III Posted February 8, 2007 Share Posted February 8, 2007 Here is a recent example of my own "visual impact study" work. Man, outstanding in his field, is killed instantly when a massive water tank is installed on his property. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Claudio Branch Posted February 8, 2007 Share Posted February 8, 2007 Thanks...and I agree with your comments. My clients are obviously easy on me! For me personally though, visualization is about creating a strong memorable image not extreme accuracy (I got out of mechanical design for this very reason). I considered getting into forensic animation and now I'm glad I just make pretty pictures and animations for a living. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now