Workflow suggestion in MR

[studio2s]

I would like to hear some opinions on work flow.

 

Typically, if I am going to do any sort of rendering, I am generally in design mode as well. I have found, in both interiors and exteriors, that it works well for me to start with a classic "all white model", such as you might actually physically build, to check form and space. This model is generally just a quick massing to assure myself I'm on the right track.

 

My question is:

For interiors, in MR, would you spend time at this stage getting a smooth solution (relatively, but speed would be a major consideration) and once that is established, start in on the materials?

 

or

 

would you jump right into materials as you model and worry about the lighting later?

 

The reason I ask, is that it is easier to spot lighting problems in an all white model, BUT, as we know, glossiness and reflections have a major play in the lighting solution.

 

Perhaps there is a 3rd work flow where you get, say, 25% of the lighting worked out (major shadow caster and any other major things...sky or what have you) and then massage both material and lighting solution as you go along?

 

The third way seems like the longest, as your lighting solutions would tend to become more complex as your materials do, tending towards longer tests. Oddly enough, it also seems like the best as it allows you to design the image as you are building it.

 

Any thoughts?

[nisus]

Hi Studio,

 

I would recommend to just model and add the materials. Yet, be aware to make a matlib upfront that will save you time. Also you will get a feel for your materials, and eventually know (by heart) how they will react.

 

So I'd say worry about light later: it is a known fact that light/white models are harder to get smooth and that the rendertimes is higher for lighter models... Also, with maps, you might not need an overly smooth solutions as the texture can hide a lot.

 

In MR the A+D materials are really good, and one can easily trust them for their effects and contribution to the lighting. Enough reasons not to do the white pass.

 

The only reason to do 'white', might be to check the model for holes and caps, flipped normals etc.

And of course to make a shadow study (to determine your sun position), but than again... You don't even need GI or FG for that...

 

rgds,

 

nisus

[studio2s]

I have found that the textures are pretty forgiving concerning the GI. I think your suggestion is pretty good.

 

I like the white models as a work flow on the design side. When you look at a white model, you stop seeing the red carpet and how it matches with the wood, but if the space feels right. But if I am doing it for that reason, then A) it doesn't need to be perfect GI and B) It can be a different file.

 

The more I think about it, the more I feel your comments are reflecting what my experiments are pushing me towards.

[nisus]

A) it doesn't need to be perfect GI and B) It can be a different file.

 

 

two comments:

A) idd, don't go wanting too smooth results... even white surfaces are HARD to get soft and smooth...

B) Don't use another file, use the material override (with a diffuse material)

 

 

rgds,

 

nisus