home-office interior

[jucaro]

Hi all, i would like to get from you your critiques about the general lighting of the space and the material map definitions before I proceed to populating it with objects and interior lighting fixtures.

 

For the technical aspect, Its lighted with the daylight system of MAX5+radiosity

at 90% with 3 iterations and .2 meters subdivision and using logarithmic exposure

 

[bigcahunak]

Hi.

OK, here is what I see here:

• Modeling looks good, but all edges seemed too sharp.
• It looks like a liitle too lit, or too btight.
• Personaly, I dont like the colors, which is a matter of taste, howeverthe upper white floor level cant just end into the stairs there. At the corner where the white floor meets the brown vertical marble, architecturally there has to be somekind of detail to acomodate both ends. Which one is above the other. In life its not just a sticker glued to a box.
• Last thing... I think your glass material still need some tweaking.

Waiting to see the next phase of the project.

Good luck

[nisus]

Hi jucaro,

 

Idd, the edges are to hard: chamfer them

rgds

 

nisus

[jucaro]

I thought so too about the edges(it looks like it can cut you). The material color isnt final yet, but the material type is already specified.

 

I'm already reworking on as I'm typing this message.

 

Btw, I didnt put any glass panes between the window frames. I thought it wouldnt make a difference.

 

I'll post an update anytime today as soon as the render finishes.

 

Thanks for the critique.

[Christian Miranda]

Hi jucaro,

 

You have a nice starting point, specially the lighting seems very good.

 

I have to ask you to chanfer the edges as well.

 

Will there be joint on the floor? I miss them, but it can be just me.

 

Rendertime/machine?

 

Keep us posted.

[jucaro]

Is this an improvement?

 

Here it is again. I 've already taken care of the edges and the over bright exposure.

 

Now, before I go on to finally complete this piece, I want to know which direction should I go. A or B?

 

All the crits would be a great input.

 

 

 

And, by the way, the render times is 18mins on a 1.4 Ghz Intel P4 with 256mb

[nisus]

A gives me a more pleasant feeling, much warmer atmosphere Good improvement btw!

 

nisus

[bigcahunak]

Another vote for A.

I'd also step back, or just show more of the hole in the roof (the one that is closer to the camera).

Good luck.

[Christian Miranda]

Third vote for A. Reasons:

 

1. Warmer atmosphere.

2. More realistic lighting ( more diffuse reflections).

3. The way to go.

 

Question/suggestion: Are you using any kind of skylight to simulate the diffuse lighting comming from the sky+environment? If so, wouldn´t the light comming from the windows attenuate some more?

 

Please keep us posted.

 

[ March 06, 2003, 06:20 PM: Message edited by: Christian Miranda ]

[jucaro]

I personally like option A and i'm finishing up now.

 

Originally posted by Christian Miranda:

Third vote for A. Reasons:

 

Question/suggestion: Are you using any kind of skylight to simulate the diffuse lighting comming from the sky+environment? If so, wouldn´t the light comming from the windows attenuate some more?

 

The lighting setup is just the standard Daylight system of max5, but instead of using MAX5 IES Skylight, I deactivated it and used Finalrender skylight with an HDRI map in Global Parameters and set the value to .3 for the ambient multiplier. I also used FR Material as the base material for the Advanced lighting overide instead of the standard max5 material.

 

Now, why did I do this besides experimentation? Things I had in mind:

 

1. -The standard Max materials lack specular highlights when used with the Advanced Lighting overide (after reading Ted Boardman's column) and tend to have a washed out effect (unlike lightscape's and FinalRender)

 

2. -The raytrace material of max5 is far down in comparison to FR (IMO), and I wanted the Fresnel and blurry raytraced reflections found in FR

 

3. - the receive and send illumination of FR is easier to handle

 

4. -let 3Ds max calculate the radiosity (which is faster) for a better and 'realistic' lighting inter-reflections (or bounces) than just using GI alone in FinalRender. FR takes too long and needs very high RH sampling values. Especially when used for indoor lighting setup using only one lightsource (Daylight)

 

5. -Instead of using max5 IES skylight, which is (again IMO) a little limited as compared to using an HDRI map with FR. And I think the 32bit TIFF maps can only be used with the light tracer which is very slow and almost unusable. (correct me. i might be wrong)

 

6. I MIGHT BE GOING CRAZY trying to fuse together the features I like in MAX and FR. Maybe i'll post some of the results of using 3ds max radiosity alone and also using FR alone.

 

---was there a sense in all my ramblings?

 

[ March 06, 2003, 10:54 PM: Message edited by: jucaro ]

[John Dollus]

Looks like terrazo on the lower level floor. if so, you should have some joints in the floor.