Jump to content

Rendering for Architecture: the experience of Brian Looney


folini
 Share

Recommended Posts

Brian_Looney.jpg

 

Brian Looney is a rendering artist working for an Architectural firm, McFarland Davies Architects, in Tulsa, Oklahoma. He uses a few software tools such as AutoCAD, 3ds Max, and Maxwell render to refine 3D models and to generate hi quality images.

 

I interviewed Brian for the Novedge blog to understand what the role of rendering is in an architectural firm today, and how rendering improves interaction between architects and their clients.

 

If you are interested, the complete interview is available on the Novedge blog.

 

Franco Folini

Novedge LLC

 

UPDATE: A sample of Brian rendering images can be seen on the Maxwell Render forum (free registration required).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe I can divert the "pile on" by saying that the advice he offered about being able to adjust lighting during rendering was very interesting. He is obviously effective if his company owners have seen fit to invest in time and software at his advice. Regardless of whether his renderings would appeal to you, it is probably safe to say that since someone sees fit to continue investing in him and his skills, he's profitable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I asked Brian for some example of his work. In the mean time you can see this interesting image created by Brian Looney and published on DigitalArt.org.

 

Franco

 

PS: Regarding the McFarland Davies Architects website, you (3dway) are right, it is poorly designed (but it works on my FireFox). Please consider that Brian is not the owner of the company. He just works there. I don't think he is in charge for the website.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I didn't say the website was poorly designed. I said that I found the dead end splash screen annoying. Purely subjective. I hate all splash screens. A splash screen with no way to get around it is worse than a splash screen. You never know if the site is in construction, or if the flying images are mocking you because you can't find the secret button to get to the actual website, which is what you really want to see. The internet is a bit like a mash up between a newspaper and TV. You're incontrol like reading a newspaper, but it's media rich like TV. Taking the control out of the user's hands (ie splash screens) kills half of the efficacy of internet experience.

 

Someone else stated that the website was poorly designed, though it may be easy for you to infer from what I said that the I meant the website was poorly designed, but that would be your inference.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Did Nicole write that article?"

Fran, if this is a joke is not funny!

 

Franco

 

Well, with the Maxwell logo featured so prominently, and the "testimonial" atmosphere, I nearly thought it was a Next Limit newsletter. ;) Sorry if my little quip hit too close to home. :confused:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

LOL, that's funny Fran. Franco, I would assume Maxwell is fully aware that they are the butt of many jokes in the CG community. It's fair to say they made their bed. I guess there could be people who don't have horror stories from Maxwell. Brian Looney could very well be one of those people.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To be honest, I'm not blown away by the quality of the Banjo image and don't find myself wanting to register with the Maxwell forum to see more. I'm surprised and a bit disappointed that there isn't anything to look at in the body of the interview or readily accessible elsewhere.

 

Jim

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wasn't he was a protegé of the great Jonathan Nutcase who himself emerged from the renowned (but ultimately misunderstood) Um Bongo Fruit Loop movement in the 60's?

 

Joking aside, normally a profile like this highlights the work of a unique or inspirational artist.

I looked at the Maxwell gallery and the rest of the work is ok at best.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Come on, this is a blog, right? Besides, Brian Looney (Bubbaloo) is a contributing member here and at vizdepot. He's one of us. Show some respect. The images he does may not be the best anyone has ever seen but Franco thought he had some insightful things to say so he interviewed him. What's the fuss?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From the intro to the article:

In order to learn more about his experience with Maxwell Render and how Brian is using this tool I asked him for an interview.

 

This is the whole point of the article. It is what begs the question, "Is this an interview or an advertisement?" This "interview" seems to me to be promotional material about Maxwell. I don't think that advertisements belong in the General Discussions forum.

 

I'm pleased for Brian that he has received this recognition and I hope that he doesn't take my questioning the purpose of referencing the interview here as a personal affront.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I decided to join the forum so I could check out Brian's images, and I must say I find the interview a bit contradictory. I don't think it should have involved the architecture firm that Brian works for. The architectural work actually brings down the quality of the portfolio, whereas if this was written from the standpoint of how great maxwell is as an object renderer, it would be more compelling.

 

Maxwell is a phenomenal object renderer, but when the rendering turns into a full scene the scene never stands up to the single object renderings that maxwell can create. For instance, if I looked at this image....

 

http://img252.imageshack.us/my.php?image=bp41561ps1eu5.jpg

 

It lacks the realism, specifically the reflective and specular qualities that we are accustomed to seeing from maxwell, as depicted in images like this one...

 

http://img252.imageshack.us/my.php?image=candle91667za8.jpg

 

Now you could fight that I'm comparing apples to oranges.... but if maxwell stands up to the article, then it shouldn't matter, the problem is maxwell is great at apples, but it can't do oranges.... (analogously speaking of course cause it could probably do a killer rendering of an actual orange by itself)

 

One comment that I find really interesting is the quote "The render doesn't necessarily need to be technically correct".... This is the first I've ever heard someone speak of using maxwell and not trying to be perfect. The way NL sells themselves you don't have to know much to get a technically correct render.....so how much do you have to know to make maxwell do a non technically correct render? Although that comment pretty much makes the point that NL didn't write the article because that seems to be their platform that they stand on.

 

(image credits :: both image's are Brian Looney's which I pulled the links from his gallery on maxwell's forum.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thank you everybody for this interesting discussion. I would like to explain my point of view as well why I did the interview.

 

First of all, let me say that I'm not an expert or rendering. One of the few things I know about rendering is that Maxwell Render can generate very good images but is very slow when compared with "traditional" rendering systems. Also the "traditional" rendering systems require setting a lot of parameters, and "playing" tricks, most of them with no relationship with the lights, the subject, the physical properties, etc. Maxwell is by definition closer to the physical model.

 

Doing the interview, my interest was in understanding how Maxwell could fit in a "production" environment. As disclosed in the blog post, I asked Nicole of Next Limit for an advanced user and she introduced me to Brian. (The next communication with Nicole was when I sent her the link to the published interview.) The core question of the interview is "how do you use Maxwell in your daily work?", "How do justify (to your boss) the extra time required by Maxwell to generate an image?".

 

I honestly believe Brian fully answered my questions and his answers make the interview an interesting reading for many people. I know that several readers of this forum are "masters of rendering" and they don't need to read my interview to learn about those topics.

I assume that several other readers could be interested in Brian experience and they share with me the curiosity and the desire to understand how this new tool fits into a professional environment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the most difficult place to do a decent architectural rendering is in an architect's office, with all the designers over your shoulders.

 

So hats off to Brian, first for doing decent work, and second for establishing a work flow with the pokiest rendering engine on the market, so by the time the image is done, no designer would dare change a thing - or risk blowing the deadline waiting for another.

 

He's actually carved himself out some sanity, and bought himself some peace to work in. It ain't a bad model.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...