exteriors - schools

[mskin]

curious to hear your feed back on this one. it was really a crank out. 8 hours to model. the renders were rather flat as you can see with the attachments. i didn't really have time to fuss with render adjustments, materials, etc... so i went right into photoshop. its the first time i've relied on photoshop so heavily. please crit.

[AJLynn]

It's coming along alright, but there's something about the textures - are you using gamma correction on the incoming bitmaps?

[mskin]

no. do you say that because of the original images? I really struggle with textures. i spend alot of time in photoshop thinking i've got it just right, and when i pull it into max its either completely washed out or over saturated.

[AJLynn]

Yeah. Don't bother with it now, but try it next time, in and out gamma both at 1.8 or 2.2.

[mskin]

i will explore the gamma. i've breifly looked into it, but im always so under the gun. the powers that be expect that the computers just puke this stuff out.

 

as far as the process, like i said, i usually spend a lot more time adjusting materials, test renders, etc... i wonder how many people employ this type of a workflow - relying so much on post work.

[lecameleon]

Edited December 21, 2008 by lecameleon

[Tedrux]

curious to hear your feed back on this one. it was really a crank out. 8 hours to model. the renders were rather flat as you can see with the attachments. i didn't really have time to fuss with render adjustments, materials, etc... so i went right into photoshop. its the first time i've relied on photoshop so heavily. please crit.

 

You have really improved those images, although personally, I think you would better manage your time producing some reasonable initial renderings that would have taken less to produce than messing about in photoshop! Don't you have a similar scene that you could use with assets aready there? It is a bit embarrasing to show this as a 'senior member'.

Only kidding!

[mskin]

Honestly, i often spend quite a bit of time fussing with renders to get good quality renders - and i do produce some nice renders that way.... The problem is the work flow. Minor adjustment, 45 minute render, another minor adjustment, 45 minute render, etc on and on. I cranked out these crappy renders in about fifteen to twenty minutes followed by about 1 hour of photoshop each. So, in my opinion, im thinking that this work flow may be more time effecient - at least for me.

 

im also wondering a bit about the importance of the quality of the initial rendering, in addition to all the discussions you hear about vray vs mr vs brazil etc...

[mskin]

“Isn't it better if we could just, possibly, maybe, try low settings and cut down that 45 minutes render time to around 3-4 minutes? Why not look at the low res low quality test renders to do the corrections? or is there something I don't know about?”

 

I just always find myself in the same trap. A few quick low res renders along the way to test lighting, but eventually im running high res high quality renders of regions, and then high res of the whole image. But something is slightly off so I do it again…. Yes, 45 minutes later, I find another mistake.

 

So why not pull the plug earlier and just jump into pshop and save loads of time rather than trying to master render engines that require a masters in physics to master?