Stormhouse
-
Great work Lewis .... maybe a movie / animation might be on the cards?
Mike
-
That would be kind of challenging, Mike. It's worth a shot...I'll add it to the ever-increasing list of things I want to experiment with.
Photoshop Extended can do movies after a fashion, but Piranesi can't...
-
Thanks. I'll have to think about how to do the line business...maybe by applying a depth of field mask onto the shadow-only layer before I start the rigmarole of creating the photocopy effect. I could also start with wider profile lines, and hit their layer with a DOF if the Styles window isn't helpful enough (EDIT:Piranesi will do this with edges.) There are profile-only and lines-only output layers, but the latter rarely survives into the final render.
I was just looking at some of Schuiten's drawings, and his profile lines stay fairly consistent in width from near to far, but the contents (including edges, shading, and colors) tend to disappear with distance.
-
Nice model.
Reminds me of Fallout and Mad Max. -
I'm amazed. Your entire workflow is just gorgeous. There are many design elements which I like a lot. Thank you for sharing this.
/matteo
-
Gorgeous
-
Well, thanks guys. That cheers me up quite a bit. I was just going through the typical bleeding-edge architecture and 3D modeling sites last night and thinking to myself that I was completely out of step with everything...both trends in design (generative-script-driven stuff is everywhere) and in modeling/rendering (parametrics/BIM and ever-more-life-like variations on raytracing).
I hope to have some time to elaborate this project further and try some other rendering processes soon.
-
The way I made these images with PS and GIMP, I developed the "fake bad photocopy" B&W parts first, and only later blended in the colors (there weren't any real textures in the SU file, at least on the building portion of the model). I was really tempted to consider a couple of these "bad photocopy" versions done with just a little color, but I didn't have the nerve to submit any of them.
So here are two saved "out-takes" of two of the above pictures. Does anyone prefer these to the final versions in my first post? I'd like to know before I undertake any new images in this "style", assuming I do this again.
-
Beautifull work Lewis.
-
Finally had a chance to work through the Piranesi tutorials, so here's the first result.
A higher resolution version of the same image is available in this gallery on Picasa. (The faked "etching texture" of the background texture is more visible in the higher res version.)
I rather disliked the original view towards the South (north elevation in perspective) shown in the first post of this thread because of the non-human (but not particularly bird-like) point-of-view. This is more reasonable, from eye-height for a 6' tall human. Pity it's too late to re-submit the image.
I'm finding Piranesi to be a fight...so far, it seems to be the most expensive Photoshop accessory ever (as far as I am concerned), because almost inevitably the output needs pixel-scrubbing and layering in ways that don't seem easily achievable with Piranesi alone. I'm not sure I like this as much as the "bad photocopy" pre-Piranesi NPR renderings posted before, although it is in fact much more like a Schuiten-type illustration (which may not be a good thing--there's something deceitful about faking older illustration media with digital means. This is not a pen-and-ink drawing, anymore than a VRay rendering would be a photograph).
Advertisement