new use for an old building
-
I built a model in SU about a year ago. It is an old coach house in very outback Australia. I decided to put it in a big city context. I rendered it in Twinmotion.
-
good stuff
-
@L-i-am Those road reflections are on point
Something feels off with the scale. Maybe its the curb or the camera height throwing me off?
-
Wow! Good stuff!
-
Brilliant and hugely motivating. Bra and indeed vo.
-
Cheers Mark, Bryan and Mike
. Rich, your eye is phenomenal, The building was 1 third bigger than it should be. So I just scaled up the assets intuitively.......but the car was 10% too big and the people about 7% too big, so you were correct. I just spent 2 hours redoing the render with a calculator Will post the result as I made some other changes, just for a change
-
@L-i-am said in new use for an old building:
Rich, your eye is phenomenal
Critiquing is easy. I appreciate that you don't take offense. Pouring hours/days into a render then hearing 'what is that?' or 'why is this there?' can burst a bubble
...I always like to see your scenes. If I ever jump into TM you'd be my go to guy for help.Plus if your not making mistakes or errors there's no room to improve.
-
@Rich-O-Brien said in new use for an old building:
Plus if your not making mistakes or errors there's no room to improve.
Agreed, Rich it is my goal to become very good at rendering it is a long road and am chipping away at being bad at it. Constructive criticism is gold, free and appreciated.
I went back to my old posts and I have posted my first renders are a couple of weeks apart in late 2017. I almost threw up and I think my teacher would say my learning curve was "slow but sure)(slow to learn and sure to forget) 
-
It may make the Liam of today cringe. But that younger Liam could still do something a very small percentage of people can.
I don't think there's a 'bad' render. But there are renders where the user didn't experiment enough or settled on a result. They are both serviceable images if the point was 'a day time interior.'
I think that as you rank up in rendering more and more factors need considering. That leads to more knowledge. Some plateau at a level and other keep pushing. Every push places you into a smaller and smaller bracket.
Rendering is science in my opinion.
-
@Rich-O-Brien said in new use for an old building:
Some plateau at a level and other keep pushing. Every push places you into a smaller and smaller bracket.
Exactly Rich, in prior conversations we have both agreed that the last 10% of learning to becoming very good at this game takes as long as the first 90%of learning rendering. I could not agree more. If you have not seen the movie "whiplash" (where the young, talented, drummer's fingers bleed from his dedication) please do yourself a favour
But I digress, it is hard work, I do not get why you think it is a Science not an Art though. I am kind of curious why you think that. -
@L-i-am said in new use for an old building:
why you think it is a Science not an Art
I think the end result is art. But the setup is science. Understanding material properties, lighting properties and even the render engine itself is science. Especially if the end goal is photo realism.
You need to know about lenses, turbidity, rayleigh etc to fully get astounding results. When you get to the point where you are looking up how to get the N and K values from a IOR and convert that to RGB values its fair to say that's not artistic. The result of your attention to detail is artistic but also physically correct.
Advertisement