Why do we render?
-
Following up on another thread I thought I'd start this thread in order to understand why we render, I know it sounds like a silly question, especially to those that render on a daily basis for work. The question is not an easy one really as there are so many different industries and uses for a render be it architectural visualisations, Interior space planning, artistic, fun, etc.
So before we can determine what one should look for in a render app we first need to understand why we render.
Feel free to jump in and help new users understand what and why you render, once we have enough reason then maybe we can start a thread to discuss what we look for in a render software and maybe even go further in helping people decide on one.
-
good idea, Pete. Thanks.Let me start with some "quotations" I generally read on different forums, from newbies mainly:
"How can I add lights to my model?"
i.e. (among other reasons) we use external renderers to add artificial lighting to our scenes (other than the default "SU Sun").Another frequent question is:
"How can I add reflection/mirror effect to my scene?" -
Communication, pure and simple. Which to me means that all forms of rendering become valid depending on the context. Small simple hand sketched thumbnails can sometimes express just as much or more than the 24 Maxwell photo essay.
Each project, each client, may require a different style which can be driven by everything from the inability to "see" in 2d", to the need to have high end graphics for advertising purposes. -
Why do I render:
- As a aid to design.
- In order to communicate.
- Because I can, looks good, and it is fun.
What do I want out of a renderer:
- Runs inside Su.
- Easy interface, quick to preview (reasonable to final), lots of libraries available, and facilitates nice images.
- Reasonable price, reliable company, good support.
Before Su, and ray-trace, I did pen and pencil sketches, and water color pencil renders. Never spent more then 5-30 minuets on sketches, and for a final render (18X24) no more then 12 hours. I am a OK rendered, not at the level of great, but good, better then most. With Cad renders, I still haven't reached my previous level of productivity, but my overall workflow is better, and the variety of presentation techniques is expanded.
-
I render to encourage that "suspension of disbelief" necessary for people to imagine themselves inside a project.
SketchUp's own output is, in fact, a render, too; it just happens not to be a photorealistic-oriented render. A lot of people love the different styles you can achieve within SU, and in fact I've delivered these "Internal SketchUp renders" -if you want to call them like this- many times.
Hand-drawn watercolors are renders, too.
It doesn't matter if you do photoreal-aspiring renders or not; both can produce the same "suspension of disbelief" when handled correctly. Think, for example, of hand-drawn cartoons, puppets, clay animation and traditional opera; all these mediums can engage the audience, despite not aiming to photorealism, as today's Hollywood movies do.
-
Very true, modelhead. Just look at recent blockbuster movies and see how lots of teenagers actually think it's a good movie just because it had awesome renders of giant robots. I've also used CG renders to disguise poor projects and fool my teachers
-
I do it for the chicks!
-
@unknownuser said:
I do it for the chicks!
Can't wait for round 2 when we get to find out what the best renderer is for that sort of thing
-Brodie
-
I was chatting with a SketchUp user about 18 months ago about rendering, and he was explaining why he did not want to use SketchUp renderings OR Photorealistic renderings.
Basically, he said that he created his models in SketchUp but when he presented his models to his boss they had to look like rough drafts, rather then completed designs. So he had to work hard to make them non-photorealistic.
Perhaps this is obvious, but it was a revelation for me.
Al Hart
IRender nXt from Render Plus -
Al, I occasionally have problems with Client expectations as to representation of materials as presented on a Cad renderings (if this appears photographic, why isn't it accurate?-) Never mind that even photos are not color accurate. When I present a color pencil sketch, the final material selection is never in question. Photo representation can be a distraction early in the design stage.
Practically speaking, the standard disclaimer doesn't work in this situation:-(
-
As stated above the term render cover more than just a photo real end product. Lets break it down; first of all you have to model the building/object. In some instances the raw uncoloured result is sufficient. This is normally true in a situation where the relevance will be THE CONCEPTUAL DESIGN STAGE. The function of the model will relay spatial relationship , massing integration and general planning issues. This first stage can also branch of to perform a function of intent. Especially in the case of manufacturing. Being able to fully explain your design in three dimensions.
Now that the design has progressed and generally been accepted it needs to be sold. Now selling any product requires you to market it. Selling a design concept is very much the same, most marketing rules apply. It has to communicate to the target audience, in most cases the client and ultimately his/her client. So the image needs to appeal to the man on the street, the layman. It needs what I like to call GENUIS LOCI, spirit of place.
Rendering to me whether Photo real or hand drawn style is taking that initial conceptual design and adding spirit to it. As a professional you learn with time which render method to apply to your design to best ingrain into it that spirit of place. I always like to know whenever I start a project WHO (the very end user) it is intended for and will spend time in exploring that WHO.
My two cents, hope this added constructively to the discussion. -
A bit of a counter point.....
Prior to SketchUp I used 3DStudio Max, Infact I'd used 3D Studio since it came on 5 1.44Mb floppy's and was made by the Yost group! SketchUp was and still is a blast of fresh air.
I love SU BECAUSE it cant/doesn't render, No 14hour waits to see if the image is OK, No umpteen controls for each material to tweek, No crashes 99% through a 10hour render, No.... you get the picture.
The more you try to get a material 'right' the more it becomes 'just not quite right' and the more you tweek and the more you render....AND IT'S STILL ONLY FOR 1 IMAGE!
With SU I can plonk a good brick texture onto a wall and guess what?......It instantly becomes 'A brick wall'. I don't have to worry about the texture of the brick, the depth of the coursing, the colour of the mortar etc. etc. etc.
Don't get me wrong, I love a good rendered image and recently I've shelled out some of MY OWN money for Twilight just to get my ''eye back in' but trust me, it'll be a cold day in hell before I go back to the likes of 3D Studio.
-
As said above rendering is a great way to communicate/translate drawings & sketches to clients which is one of its great strengths.
The other, for me, is the wow factor. I've had clients who giggle when they see (semi)photo-real images of their projects. -
@redot said:
As said above rendering is a great way to communicate/translate drawings & sketches to clients which is one of its great strengths.
The other, for me, is the wow factor. I've had clients who giggle when they see (semi)photo-real images of their projects.I have worked with a lot of Office Furniture dealers. There basic application is to place premade 3D components of office furniture into an office setting to show a design to a client. We rendered their designs with a basic, OpenGL like, renderer. But they loved the idea of a push-button renderer which added floor reflection and ceiling lights to a pre-defined room to showcase their furniture layout. We originally used a special push-button version of Lightscape - until is was gobbled up by AutoCAD and shut down.
These "office furniture layout designers" did not learn about rendering, renderers or how to use them. But were quite excited about a simple, push button approach to getting "photorealistic" renderings from their models. This has led me to conclude that there are some designers who want a simple way to improve their client presentations.
Al Hart
IRender nXt from Render Plus -
Marketing - both for our firm and our clients, being able to post attractive images of a project = more money
Design - it's not uncommon for us to tweak or totally change materials upon looking at a rendering
Customer Satisfaction - it smooths the process along to show an accurate representation. The benefit of a hand drawn sketch or a study model is that the client will tend to fill in the details themselves and will have less to dislike if they don't see all the details up front. However that's also the biggest disadvantage as clients may misinterpret how something looks until it's built.
-brodie
-
I remember back when I started looking for more than a plan view or hand drawn sketch, I needed something more to sell my designs as I found my clients did not have vision and needed something with 'pop'.
I started with landscape designs, taking photos of the area/home and then using cut-out images I had compiled to create the look in Corel draw. I remember going to the nursery with a white cloth as a backdrop so that I could remove the white in photo edit, using black trash-bags to filter sun so not to get any glare.
I also remember when I started my construction business having the need for a site sign so that the neighbors could get an idea of what was happening in order to avoid them from causing delays in construction and it certainly helped when approaching the bank for financing. From there it became a standard even my competitors (not really as we are small time concept builders) asked me for renders. Now I am more illustration than construction. My wife is all 20-20 NKBA design, and although one might not think it but she does more interior renders than one can imagine, then again if you commission a designer for a 50K plus kitchen you would expect a render.I guess when I talk about render I mean photo-real, I consider anything else as just illustration, I know technically they are all 'renders' but you know what I mean.
-
You can look at a photo of great building and appreciate this and that, but its a wholly different experience to walk through it. Being inside a building elicits a whole bunch of emotions that you just don't get from a photo.
In a similar vein, I can look at a schematic representation of building / artefact and understand the dimensions etc but a render brings out a whole new set of emotions/thoughts that I just don't get from looking at a schematic representation that I can hopefully take back to the schematic in an iterative way.
Adam
-
Are we talking about "render" in terms of render engines like V-Ray and the likes (the context where you hear "render" in now)? Or does it include rendering with traditional tools - such and pen and paper?
-
I intended to discuss render as in 3rd party apps like Vray, KT, Podium, Lightup, etc. I'm trying to get to a point about why we render using SU plus X.
-
Ok - just wanted to clarify that. As "Why do we render" as in "Why do we illustrate" would be a totally different discussion.
For me it's an extra tool in the belt.
For early stage projects I prefer to keep it simple. A sketchy style communicates better to the viewer the stage the design is in. It prevents the client's getting caught up in details that hasn't been solved yet.
For more matured projects it's often a desire from the architect and client to see a better approximation of the final result - to get an impression of the materials and details. We often use this to try out various design solutions.
I still some times render a model for early stage projects - but not with realistic materials or lights. It's more that I some times want some softer shading than what SU offer natively. And it often gives a satisfying result quicker than shading my hand in PS. Additionally, V-Ray - which is my render engine of choice - allows you to render out various other useful passes that can be useful for a PS comp.
Advertisement