Why do we render?
-
Solo, I get the feeling that your question exposes some issues Architects have with Cad rendering. If you read Paul's post, he is making a good argument why not to use render software, essentially when it may impedes the design process. Surprising to me since Paul makes great renderings. I suspect that this is true for most Architects, regardless of the love we have for, or the value of Cad rendered images.
Speaking for myself, it is frustrating when you can not work in "what you see is what you get". Designing buildings is not the same as making an illustration of it, and when the illustration software slows visualization down, and design creativity is affected.
So I would change my reply to: When I render, it is simply to get the results that only Cad ray-tracing provides.
-
@solo said:
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.
I presume you are including non-photorealistic add-on renderers,
renderers which process lights, but not reflection, and of course we should include SketchUp itself. (Having worked in wireframe for many years, I thought OpenGL was a pretty good renderer in itself.)I liked what I thought the original question was "Why do we render?" - meaning why do we use SketchUp, and/or other tools (including pencils) to create renderings. But if you want to change it to: "Why do we purchase, or use free, add-ons for SketchUp" - that would be interesting too.
Non Photorealistic add-on example
Lights only example
SketchUp Rendering with OpenGL
Al Hart
IRender nXt from Render Plus -
In our daily work, rendering is not just for presentation for client but we also consider it a design tool
-
@unknownuser said:
Why do we render?
In short: To sell the design.
Rendering is a way of making the design look as good as it possibly can.
Rendering can also show the solution in a way that makes decisions easier to make. Maybe for people that isn't used to read cad files.
It's also a way to easily show different colors, materials, lighting, also making it easier to pick the "best" alternative.About style, photorealistic or not, I believe what sells the idea best is right. I also belive that a style that differentiates you from your competition is best. So when everyone is making photo real images why not make a hand drawn, watercolor image.
-
I agree with Pixero,
I render for a few reasons: 1. Once you add "lighting" to any space you get a much clearer idea of what the colors and materials would look like. 2. I also render to look at the color scheme and the overall "feel" of a space. 3. For Marketing reasons and to be used in proposals. 4. To analyze the location and the amount of lights in a space. 5. They are great to impress a client when they can't get the real 'sense of space' in a color wire-frame. 6. To decide material selection and product accurately in a space with other chosen products. Helps to price materials after the client has viewed them. 7. It's the only way you can decide lighting in a space before you purchase them.
Although most renderers tend to focus on the "static" image, ones that allows you to walk through a space live like "Lightscape" used to do is a great tool, "Light-Up seems to be the only alternative. Clients like this. Also it just make your space more real and believe-able.
-
I only render to show materials and oftentimes reflection of light. The "weight" of materials is important to me and a rendering helps convey that to a client.
Otherwise, sketchup provides a nice visualization tool for the geometries and how materials come together. Tracking a reveal through 10,000 S.F. is difficult enough, but to actually SEE and make visually informed decisions based on how it looks within a space is critical!
Advertisement