Final image,on screen&in print, needs to be photo realistic

[donnasanta]

Hello-

I have been learning SketchUp for about (3) months now, mostly concentrating on making my own material library from .jpeg images. The GSU materials I am creating are of different stone; pavers, wallstone, stone veneers. The problem I am having is these images need to be photo realistic in print. I notice the images are represented better on my monitor than in the print.

What factors do I need to make this possible!? I (think I) understand a high pixel & dpi count make for the crispest pictures, but my materials still look 'cartoony' to me in GSU.

I wanted my final product, the stone, to look photo realistic for selling purposes. How do I acheive that in GSU alone(the ideal situation)? Or do I need to use a rendering program? If so, please guide me. Most of my materials in my GSU model will be viewed outside in direct sunlight.

FYI- This has been my process to create the materials shown in the GSU model;

1. Took an original jpeg image;~1550x750 pixels, with a dpi of 180.
2. I opened the jpeg file in'Texture Studio' to adjust the image & create a seamless texture with resulted being; a bitmap image 1024x1024 pixels, bit depth 24.(Not sure what a bit depth is?)
3. In the GSU model I created the material using the bitmap image and applied to the model.
4. I exported a 2D image (attached) from GSU. It's properties are; ~1200x850 pixel, bit depth 24, 96 dpi.

Any advice for this learning novice is much appreciated.

Thank you very much.

-Donna

---

[brodie]

If you want photorealism, you'll want to go with a rendering program. Lighting plays a huge role in photorealism and SU simply doesn't simulate light in any sort of realistic way. Beyond that you would at least need to be able to adjust a material's reflective properties to get anywhere.

There are tons of rendering options and the ideal choice has a lot to do with what you're doing with it and how often you'll be using it (is this something you're doing on the side that may come up every few months when you have a few new materials to present over the web or are you getting into professional arch-viz where you'll be producing high quality prints...or somewhere in between).

I'll tell you that about the simplest option is SU Podium. It gives you the fewest options you would need to have the ability to produce something one might call photorealistic and it has a pretty intuitive interface.

-Brodie

[honoluludesktop]

Don't be discouraged. I have seen SketchUp only renderings here that are better then many rendered images.

[jarynzlesa]

@honoluludesktop said:

Don't be discouraged. I have seen SketchUp only renderings here that are better then many rendered images.

I agree with you, but you must go pro.

[Gaieus]

Even the simplest rendering application can give a lot to the final appearance of the materials. Basic things like reflection, bump maps and more realistic shadows can easily spice up an otherwise flat material in SU.

YouTube - 14th Century Carmelite Church in Pécs, Hungary
[flash=600,360:2kv5wdrh]http://www.youtube.com/v/thuEv7K2FGU?fs=1&hl=en_US[/flash:2kv5wdrh]

[rspierenburg]

Not to mention all of Urgen's amazing texturing.

[tallbridgeguy]

Hi Donna, I made this rock by attaching a texture in sketchup and then rendering it with Kerkythea. ( afree program)

Rendering is the only way to go if you want photorealistic. ( I have only approached semi-realistic.)