Route 66 Gas Station project
-
@bob james said:
Having traveled 66 from Chicago to LA several times back in the late 50's I, no doubt, passed this station.
You've done a masterful job of detailed modeling
Your kind words are much appreciated.
@bob james said:
Curious: Wonder why the change from Sinclair to Standard
According to Wiki it changed brands several times, no reason given -
"The station was built in 1932 when a contractor, Patrick O'Donnell purchased the small 200-foot (61 m) by 60-foot (18 m) piece of land the station stands on. The land lies on the southwest side of the Livingston County town. O'Donnell's plan was to build a gas station that he could lease to his son. The project went ahead and the station was modeled after a 1916 Standard Oil of Ohio design. The station is of the house and canopy style and includes work bays which were clearly added at a later date. Upon careful inspection the interior walls of the bays reveal the later origin. The station continued to sell Standard Oil products for its first several years but by 1940 it had switched to Phillips 66 brands. At least nine other stations besides O'Donnell's dotted this part of Route 66 through Odell, the competition drove the addition of the bays by the 1940s. Between the 1940 and 1952 the station underwent a number of changes.[2]
At one point, the station went from Phillips 66 to Sinclair products. Eventually, in 1952, Robert Close leased the station from O'Donnell. When O'Donnell died, Close purchased the property from his estate. He moved his family into the adjacent cafe which had been converted into a house. They stayed there until it burned in the 1970s. Close continued to do body work at the station until 1999. It was that year that the Village of Odell purchased the station for the express purpose of historic restoration. The Route 66 Association of Illinois took interest in the project and nominated the property for inclusion on the National Register of Historic Places, a status it was granted on November 9."
Dang, according to this I should have made it a Phillips 66 or Sinclair station, according to the era of the accessories I added. Maybe I will, just for fun
-
holy sweeet detail... that's awesome HellnBack.
-
@krisidious said:
holy sweeet detail... that's awesome HellnBack.
Thanks Kris.
Looking at the pics I posted I've noticed some mistakes and some things I meant to change but never got around to it (but I'm not going to point them out to anyone
) -
@hellnbak said:
Looking at the pics I posted I've noticed some mistakes and some things I meant to change but never got around to it (but I'm not going to point them out to anyone
)Probably some undisclosed errors in other great artist's work, but who wanted to dispute the master?
-
Wow! Looking good. Now needs some grease, dirt peeling paint!
-
@jpalm32 said:
Wow! Looking good. Now needs some grease, dirt peeling paint!
Yes, it needs it badly. Unfortunately that needs to be done in PP, and that comes after it's rendered, which I cannot do yet.
-
@hellnbak said:
and that comes after it's rendered, which I cannot do yet.
meh.. the worst part about rendering (for me at least) is texturing.. so whether you realize it or not, your rendering skills are already well underway..
the other parts of rendering (for me at least) are more fun..
(but for real, aside from a few material property tweaks and environment settings, this thing is ready to be rendered in a way which will give very nice results)
-
This is so great. Steve. You really put life in it with all the things you made for it and all the detail and touches. Needs a classic car pulling up. I wonder where you could find one? Looks mostly rendered already.
-
@unknownuser said:
@hellnbak said:
and that comes after it's rendered, which I cannot do yet.
meh.. the worst part about rendering (for me at least) is texturing.. so whether you realize it or not, your rendering skills are already well underway..
the other parts of rendering (for me at least) are more fun..
(but for real, aside from a few material property tweaks and environment settings, this thing is ready to be rendered in a way which will give very nice results)
One thing I've wondered about is what people do differently when modeling something with the intention of rendering it. I have been rounding most of my edges, I remember reading something about that here, something about "specular highlights" or something like that. But beyond that I just don't know what to do differently.
@pbacot said:
This is so great. Steve. You really put life in it with all the things you made for it and all the detail and touches. Needs a classic car pulling up. I wonder where you could find one? Looks mostly rendered already.
Yeah, I thought about putting a couple of my cars in there. Maybe the '56 Chevy with the front clip removed, frame showing, that I did a while back in one of the bays like it was being worked on.
I have decided to convert it to either a Phillips 66 or Sinclair station, don't know which yet. Since it was built in '32 and was a Standard station for only a couple of years, that is much earlier than I want the model to represent.
One thing that's frustrating me is the interior. Whenever I made a car one of my favorite things was to add a detailed interior. But adding a realistic detailed interior here would be quite an undertaking. Not many reference photos, but what there are shows that it was very cluttered, a typical old time gas station.
Maybe I'll mess around with it and see how it goes. As long as it's fun, what the heck.
-
Wow ! Master texturer(what is the proper word for someone that applies textures ? if there is none then this would be it !) !
-
Hello Steve, you really do sell yourself short! Any member of this forum would be more than happy with that standard of modelling, if she looks that good before rendering you know you have something special in the making.
As already said put your cars in and if SU can handle it, watch it come to life.
John -
"Yeah, I thought about putting a couple of my cars in there. Maybe the '56 Chevy with the front clip removed, frame showing, that I did a while back in one of the bays like it was being worked on."
Yes!
-
@ely862me said:
Wow ! Master texturer(what is the proper word for someone that applies textures ? if there is none then this would be it !) !
@tadema said:
Hello Steve, you really do sell yourself short! Any member of this forum would be more than happy with that standard of modelling, if she looks that good before rendering you know you have something special in the making.
Talk about somebody selling themself short --
@tadema said:
As already said put your cars in and if SU can handle it, watch it come to life.
John@liam887 said:
"Yeah, I thought about putting a couple of my cars in there. Maybe the '56 Chevy with the front clip removed, frame showing, that I did a while back in one of the bays like it was being worked on."
Yes!
But, like the station itself, the '56 would have to be weathered, rusty frame, grime, etc, to look realistic in this setting.
I did just upgrade to CS5 Extended (mainly to take advantage of 64 bit capability, as recommended by somebody in another thread) and ordered some books from Amazon to get up to snuff on it. I used to be pretty good with Photoshop, but that was when I was using it on a daily basis (before I discovered SU) and nowadays I've pretty much forgotten all the tricks I used to take for granted.
So much to learn, so few active brain cells, so little time
-
@unknownuser said:
One thing I've wondered about is what people do differently when modeling something with the intention of rendering it
One thing from my simple mind: Make sure all your normals face out (all the faces are white, not blue when set to monochrome)
-
I can see a lot of love in the details of this model it will make an outstanding render. It already is a great image. There are no real shortcuts when it comes to the love and time involved that this shows.
-
@bob james said:
@unknownuser said:
One thing I've wondered about is what people do differently when modeling something with the intention of rendering it
One thing from my simple mind: Make sure all your normals face out (all the faces are white, not blue when set to monochrome)
Thanks. I've always been careful about that (ever since I posted a thread asking why some of my faces were blue
)
-
@chedda said:
I can see a lot of love in the details of this model it will make an outstanding render. It already is a great image. There are no real shortcuts when it comes to the love and time involved that this shows.
Thanks Simon. Yeah, I do love the details.
-
I LOVE old gas station designs.
I hope one day to model the great designs from the 50s through the 70s as a series, much like Tandema does for the classic English architecture.
Mostly the modernist 60s stations.
-
@hellnbak said:
Talk about somebody selling themself short --
Honestly when I look at your works I feel like a beginner !!
I think that if you trow that model into a normal render application without even working on the textures, the render will come out pretty well !!
-
@ely862me said:
@hellnbak said:
Talk about somebody selling themself short --
Honestly when I look at your works I feel like a beginner !!
I think that if you trow that model into a normal render application without even working on the textures, the render will come out pretty well !!
I think you're being kind, but thanks.
I've started two other gas stations. There are so many across the country that just beg to be modeled. This kind of modeling does have advantages over modeling cars - with cars you can add only so many details, but with these models you can "accessorize" to your heart's content (as long as you don't go overboard) and give each one a unique character.
Gotta get back to this one though and convert it over to either a Sinclair or Phillips 66 station. Busy busy busy
Advertisement