It's a tricky one to explain in terms of layout unless you know what i'm talking about, also it depends on the level of detail you want to go into.

Basically a mixing desk is split into "channels", each channel has a seperate audio input and the audio "route" through the channel will start at the top and travel through the following sections;

-Gain/trim
-filters
-dynamics
-eq
-auxilliary sends
-mute/solo
-main fader

So for each channel strip you'll need those sections (i'll post up some links to various documents/photo's showing what they look like). I'd definately model each channel as a component because in reality that's what they'd be as they're almost always fully replaceable.

You could go for an SSL Duality (much easier to find reference images of):
http://www.solid-state-logic.com/music/duality/images/Duality_SE_Angle_large.jpg
http://www.solid-state-logic.com/resources/gallery/Duality/Duality_SE_Overhead_Xlarge.jpg

Also, their brochure contains images of the channel strip buttons (page 7): http://www.solid-state-logic.com/docs/Duality_SE_Brochure.pdf

Ahhhh, just found another one for the SSL that shows exactly what's on the main section of the channel strip: http://www.solid-state-logic.com/docs/Duality_Drawings.pdf

What you've got looks good but isn't necessarily "technically" correct - but most people probably wouldn't care about that though, I guess i'm just a stickler for accuracy haha.

[edit: removed the Neve mixing desk as there's not really enough reference material to model from - definately go for the SSL!]

Looks nice but (and I might be the only person to say this) I'm from a music/recording studio background and I think you should base the mixing desk on a real one. Such as a Neve or SSL (solid state logic) desk, as they're the ones used in the worlds best recording studios.

If you need any info at all on how mixers are laid out, let me know! haha

Modelling looks great though

Hey folks, been a while since I've posted anything on here - though I can promise I have been lurking around the forums keeping very much up-to-date with developments. Here's a project I worked on about 4 months ago - the building & site were all modelled in sketchup.

The exterior shots were rendered in mental ray, and I'd have liked to have included full 3d grass and even more foliage but we ran into serious memory issues because whilst mental ray is an extremely capable render engine I find that its proxy system is nowhere near as good as VRays which brings me onto my next point...

After these images were completed we were required to provide internal shots too at which point I took the decision to move to vray (for 3ds max). A big step seeing as I had no idea how to use it, though luckily a lot of the things I learnt from mental ray were transferable to vray.

Would it be able to do a ramp with say a "T junction" half way up? I'm just thinking about how to go about doing roads on uneven sites, which often have various junctions and so on.

Whilst this isn't a relevant crit of your model or render I have to agree with cmoreink that is an astonishingly ugly building.

Would be nice if on your next render you could match the lighting of the model with the sky in the background.

Like the render, don't like the design particularly though. Something about its form doesn't look quite right, it almost looks too heavy in places.

I've been keeping track of Alex Romans CGI stuff for quite a while now, and it never ceases to amaze me. Absolutley phenominal work.

I'm just wondering if in Sketchup there's any facility to adjust how many faces an arc/circle will have when importing it from DWG? I'm fed up with importing site plans and having to re-draw all of the curves to a higher detail.

@unknownuser said:

@unknownuser said:

When you find a DLSR that allows DOF in realtime let me know.

I mean really!!!....I'd like to have it

I just read through the D300 manual, page 105 good sir. Depth of field preview through the viewfinder. Take my word for it, all DSLR's have DOF preview in realtime.

@unknownuser said:

will be the "yes they will posts" but none do this with real-time viewing Real time viewing of the DOF is something you have to see to understand.

Seriously, read the manuals on your cameras. Then come back here and tell me they don't do it in real time. I can catagorically guarantee you that they do.

@unknownuser said:

@unknownuser said:

The use of DOF is one of the differences between a realistic render and an imitation photograph.

....my feeling as well.

@unknownuser said:

Might as well just get a nice new DSLR if you're gonna get into photography.

None that I know of (DSLR's) can do what I described in real time. I use a nikon d300 and a Canon Rebel. Neither of these cameras can adjust DOF in realtime through the lens.

Both of those cameras have a depth of field preview button, read the manuals. All DSLR's have depth of field preview buttons afaik. My sony alpha 100 does.

@unknownuser said:

If you really want to get into DOF you have to buy a camera. The ideal camera would be an old reflex 35mm with a 55mm lens on it. So you are thinking is modelhead nuts (yes)...This camera is not for taking picturesit is for checking DOF. These old reflex cameras will allow you to adjust the F-stops while you look through the camera lensso you can see in real time how your depth of field is changing. I have a working camera but I also have one of these test cameras...it is a pentax spotmatic from the 70's. I paid 20 bucks for it.

Might as well just get a nice new DSLR if you're gonna get into photography.

I'm a great fan of DOF, but I think the effect has definately been over-done in your scene. DOF is something that must obey real-world laws to look correct imo, otherwise you end up with what looks like a toy-town finish to any shots taken from a distance.

For example, I have a 50mm f2.4 macro lens, which when shooting up close objects at f2.4 provides an INCREDIBLY shallow depth of field, probably only a few mm's of the image will be in focus - however, if I take a shot from a distance with the same lens at the same f stop, most of the image will be in focus - this is where a lot of people go wrong with DOF.

Also, it begs the question "does the shot need it?". The only time I ever see depth of field used in architectural photography is when the photographer is taking an up-close shot of a detail of the building, or something around the building such as a plant. Any longer shots are almost always crisp and clear shot at something like f16 to f22.

Just my 2 cents.

Can't you just change the save format to Sketchup 6 when you save your model?

The best way to resolve your lighting issues in the interior shots is to use Metropolis Light Transport rather than PM+FG. Though to achieve the "light rays" you'll need to turn on bi-directional path tracing.

For the exterior shots I'd use Path Tracing (Progressive), but I'd be sure to set the supersampling to at least 2x2, and definately 3x3 if render time isn't an issue.

@steelers05 said:

I am trying to accomplish the effect in photoshop, because the rendering times to do it with a vray physical camera are annoyingly long for me right now

There is an alternative way to do it. Can V-Ray do a "depth pass"? If it can, you can use the depth pass in photoshop and accurately simuate depth of field there, without the added render time. It's found (in photoshop) under "Filters/Blur/Lens Blur" - there's a dialogue where you can input a depth map.

All very good images, my only major criticism is the post-production depth of field you've tried to add. It's blatently fake because it doesn't actually take into account a "focal distance", rather the edges are all out of focus and the centre is in focus which isn't what happens in photography.

Depth of field is dictated by how near/far an object is to the focus distance, not how close to the edge of the photograph it is.

The clay renders are what do it for me.

@olishea said:

artys: what are all these buildings for? are you putting together a big scene? nice detail

I'll second that. Also, do you have a job, or do you spend all day at home just doing sketchup?!

Just dragging this topic up again.

Being unfamilliar with the "follow me & keep" tool, could someone please explain how to use it? I get absolutely nonsense results when I use it.