Topics created by seabass84

http://i215.photobucket.com/albums/cc246/seabass84/6_zpsf0fd786e.jpg

I would also take the ceiling lighting down about 60% and see what the space would look like. I think you will like the results.

Hello there,
What techniques have you used to make these floorplans?
Thanks in advance

Working from construction drawings speeds up the process 😄I've cranked out models faster from sketches

Maxwell was used to accurately model the lighting from an HDRI and many elements from the Podium model pack bring a bit of realism to a smaller budget render.

I did this one in 4 hours from a JPG architectural sketch

http://i215.photobucket.com/albums/cc246/seabass84/Render2-2_zps55b154fa.png

Normal maps work in 2.0

Taken from another forum... "Normal maps are just bump maps that allow for the appearance of a bump in any normal direction, not just at the normal. That's the problem with bump maps - everything appears to come "out" of the bump at exactly 90 degrees to the surface of the poly. That's why normal maps are full colour - the three colour channels correspond to the local XYZ space, as opposed to the single channel for bumps."

very nice images, especially the interior ones.

but I think the exterior images could be improved if you got rid of the convergence of vertical lines. have a look of pictures taken by pros or renders made by the top guys: vertical lines never converge unless the viewer is right infront of a tall building.

I think all of them are very nice.

Some man-cave! Wow! 👍

Hey mate, nice job! I think though there is some miss match of the amount of illumination of the sky v's upon the facade of the building.

One thing I would say and we all do it. We strive for realism without enough consideration toward what the image is to do - sell the proposal. Whether it be for marketing OR for planning we are still trying to sell, therefore would a little more light flooding the view of the facade give a better impression? I'd say this regarding the camera angle chosen too, could it be more dramatic rather than showing all?

The last night image is excellent sea bass.

http://i215.photobucket.com/albums/cc246/seabass84/StreetRender1.jpg

http://i215.photobucket.com/albums/cc246/seabass84/StreetRender2.jpg

Very interesting, although the mix of styles doesn't appeal to me. I came very close to building a geodesic dome home in the mid 70's. Had a customized kit all finalized, was ready to send the check and then I got orders to Iceland. It got put on a back shelf and just stayed there. I've always regretted that 😞

Really nice presentation work, I like the building design too.

And I see that guy changed into warm weather attire, too. 👍 👍

I am experiencing the same problem. Found any solution for this problem?

@sepo said:

Yes apart from stone texture awesome render.

Have to agree on that...
The stone texture isn't good, but the renders are really great...! 👍

Looks pretty good.

My only other comment is I see some moiré in the furniture and some repeating in the countertop pattern seen on that shallow angle in pic 2 and 3.

@honoluludesktop said:

I noticed that a number podium renders posted have their colors balanced "non" white (don't know the proper term). Is there a podium reason for this, or is it personal preference?

i believe the term is called 'color bleeding'. its a natural phenomenon where the surface reflects part of its color onto surrounding surfaces. in render engines which support SI (global illumination) its mostly present.
some clients raise their brows when they see this phenomenon. and i am a victim of it several times myself with many different render engines. 😞 there are ways around this though... but at a risk of losing physical accuracy wrt to materials and light.
sorry for the off topic rant.

nice scene btw!!! 😄 more objects on the table and wall hangings and chandeliers and fire in the fire place can make this a real winner!!!! 👍 👍

nice modeling, and rendering, seabass!

i don't have time now to resize but a right-click view image shows the whole thing..