archviz! some tips please

[moka.studio]

the glass in at the ground level is too blue.
It should be much darker on a sunny day.
Also, the people and car look fine, except for the man at the balcony, who looks a bit too 'archi-posed'.
Another small point, I don't think a car would be moving very fast on a cobble stone street, it would have been better not to have a blur on the car for this image.

[AdamT]

Nice job with the modeling and texturing. The angle might have been a little more interesting if you'd moved the camera a bit to the left--to get a straighter view of the front of the building.

Generally I think you've got a few problems trying be photorealistic. In bright daylight you'd be shooting at a small aperture and high shutter speed. As a result, you wouldn't see motion blur on the car, and certainly not on the people. Also, the building in the background would be sharper. The foreground (CG stuff) also looks pretty crispy--could use a bit of blur and grain.

That's not to say that you have to go with photorealism, but if you're going for more of an illustrated style I don't think you should use a photo backdrop.

[maikukai]

I like it. It gets the point across to the client, which it the most important part.

I agree with AdamT, I think you could try a more interesting angle, showing the front of the building. And the glass looks a little funky, make it darker and maybe try fresnel in the reflection channel so the reflection fades across the face of the glass. Also, using photos for reference really helps. Sometimes I take photos of the site and adjacent buildings to get a feel for how they should look.

It looks like you are using GI and AO. Are you using HDRI for the lighting? That might improve the realism, if that's what you are after.

As far as the blur goes, I kinda like it. You see this so much in ArchiVis, but it does give a static scene a little motion, even if it is not realistic.

The tree is kinda in the way, have you thought about making it transparent? I haven't used this technique yet myself, but I've see others make it work. It lends to a more illustrative style, but helps show off more of the architecture.

Oh, by the way, how did you do your vegetation? Jepgs with alpha maps? Done in post with Photoshop?

[vid2k2]

Over all, I like it.
Things that might make it better ???
- everything already said and one other thing ......

I'd try to avoid tangents / tangent lines.
Example:
The cathedral seems to be growing out of the top of
the roof of the building to the left. Hence, a different
camera angle would have helped.

Unfortunately, the tree is smack in the middle of the composition
and that's what hits me first. Even "if" a tree is really there, a
change in camera position would have helped.

Last item is that it seems to be high noon. Shadows are not
very interesting that time of day and the sun washes everything out.
I'd have investigated earlier in the morning, or, later in the afternoon.
I like using a sun for this type of shadow variation.

I'd like to see more arch viz :)

[rikke]

You've nailed my 'problem' people. I'm still looking for an own style and everytime I try different lighting methods. Everytime I aim at photorealism, but I always end up with a more illustrative look, which is not necessary a bad thing. But Adam, you are so right about the wrong choice of putting a photo of the cathedral in it, in stead of a 3D model.

Funny story about the camera angle: The wall painting logo is something that needs to be restored (it's an old building) but the capitals -IANISMES where the only ones that could still be read and no one knew which were the missing capitals. Fortunatily there was a tree just in front of it :) . Moving the camera would 'expose the unknown'.

This scene was made with AO but not with GI, which I try to avoid for outdoor scenes. I used the area hemisphere light instead, a function I like very much. I used the right fresnel settings for the windows, but indeed the bottom windows should be darker. To be honest, I never thought about making the scene at another time than high noon, always presumed it was the most attractive time of day. But I'm really gonna try these suggestions for my next project. Thanks, this was very informative!

[maikukai]

Just curious, why do you avoid GI for outdoor scenes? To me GI seems essential for getting that photo-real look, especially the little things like the green color from grass bouncing onto walls, etc. I've had much success with GI in combination with HDRI. Don't avoid it, embrace it.

And high noon from a photographers perspective it the worst time of day possible. Nasty light, yuck. Dusk and Dawn are best. For ArchiVis, it might be too moody to show a client, but maybe try 9:00-10:00 or 2:00 to 4:00, lower angles that give longer shadows. Adjust the color of light to what looks best. In the end, you want to show the client a pretty picture that shows off the architecture, not something that shows you can accurately model lighting conditions at a specific time and date. (Unless that's what they asked for, of course...)

[ozmackem]

Just a few points.
Main thing I notice that I don't think has been mentioned yet is the odd shadow behind the street sign on the wall, it looks way too dark and has two shadows as if there's two light sources.
I agree with the motion blur comments.
Finally, maybe the front of the top of the building looks a little plastic, a little unreal. I'm presuming its representing a new building, but it looks like it needs a little dirtying up?

[Martin Kay]

It looks way over lit, where everything is washed out. The lighting angle is uninteresting. The churchy building in the back is not as sharp as the main building- something you wouldn't get with a camera lens with this scene.:) Martin K

[ozmackem]

Why not post the scene if you can and see if any are willing to either re-texture or re-light it? I'd have a go :)

[rikke]

@maikukai:
I avoid GI because of the long rendertimes, although AO isn't that fast eather. But I'm experimenting and definitely will consider it for a next project, as long as the output doesn't need to be over 5000 pixels high, like in this case. I do like GI, and use it for many interior and product visualisations, but for outdoor scenes it always leaves me in frustration...
Maybe I'll have a little test with this scene myself.

@ozmackem:
The second 'shadow' behind the parking sign is AO, which is indeed a bit overdone. Maybe the plastic look comes from the over lit zones? Thanks for the offer to have a look at the scene, but I don't think my client would want this. But feel free to let me in on your techniques...:)

[CGTalk Moderation]

This thread has been automatically closed as it remained inactive for 12 months. If you wish to continue the discussion, please create a new thread in the appropriate forum.