Portfolio: How to Differentiate between Physical Models and Renders


I'm updating my portfolio, and I've found that many people cannot tell that some of the images are photographs of physical models - not renderings. Is there a standard way to graphically indicate one versus the other?


Feb 11, 19 6:26 pm

Photorealistic scale figures. If they're missing, I assume it's not a render.

Also nice humblebrag about your model building skills.

Feb 11, 19 6:29 pm

or really bad renderings

Non Sequitur

Ding ding ding.

Non Sequitur

I’d say the visible glue and cut/lazer marks would be an obvious thing, but maybe I’m giving your audience too much credit… or assuming too much of your rendering skills. 

Feb 11, 19 6:47 pm

I always include laser marks and glue spots in my renders


I see you either went to USC or UCLA. That probably explains why you'd ask such a stupid question.

If you had a properly design portfolio this would never be an issue.

Feb 11, 19 9:06 pm

Wow... having a tough day?


It does seem like a strange question though haha


If you're building physical models that end up looking just like renderings then... why are you building models?  Seems like a waste of time and materials.  If this is a sincere question:  the "standard" way to explain anything in a portfolio is to have captions and/or a little bit of explanatory text.  Label the rendering "Rendering of Northeast Corner".  Label the model "Model:  museum board, plaster, and packing peanuts."

Feb 12, 19 2:25 pm

render vs reality

Feb 12, 19 4:20 pm
Lewis Garrison

Honest question here. Why does it matter. The purpose of the imagery is  show your skills at communicating your design ideas. If you feel it's absolutely necessary just label the images.

Feb 18, 19 5:44 pm

Block this user

Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?

  • ×Search in: