So, I’ve done the first couple of years of Architecture School but had to take a break for personal reasons. Now I’ve decided to go back next year!
In the meantime, I want to improve my Architecture Visualization skills. I’ve ‘played’ a bit with 3ds Max and Cinema 4D before but nothing too serious. I know the basics of both and therefore the basics of 3d, but that’s it, just the basics! Now (this next year), I want to really step up my game!
I don’t want to go for the 'realistic' stuff. I want to learn/do something in between 'artistic' and 'realistic'. I love the work of Luxigon and Labtop Rendering and that’s the flavor I want!
Yeah, I know I’m not going to become a professional in one year but I won’t be doing anything else, so I’ll be completely focused on this and I want to take it as far as I can!
I also know there are courses and workshops I could take, but I don’t want any of that! I want to learn at home with video tutorials (or books if that’s what it takes) on my own, because I know I can do it.
The question is: Where do I get the tutorials? Architecture related!
I know about Lynda (a great place to start, although it’s not architecture related), Digital-Tutors (some really nice stuff, again not architecture related), Gnomonology (great stuff, some of it architecture related, but a bit random) and VTC (a bit like Lynda).
I know Cinema 4D is less used and consequently harder to find good tutorials/resources, but 3ds Max!? C’mon! There should be some good architecture tutorials out there… Have some of you been in my shoes? Where do I get all the architecture visualization stuff? Please 'Archinecters' help me find good architecture tutorials!
Thx!
* I’ve pretty much decided to use 3ds Max, but that can change if you point out a very good reason!
** Although I didn’t mention Photoshop, I know it plays a big role too and I’m pretty good with it!
im slowly going through "mental ray for Maya, 3ds Max and XSI" by Boaz Livny.
so far it's pretty great; but i'm reading other stuff at the moment and just leveraging my knowledge of maxwell for whatever renderings i have to get done for competitions and all that . maxwell is a lot easier to use and with a damn nice user manual.
in my opinion, asking for architecture specific rendering tutorials is a bit... eh, i don't know how to phrase it without being mean... naive? maybe? any rendering tutorials that you do, you can apply to architecture, especially if you're not aiming to do highly photorealistic things.
@fluxbound
Well I'm not that naive... but I wasn't actually asking for architecture rendering tutorials. I was talking more about modeling and the whole approach to an architecture/urban scene... which I assume to be a lot different from doing a game character! I'd be a happy girl if I had found as many tutorials for architecture as I did for aliens/monsters!
About maxwell: Yeah, I've read that maxwell is a lot easier to learn/use than Mental/V-Ray, but also that Mental has become a very powerful render engine over the last couple releases. I'll probably try both before choosing one...
modeling, i really suggest you don't go with 3dsmax.
if you want a tight integration with mental ray, go with maya or even xsi. both of those, in my opinion will give you more control over your work.
i personally do the generative stuff in maya (mel is sexy) and actual sketch-to-3d modeling in rhino. rhino is amazingly powerful, especially if you ever plan on doing fabrication drawings, or if you want to venture into digital fabrication work.
Evermotion (evermotion dot org) has some great tutorials, amazing inspiring work and other cool stuff.
There is a book, called Architectural Rendering for Mental Ray, that has some good beginner tips.
The advanced stuff you will have to get down with 'The Area' forums and ask pointed questions or work with someone who has the experience... the field is incredibly deep and everyone has their own way of getting to a 'realistic' product. Modeling in 3D Studio (or ADT) and rendering with Mental Ray is the way to go for practical use in most architecture firms. Rhino is my favorite modeler but I don't get a chance to use it much in professional practice because of the nature of the work... Maya is the most flexible but has even less of a practical application because most shops are invested in MAX Design, not the more comprehensive maya package.
That said, Fluxbound you have a good point about Rhino and fabrication.
Everyone and their mom has an opinion on this matter, it all depends on your personal ambition.
@fluxbound
What? Maya? Isn't Maya good for the organic stuff? I'm no Zaha! I lean more towards Rem, MVRDV and REX... and if I can't get any good architecture tutorials for 3ds Max imagine for Maya!
But why do you say: 'i really suggest you don't go with 3dsmax'? Isn't Max the most used in Architecture? Oh.. and I want to get a job at some point... eheheh Where will Maya get me? Zaha? Greg Lynn?
I know a bit about Rhino and don't really like it...
The design comes from the designer, not the software. You can do just about anything with any 3D program.
I'd stick with max for compatibility down the road (this is what we use professionally).
Where are you located? This will have a big impact on whether you can get work doing the more abstract renderings. Most of the abstract images are competition oriented, not marketing, so in the US there is almost no market for those.
I do like the abstract images too (some are great, but the "style" is getting a little old, imho), but keep in mind that it is all about the artist. You can make amazing photoreal renderings that capture an artistic flare. This is rare and more difficult, but you need to think about this like photography - anyone can buy a snazzy dslr and take a lucky shot but it takes a true artist to make a great photo.
Photoshop - don't underestimate this. Putting semi transparent people from fashion mag scans is a breeze, making a great composition, fine tuning adjustments, etc., takes skill. Study photoshop for photographers, you'll be amazed at how much crosses over.
@loremipsum
Thx! Evermotion is amazing!!! There's a lot of great stuff there! Thx a lot!
About Rhino: I know a lot of people are using Rhino now, but I'm not into fabrication and don't really like grasshopper - the reason why 95% of the people use Rhino - so it's clearly not the best option for me.
About Maya: That's what I thought! Maya is amazingly powerful but how many practices use it for architecture visualization? 3% of the market?Probably even less! and I'm not going to the University of Applied Arts Vienna or SCI-Arc.
@randomized
SketchUp? You're not serious... are you?
@trace™
'You can do just about anything with any 3D program' Yeah, I know that... but how do you learn? That's my point! The resources available for each one are radically different! I would love to stick with Cinema 4D (used by Luxigon) but where do I get good tutorials? Evermotion is a beast with many architecture related toturials, but... for 3ds Max! Cinema 4D? 0! Nothing! Niente!
I'm in Europe. What do you mean by 'abstract images'?
I know Photoshop is a beast and I'm pretty good with it... not a pro! but pretty, pretty good! And resources? There are lots and lots and lots of great tutorials pretty much everywhere! That's the least of my concerns.
______
I've installed 3ds Max 2009 on my laptop but it seems to be a running a bit slow compared to Cinema 4D R11 Architecture Edition.
I've got a 3 year old Sony Vaio VGN-FE31H with the following specs:
Processor: Intel Core2Duo T5500 - 1.66GHz (x2), 667MHz, 2MB L2 Cache
RAM: 2048MB DDR2-667MHz
Graphics: NVidia GeForce Go7400 supporting 256MB TurboCache
OS: Windows XP Media Center Edition, SP3
Is it too old to run 3ds Max 2009 smoothly? Because I don't want to buy a new one before I get back to school next year...
"About Rhino: I know a lot of people are using Rhino now, but I'm not into fabrication and don't really like grasshopper - the reason why 95% of the people use Rhino - so it's clearly not the best option for me."
Way wrong.
Way way way wrong.
The reason a lot of practices are starting to use rhino is because of how nicely it plays with other software + it's interface borrows a lot of things from autocad, so the learning curve is minimal for those trained in classic autocad. Grasshopper is not being used as much a few sites would lead you to think.
"What? Maya? Isn't Maya good for the organic stuff? I'm no Zaha! I lean more towards Rem, MVRDV and REX... and if I can't get any good architecture tutorials for 3ds Max imagine for Maya!
But why do you say: 'i really suggest you don't go with 3dsmax'? Isn't Max the most used in Architecture? Oh.. and I want to get a job at some point... eheheh Where will Maya get me? Zaha? Greg Lynn?"
Naive again. Maya's strength, when dealing with architectural work, is the scripting engine and how accessible MEL and Python are. MaxScript = trash compared to the ability to call python modules from within Maya. So yeah, rant about organic forms all you want, when it comes down to it, Maya's modeling tools can accomplish anything 3dsMax can do and more... You're essentially saying that you want to cut your steak with a fork because Zaha cut her steak with a knife.
finally, why do you keep insisting on architecture tutorials? seriously; judging from your uninformed misconceptions about oh so many pieces of software, you might be better off modeling flower vases and choo choo trains for a while...
flux - what do you use the scripting for outside of school and blobby things? I've seen some beautiful generative stuff, but it is 'art', not architecture (that I've seen). Love it, but not part of the architecture world (for visualization or buildings).
Again, it is possible to make anything in any program. Maya, imho, is waaaaay overkill for any arch viz stuff (and certainly architecture), but it is a great program for animation and super, super high end stuff (that my company and anyone else in arch viz will never need or have a budget for - or want).
We use 3D Studio because of the compatibility, plain and simple. Client wants a BMW 745i? No problem (and yes, this has happened). It is just a much better overall investment for visualization (again, we make pretty pictures, this is not for designing architecture - I would NOT use 3D Studio for that, or Maya, for that matter).
Tutorials - look around CG Architect, there are a few recent books that focus on architectural modeling and rendering (in 3D Studio, of course).
Cinema - go look at www.mograph.net, it is a super motion graphics forum and most are using Cinema. You can probably track down lotsa good stuff there. CGTalk shoudl have a dedicated forum too.
Like anything creative, the best way to learn, once you have a handle on the basics, is to study those that are good. Dissect the images piece by piece.
Where is the lighting coming from? How much is photoshop (in those Luxigon images, I'd guess it was the vast majority)? What types of materials are they using?
Tutorials will help with the fundamentals, but the images you like are 99% artistic, not technical prowess (whereas most of ours are mostly in the 75% artistic because our clients want 'beautiful' but they also want it to look like a great photo from Arch Record/Digest, not a 'cool' image from a school project).
i scripted column grids, shading systems, program space calculators/visualization aids... and a crapload of other things while at my summer internship (big corporate office in DC).
2 hours of scripting = 2 days of cntrl-v gone.
but i was using digital project there. and digital project's scripting engine back then made me want to puke (and still might).
@fluxbound
Alright, I love it when we don't share the same point of view 'cause that's when we all learn something... so, thx for your answer!
About Rhino: Ok, I might have been misled by what I've seen from IaaC, however I don't see Rhino being used for this kind (e.g. Luxigon's style) of visualization either. Maybe it is great to do modeling, but I guess you'll have to finish things up with another software like 3ds Max... am I wrong?
About Maya: Well, I wasn't ranting... and I acknowledge that Maya is amazingly powerful (probably the best out there), but again, how many architecture firms use it? What kind of architecture do those firms do? 'organic stuff'... right? Are you saying that OMA, MVRDV, REX or BIG are cutting their steaks with forks? I don't think so.
Well, I keep insisting on architecture tutorials because, like I've said before, I assume modeling and the whole approach to an architecture/urban scene to be a lot different from doing a game character.
To learn the basics Lynda tutorials are great! However, moving forward I believe it would be a lot easier to go through tutorials like this house or this library than this devil or this troll. Don't you agree?
@fluxbound
Antialiasing is set to 4x (max) and everything else is also set to max quality!
@trace™
Thx! Yeah, there's a lot of good stuff at www.mograph.net but for motion graphics! Anyway, I'm still gonna dive deep into the forum... I might find some useful links!
You're right... A lot of it is Photoshop! I should analyze those images! Maybe I don't have to go very deep into 3d after all!
And I would love to use Cinema 4D. I like it better than 3ds Max! The problem (like Maya) is: who the hell uses Cinema 4D? Luxigon does, but architecture firms... can you name one? I can't!
No, you don't. That's one of the beauties of doing renderings like that - they are fast. One reason they rae used for competitions and seen in student work. The 3D rendering portion is relatively fast, you aren't worried about a perfect stainless steel material or perfect GI.
Dig deeper into mograph, you'll be surprised what you can learn about the 3D. Every motion graphic firm uses 3D to some degree, and many of the artists are amazing (look at pioneering crossover firms like Tronic and KDLab, both using Max by the way).
I agree with your assessment - better to spend time on software that will help you get a job, not to mention a company having it (having to convince your boss to buy a new software for thousands, plus plugins, etc., etc. and a snazzy computer will be very hard).
That said, most of the general 3D programs (Max, Maya, Cinema) have so many similar things you can jump from one to the other once you understand the terminology and how things work. That, and most are using VRay these days which works with just about everything out there.
Don't be too afraid of sticking with Cinema. Most importantly, perfect that 'artistic' look and you can get what you want out of anything. That's the hard part. Technical wizzes are a dime a dozen, but true 'artists' are extremely rare (and they can command a price, I know mograph artists that make well into the 6 figures freelancing).
Good luck. Make some images and post them, get some feedback (CGArchitect and CGTalk are great resources, some amazing talent on there).
@trace™
I agree with you on pretty much everything! Except:
"renderings like that - they are fast. One reason they rae used for competitions and seen in student work."
The whole process? It's not that fast (nor easy). After all, there's a reason why OMA, MVRDV, REX and BIG hire Luxigon to do it! And I don't see a lot of student work that good...
"most of the general 3D programs (Max, Maya, Cinema) have so many similar things you can jump from one to the other once you understand the terminology and how things work"
I do agree with that, but what do you put on your resume? Do you list 3ds Max, Maya, Cinema 4D, ... (the list could go on and on)? They gonna think you're 'crazy' (at least that you don't have a clue)! On the other hand, if you put only Cinema 4D and try to convince them that your could also work with 3ds Max, they'll say: 'Yeah... sure...' and move on to the next guy with 3ds Max on the resume. You know what I mean...
To be honest I'd love to stick with Cinema 4D, because it is as powerful as Max, a bit easier to use and is Mac native - I'd like to buy a MacBook Pro next year...
The problem is that not being much used by architecture firms it may close me some doors...
I think I'll keep looking for tutorials before coming to a decision...
I have seen student work that good, albeit not that consistently. There are two reasons why they would hire them, I'd imagine: 1 - they are fast, those images could be made in a day or two (some, not all, again most of the time is the creative balance, not the physical work) if given the 3D from the arch firm and 2 - I am guessing they aren't that expensive, given that they can be done quickly.
Before anyone chastises me for saying that, I do think it is like an artist that has spent a long time perfecting a technique that could be reapplied. http://www.arte-factory.com/ was doing this stuff ages and ages ago (perhaps many were, that's just the one I found inspiring, someone from there was on here a long time ago too).
I don't think many could do that work simply because most people don't have the 'eye' for visual things like that (even though most architects think they do). That's what makes their work special - it is not technically much at all, but the artistic touch is very deliberate and planned, which most cannot (or will not) do. The creative part is so much harder than people think!
Resume - just list your skills: Max - Expert, Maya - Intermediate, etc.
Upon graduation from grad school, I had Max, Maya, FormZ and all the adobe/macromedia products too.
@trace™
Thx trace! I didn't know about arte-factory, and they do have some pretty amazing work... I'll definitely keep an eye on them! (what's with the wispering at arte-factory.com? eheheh! original to say the least!)
A day or two? Yeah, maybe... they're pro's, they know what they're doing! But I bet they're expensive, otherwise small firms would hire them too... 'cause those images really help in a competition!
I mean, have you gone to OMA and MVRDV's websites? Almost everything they do there is replicable in sketchup+vray minus animation.
The biggest downfall about sketchup is that it doesn't handle large file sizes, complex geometry or automation.
But that is what I think makes Sketchup good... every detail has to be done by hand. Now with the inclusion of components in 7, you can significantly cut down a lot of time and change minimal parts.
There's a lot of good plugins right now for sketchup, too.
You may spend 4 hours more detailing out a facade in sketchup but that's probably 4 hours you would have spent scripting an automation in a more powerful 3D program.
I would say the biggest downfall to Sketchup right now is the lack of line weights.
All comes down to the artist. SU can do amazing things. You can do amazing things without GI, too.
Scripting is great for things too cumbersome to do by hand. For example, scripts for particular car activity on a highway that would take ages to do by hand.
@Orochi
MVRDV yeah! but OMA? not so sure... Anyway, I still think SketchUp is a bit limited, but I guess combined with Photoshop it can become very useful... and it seems a lot of people are using it! I'll give it a try!
@trace™
Thx! pushpullbar.com is a really nice forum.
* I guess I've made up my mind! I'm gonna learn Cinema 4D, Sketch Up and Maxwell.
@trace™
'slow things down'? I thought Maxwell would speed things up! why do you say that?
@fluxbound
Have you worked with both? What are the pros and cons of each one?
* Being easier to use definitely helps, but it's not decisive! I just wanna make the right decision... the one that suits my purposes best!
@18x32
Good to know somebody else found this topic helpful! But this discussion isn't closed yet. Speak up your mind! We (at least I) would love to hear what you have to say...
Some of those are pretty old, but unless Maxwell changed dramatically (and as I understand how the software works, it cannot be), it'll still be a day behind vray in terms of time.
Use what you feel comfortable with, they are both excellent. For me, time is money (literally), so there is no way I could even consider Maxwell. The quality in the hands of a pro is indistinguishable (for any of the renderers, for that matter).
Focus on the creative part, the technical part won't be too hard for any of them.
i've used both v-ray for rhino and maxwell, and there's way way many reasons why i keep going back to maxwell.
first off, material control is stellar. the rhino version of v-ray, a year and half ago when i used it, was severely lacking in this department. also, maxwell's mxm gallery website makes it so that finding materials takes little to no time.
simulens is sweet. having the renderer simulate the distortions caused by the aperture of a lens creates pretty stellar results.
as to the speed, i think trace is referring to old school v1.1 maxwell. post v1.7, speed has been dramatically increased (i started using maxwell 3 years ago and what took an overnight render now takes an hour).
it's also a matter of settings.... i've had v-ray renders take 8 hours to complete at reasonably low resolutions if i aim for high quality lighting.
that hasn't been the case with maxwell as of v1.5. i can set up an interior with 250 lights (not kidding), superbly complex geometry (i like curvy shiz? and modeling little details like column crevices), and ridiculous materials (hey, let's use black car paint for the floor and have concrete and glass in the render too), and i'll leave that at 2500x6500 for 17 hours and get a gorgeous rendering [make note of the HUGE resolution].
i'll give you this though, if i wanna render something extremely diagrammatic, i will tend towards v-ray, but the light controls are so bad compared to maxwell that sometimes it faulters at that. (multilight is so sexy).
flux - good to see that Maxwell has progressed that far, it always had amazing potential to start with.
At the end of the day, it is just opinions. For the truly artistic image, you need an artist.
Honestly, some of those images from Arte-Factory and Luxigon could be completely without GI. Add a dome setup and a lot of Photoshop and you can get it done in no time.
now that I don't have access to anything else, I've decided to learn blender. I think the interface is not really that bad, I've sat through a couple of tutorials before attempting anything and I think it's doable.
My choice is Mental Ray for Max or 3DViz otherwise.
I've got a 3 year old Sony Vaio VGN-FE31H with the following specs:
Processor: Intel Core2Duo T5500 - 1.66GHz (x2), 667MHz, 2MB L2 Cache
RAM: 2048MB DDR2-667MHz
Graphics: NVidia GeForce Go7400 supporting 256MB TurboCache
OS: Windows XP Media Center Edition, SP3
Is my laptop just too old to run a render engine, like Maxwell or VRay, on Cinema 4D?
I gotta say Maxwell looks really nice! It seems easier to learn/use than VRay and, at the same time, still very powerful! I just don't know why it takes forever to render a tiny little image, using all the default settings...
is c4d's default render engine really that bad? why does everybody use an external renderer? sorry if this is a stupid question, but i'm still a 3d newb.
i learned how to model and render in c4d, so there's a bit of nostalgia involved here.
using an external renderer like maxwell or vray means you get to jump around software without having to worry about learning each one's peculiar rendering engine.
my school sorta forced rhino on us first year. i learned that, learned maxwell, then when i moved to maya for thesis work, i didn't have to spend time learning mental ray and just used maxwell's maya plug-in.
Architecture Visualization Stuff
So, I’ve done the first couple of years of Architecture School but had to take a break for personal reasons. Now I’ve decided to go back next year!
In the meantime, I want to improve my Architecture Visualization skills. I’ve ‘played’ a bit with 3ds Max and Cinema 4D before but nothing too serious. I know the basics of both and therefore the basics of 3d, but that’s it, just the basics! Now (this next year), I want to really step up my game!
I don’t want to go for the 'realistic' stuff. I want to learn/do something in between 'artistic' and 'realistic'. I love the work of Luxigon and Labtop Rendering and that’s the flavor I want!
Yeah, I know I’m not going to become a professional in one year but I won’t be doing anything else, so I’ll be completely focused on this and I want to take it as far as I can!
I also know there are courses and workshops I could take, but I don’t want any of that! I want to learn at home with video tutorials (or books if that’s what it takes) on my own, because I know I can do it.
The question is: Where do I get the tutorials? Architecture related!
I know about Lynda (a great place to start, although it’s not architecture related), Digital-Tutors (some really nice stuff, again not architecture related), Gnomonology (great stuff, some of it architecture related, but a bit random) and VTC (a bit like Lynda).
I know Cinema 4D is less used and consequently harder to find good tutorials/resources, but 3ds Max!? C’mon! There should be some good architecture tutorials out there… Have some of you been in my shoes? Where do I get all the architecture visualization stuff? Please 'Archinecters' help me find good architecture tutorials!
Thx!
* I’ve pretty much decided to use 3ds Max, but that can change if you point out a very good reason!
** Although I didn’t mention Photoshop, I know it plays a big role too and I’m pretty good with it!
check out the autodesk student community (google it), they have a lot of nice resources over there.
maybe also contact your school and ask what they use and if they could give you some tips or even have some on-line tutorials or course you can take.
@fluxbound
Thx! but I'm not sure I can register there as I'm not currently enrolled in school.
@randomized
Thx! but as I've said I'm not currently enrolled in school and even if I were they wouldn't help me because don't have anything like that.
im slowly going through "mental ray for Maya, 3ds Max and XSI" by Boaz Livny.
so far it's pretty great; but i'm reading other stuff at the moment and just leveraging my knowledge of maxwell for whatever renderings i have to get done for competitions and all that . maxwell is a lot easier to use and with a damn nice user manual.
in my opinion, asking for architecture specific rendering tutorials is a bit... eh, i don't know how to phrase it without being mean... naive? maybe? any rendering tutorials that you do, you can apply to architecture, especially if you're not aiming to do highly photorealistic things.
maxwell is a lot easier to use and comes with a damn nice user manual.
my grammar/spelling is so off today.
@fluxbound
Well I'm not that naive... but I wasn't actually asking for architecture rendering tutorials. I was talking more about modeling and the whole approach to an architecture/urban scene... which I assume to be a lot different from doing a game character! I'd be a happy girl if I had found as many tutorials for architecture as I did for aliens/monsters!
About maxwell: Yeah, I've read that maxwell is a lot easier to learn/use than Mental/V-Ray, but also that Mental has become a very powerful render engine over the last couple releases. I'll probably try both before choosing one...
modeling, i really suggest you don't go with 3dsmax.
if you want a tight integration with mental ray, go with maya or even xsi. both of those, in my opinion will give you more control over your work.
i personally do the generative stuff in maya (mel is sexy) and actual sketch-to-3d modeling in rhino. rhino is amazingly powerful, especially if you ever plan on doing fabrication drawings, or if you want to venture into digital fabrication work.
Evermotion (evermotion dot org) has some great tutorials, amazing inspiring work and other cool stuff.
There is a book, called Architectural Rendering for Mental Ray, that has some good beginner tips.
The advanced stuff you will have to get down with 'The Area' forums and ask pointed questions or work with someone who has the experience... the field is incredibly deep and everyone has their own way of getting to a 'realistic' product. Modeling in 3D Studio (or ADT) and rendering with Mental Ray is the way to go for practical use in most architecture firms. Rhino is my favorite modeler but I don't get a chance to use it much in professional practice because of the nature of the work... Maya is the most flexible but has even less of a practical application because most shops are invested in MAX Design, not the more comprehensive maya package.
That said, Fluxbound you have a good point about Rhino and fabrication.
Everyone and their mom has an opinion on this matter, it all depends on your personal ambition.
@fluxbound
What? Maya? Isn't Maya good for the organic stuff? I'm no Zaha! I lean more towards Rem, MVRDV and REX... and if I can't get any good architecture tutorials for 3ds Max imagine for Maya!
But why do you say: 'i really suggest you don't go with 3dsmax'? Isn't Max the most used in Architecture? Oh.. and I want to get a job at some point... eheheh Where will Maya get me? Zaha? Greg Lynn?
I know a bit about Rhino and don't really like it...
if you're into rem/mvrdv/rex etc with the recent pixel/voxel trend just go with sketch-up/vray and you're set.
The design comes from the designer, not the software. You can do just about anything with any 3D program.
I'd stick with max for compatibility down the road (this is what we use professionally).
Where are you located? This will have a big impact on whether you can get work doing the more abstract renderings. Most of the abstract images are competition oriented, not marketing, so in the US there is almost no market for those.
I do like the abstract images too (some are great, but the "style" is getting a little old, imho), but keep in mind that it is all about the artist. You can make amazing photoreal renderings that capture an artistic flare. This is rare and more difficult, but you need to think about this like photography - anyone can buy a snazzy dslr and take a lucky shot but it takes a true artist to make a great photo.
www.cgarchitect.com and www.cgtalk.com are great, as is Evermotion
Photoshop - don't underestimate this. Putting semi transparent people from fashion mag scans is a breeze, making a great composition, fine tuning adjustments, etc., takes skill. Study photoshop for photographers, you'll be amazed at how much crosses over.
+1 on the photoshop comment. imo 50% is the model, 15% the render, 35% photoshop/illustrator.
@loremipsum
Thx! Evermotion is amazing!!! There's a lot of great stuff there! Thx a lot!
About Rhino: I know a lot of people are using Rhino now, but I'm not into fabrication and don't really like grasshopper - the reason why 95% of the people use Rhino - so it's clearly not the best option for me.
About Maya: That's what I thought! Maya is amazingly powerful but how many practices use it for architecture visualization? 3% of the market?Probably even less! and I'm not going to the University of Applied Arts Vienna or SCI-Arc.
@randomized
SketchUp? You're not serious... are you?
@trace™
'You can do just about anything with any 3D program' Yeah, I know that... but how do you learn? That's my point! The resources available for each one are radically different! I would love to stick with Cinema 4D (used by Luxigon) but where do I get good tutorials? Evermotion is a beast with many architecture related toturials, but... for 3ds Max! Cinema 4D? 0! Nothing! Niente!
I'm in Europe. What do you mean by 'abstract images'?
I know Photoshop is a beast and I'm pretty good with it... not a pro! but pretty, pretty good! And resources? There are lots and lots and lots of great tutorials pretty much everywhere! That's the least of my concerns.
______
I've installed 3ds Max 2009 on my laptop but it seems to be a running a bit slow compared to Cinema 4D R11 Architecture Edition.
I've got a 3 year old Sony Vaio VGN-FE31H with the following specs:
Processor: Intel Core2Duo T5500 - 1.66GHz (x2), 667MHz, 2MB L2 Cache
RAM: 2048MB DDR2-667MHz
Graphics: NVidia GeForce Go7400 supporting 256MB TurboCache
OS: Windows XP Media Center Edition, SP3
Is it too old to run 3ds Max 2009 smoothly? Because I don't want to buy a new one before I get back to school next year...
See what I'm talking about? It looks blurry...
It gotta be the graphics card!
"About Rhino: I know a lot of people are using Rhino now, but I'm not into fabrication and don't really like grasshopper - the reason why 95% of the people use Rhino - so it's clearly not the best option for me."
Way wrong.
Way way way wrong.
The reason a lot of practices are starting to use rhino is because of how nicely it plays with other software + it's interface borrows a lot of things from autocad, so the learning curve is minimal for those trained in classic autocad. Grasshopper is not being used as much a few sites would lead you to think.
"What? Maya? Isn't Maya good for the organic stuff? I'm no Zaha! I lean more towards Rem, MVRDV and REX... and if I can't get any good architecture tutorials for 3ds Max imagine for Maya!
But why do you say: 'i really suggest you don't go with 3dsmax'? Isn't Max the most used in Architecture? Oh.. and I want to get a job at some point... eheheh Where will Maya get me? Zaha? Greg Lynn?"
Naive again. Maya's strength, when dealing with architectural work, is the scripting engine and how accessible MEL and Python are. MaxScript = trash compared to the ability to call python modules from within Maya. So yeah, rant about organic forms all you want, when it comes down to it, Maya's modeling tools can accomplish anything 3dsMax can do and more... You're essentially saying that you want to cut your steak with a fork because Zaha cut her steak with a knife.
finally, why do you keep insisting on architecture tutorials? seriously; judging from your uninformed misconceptions about oh so many pieces of software, you might be better off modeling flower vases and choo choo trains for a while...
also, about that print screen: antialiasing issues. check your nvidia control panel.
flux - what do you use the scripting for outside of school and blobby things? I've seen some beautiful generative stuff, but it is 'art', not architecture (that I've seen). Love it, but not part of the architecture world (for visualization or buildings).
Again, it is possible to make anything in any program. Maya, imho, is waaaaay overkill for any arch viz stuff (and certainly architecture), but it is a great program for animation and super, super high end stuff (that my company and anyone else in arch viz will never need or have a budget for - or want).
We use 3D Studio because of the compatibility, plain and simple. Client wants a BMW 745i? No problem (and yes, this has happened). It is just a much better overall investment for visualization (again, we make pretty pictures, this is not for designing architecture - I would NOT use 3D Studio for that, or Maya, for that matter).
Tutorials - look around CG Architect, there are a few recent books that focus on architectural modeling and rendering (in 3D Studio, of course).
Cinema - go look at www.mograph.net, it is a super motion graphics forum and most are using Cinema. You can probably track down lotsa good stuff there. CGTalk shoudl have a dedicated forum too.
Like anything creative, the best way to learn, once you have a handle on the basics, is to study those that are good. Dissect the images piece by piece.
Where is the lighting coming from? How much is photoshop (in those Luxigon images, I'd guess it was the vast majority)? What types of materials are they using?
Tutorials will help with the fundamentals, but the images you like are 99% artistic, not technical prowess (whereas most of ours are mostly in the 75% artistic because our clients want 'beautiful' but they also want it to look like a great photo from Arch Record/Digest, not a 'cool' image from a school project).
quick response:
i scripted column grids, shading systems, program space calculators/visualization aids... and a crapload of other things while at my summer internship (big corporate office in DC).
2 hours of scripting = 2 days of cntrl-v gone.
but i was using digital project there. and digital project's scripting engine back then made me want to puke (and still might).
@fluxbound
Alright, I love it when we don't share the same point of view 'cause that's when we all learn something... so, thx for your answer!
About Rhino: Ok, I might have been misled by what I've seen from IaaC, however I don't see Rhino being used for this kind (e.g. Luxigon's style) of visualization either. Maybe it is great to do modeling, but I guess you'll have to finish things up with another software like 3ds Max... am I wrong?
About Maya: Well, I wasn't ranting... and I acknowledge that Maya is amazingly powerful (probably the best out there), but again, how many architecture firms use it? What kind of architecture do those firms do? 'organic stuff'... right? Are you saying that OMA, MVRDV, REX or BIG are cutting their steaks with forks? I don't think so.
Well, I keep insisting on architecture tutorials because, like I've said before, I assume modeling and the whole approach to an architecture/urban scene to be a lot different from doing a game character.
To learn the basics Lynda tutorials are great! However, moving forward I believe it would be a lot easier to go through tutorials like this house or this library than this devil or this troll. Don't you agree?
@fluxbound
Antialiasing is set to 4x (max) and everything else is also set to max quality!
@trace™
Thx! Yeah, there's a lot of good stuff at www.mograph.net but for motion graphics! Anyway, I'm still gonna dive deep into the forum... I might find some useful links!
You're right... A lot of it is Photoshop! I should analyze those images! Maybe I don't have to go very deep into 3d after all!
And I would love to use Cinema 4D. I like it better than 3ds Max! The problem (like Maya) is: who the hell uses Cinema 4D? Luxigon does, but architecture firms... can you name one? I can't!
No, you don't. That's one of the beauties of doing renderings like that - they are fast. One reason they rae used for competitions and seen in student work. The 3D rendering portion is relatively fast, you aren't worried about a perfect stainless steel material or perfect GI.
Dig deeper into mograph, you'll be surprised what you can learn about the 3D. Every motion graphic firm uses 3D to some degree, and many of the artists are amazing (look at pioneering crossover firms like Tronic and KDLab, both using Max by the way).
I agree with your assessment - better to spend time on software that will help you get a job, not to mention a company having it (having to convince your boss to buy a new software for thousands, plus plugins, etc., etc. and a snazzy computer will be very hard).
That said, most of the general 3D programs (Max, Maya, Cinema) have so many similar things you can jump from one to the other once you understand the terminology and how things work. That, and most are using VRay these days which works with just about everything out there.
Don't be too afraid of sticking with Cinema. Most importantly, perfect that 'artistic' look and you can get what you want out of anything. That's the hard part. Technical wizzes are a dime a dozen, but true 'artists' are extremely rare (and they can command a price, I know mograph artists that make well into the 6 figures freelancing).
Good luck. Make some images and post them, get some feedback (CGArchitect and CGTalk are great resources, some amazing talent on there).
@trace™
I agree with you on pretty much everything! Except:
"renderings like that - they are fast. One reason they rae used for competitions and seen in student work."
The whole process? It's not that fast (nor easy). After all, there's a reason why OMA, MVRDV, REX and BIG hire Luxigon to do it! And I don't see a lot of student work that good...
"most of the general 3D programs (Max, Maya, Cinema) have so many similar things you can jump from one to the other once you understand the terminology and how things work"
I do agree with that, but what do you put on your resume? Do you list 3ds Max, Maya, Cinema 4D, ... (the list could go on and on)? They gonna think you're 'crazy' (at least that you don't have a clue)! On the other hand, if you put only Cinema 4D and try to convince them that your could also work with 3ds Max, they'll say: 'Yeah... sure...' and move on to the next guy with 3ds Max on the resume. You know what I mean...
To be honest I'd love to stick with Cinema 4D, because it is as powerful as Max, a bit easier to use and is Mac native - I'd like to buy a MacBook Pro next year...
The problem is that not being much used by architecture firms it may close me some doors...
I think I'll keep looking for tutorials before coming to a decision...
I have seen student work that good, albeit not that consistently. There are two reasons why they would hire them, I'd imagine: 1 - they are fast, those images could be made in a day or two (some, not all, again most of the time is the creative balance, not the physical work) if given the 3D from the arch firm and 2 - I am guessing they aren't that expensive, given that they can be done quickly.
Before anyone chastises me for saying that, I do think it is like an artist that has spent a long time perfecting a technique that could be reapplied. http://www.arte-factory.com/ was doing this stuff ages and ages ago (perhaps many were, that's just the one I found inspiring, someone from there was on here a long time ago too).
I don't think many could do that work simply because most people don't have the 'eye' for visual things like that (even though most architects think they do). That's what makes their work special - it is not technically much at all, but the artistic touch is very deliberate and planned, which most cannot (or will not) do. The creative part is so much harder than people think!
Resume - just list your skills: Max - Expert, Maya - Intermediate, etc.
Upon graduation from grad school, I had Max, Maya, FormZ and all the adobe/macromedia products too.
@trace™
Thx trace! I didn't know about arte-factory, and they do have some pretty amazing work... I'll definitely keep an eye on them! (what's with the wispering at arte-factory.com? eheheh! original to say the least!)
A day or two? Yeah, maybe... they're pro's, they know what they're doing! But I bet they're expensive, otherwise small firms would hire them too... 'cause those images really help in a competition!
* leaning towards cinema 4d more and more...
sketchup is a way underrated tool.
I mean, have you gone to OMA and MVRDV's websites? Almost everything they do there is replicable in sketchup+vray minus animation.
The biggest downfall about sketchup is that it doesn't handle large file sizes, complex geometry or automation.
But that is what I think makes Sketchup good... every detail has to be done by hand. Now with the inclusion of components in 7, you can significantly cut down a lot of time and change minimal parts.
There's a lot of good plugins right now for sketchup, too.
You may spend 4 hours more detailing out a facade in sketchup but that's probably 4 hours you would have spent scripting an automation in a more powerful 3D program.
I would say the biggest downfall to Sketchup right now is the lack of line weights.
Super architecture and sketchup forum:
http://www.pushpullbar.com/
All comes down to the artist. SU can do amazing things. You can do amazing things without GI, too.
Scripting is great for things too cumbersome to do by hand. For example, scripts for particular car activity on a highway that would take ages to do by hand.
@Orochi
MVRDV yeah! but OMA? not so sure... Anyway, I still think SketchUp is a bit limited, but I guess combined with Photoshop it can become very useful... and it seems a lot of people are using it! I'll give it a try!
@trace™
Thx! pushpullbar.com is a really nice forum.
* I guess I've made up my mind! I'm gonna learn Cinema 4D, Sketch Up and Maxwell.
skip the Maxwell for those renderings you are after, you are going to slow things down for something that will not benefit you. Go with VRay.
Everyone has their opinions, of course.
yup. i seriously think there's a lot more potential in maxwell as compared to v-ray...
@trace™
'slow things down'? I thought Maxwell would speed things up! why do you say that?
@fluxbound
Have you worked with both? What are the pros and cons of each one?
* Being easier to use definitely helps, but it's not decisive! I just wanna make the right decision... the one that suits my purposes best!
@18x32
Good to know somebody else found this topic helpful! But this discussion isn't closed yet. Speak up your mind! We (at least I) would love to hear what you have to say...
http://www.cgarchitect.com/vb/18712-maxwell-vs-vray.html
Some of those are pretty old, but unless Maxwell changed dramatically (and as I understand how the software works, it cannot be), it'll still be a day behind vray in terms of time.
Use what you feel comfortable with, they are both excellent. For me, time is money (literally), so there is no way I could even consider Maxwell. The quality in the hands of a pro is indistinguishable (for any of the renderers, for that matter).
Focus on the creative part, the technical part won't be too hard for any of them.
@trace™
Humm... didn't know about that. But I definitely don't wanna wait 2 hours for something that can be done in 45 minutes!
i've used both v-ray for rhino and maxwell, and there's way way many reasons why i keep going back to maxwell.
first off, material control is stellar. the rhino version of v-ray, a year and half ago when i used it, was severely lacking in this department. also, maxwell's mxm gallery website makes it so that finding materials takes little to no time.
simulens is sweet. having the renderer simulate the distortions caused by the aperture of a lens creates pretty stellar results.
as to the speed, i think trace is referring to old school v1.1 maxwell. post v1.7, speed has been dramatically increased (i started using maxwell 3 years ago and what took an overnight render now takes an hour).
it's also a matter of settings.... i've had v-ray renders take 8 hours to complete at reasonably low resolutions if i aim for high quality lighting.
that hasn't been the case with maxwell as of v1.5. i can set up an interior with 250 lights (not kidding), superbly complex geometry (i like curvy shiz? and modeling little details like column crevices), and ridiculous materials (hey, let's use black car paint for the floor and have concrete and glass in the render too), and i'll leave that at 2500x6500 for 17 hours and get a gorgeous rendering [make note of the HUGE resolution].
again, just my opinion.
i'll give you this though, if i wanna render something extremely diagrammatic, i will tend towards v-ray, but the light controls are so bad compared to maxwell that sometimes it faulters at that. (multilight is so sexy).
@fluxbound
'something extremely diagrammatic'? Can you show me an example?
@fluxbound
Is this the Maxwell manual you've mentioned?
flux - good to see that Maxwell has progressed that far, it always had amazing potential to start with.
At the end of the day, it is just opinions. For the truly artistic image, you need an artist.
Honestly, some of those images from Arte-Factory and Luxigon could be completely without GI. Add a dome setup and a lot of Photoshop and you can get it done in no time.
Where do I get the Maxwell Render Manual?
probably from the same place where you get the software.
It took me over 2hrs to render a 320x240 image! WTF?
I'm ready to throw my laptop out the window!
maxwell or vray?
now that I don't have access to anything else, I've decided to learn blender. I think the interface is not really that bad, I've sat through a couple of tutorials before attempting anything and I think it's doable.
My choice is Mental Ray for Max or 3DViz otherwise.
Maxwell 2.0
I've got a 3 year old Sony Vaio VGN-FE31H with the following specs:
Processor: Intel Core2Duo T5500 - 1.66GHz (x2), 667MHz, 2MB L2 Cache
RAM: 2048MB DDR2-667MHz
Graphics: NVidia GeForce Go7400 supporting 256MB TurboCache
OS: Windows XP Media Center Edition, SP3
Is my laptop just too old to run a render engine, like Maxwell or VRay, on Cinema 4D?
hmm i get good render times on a two year old macbook pro...
when was the last time you reformatted that thing?
Half year ago...
I gotta say Maxwell looks really nice! It seems easier to learn/use than VRay and, at the same time, still very powerful! I just don't know why it takes forever to render a tiny little image, using all the default settings...
is c4d's default render engine really that bad? why does everybody use an external renderer? sorry if this is a stupid question, but i'm still a 3d newb.
i personally love c4d's rendering engine.
i learned how to model and render in c4d, so there's a bit of nostalgia involved here.
using an external renderer like maxwell or vray means you get to jump around software without having to worry about learning each one's peculiar rendering engine.
my school sorta forced rhino on us first year. i learned that, learned maxwell, then when i moved to maya for thesis work, i didn't have to spend time learning mental ray and just used maxwell's maya plug-in.
but that's just me.
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.