Architectural Anim with VRayToon

[cpnichols]

So I noticed one thing that really disturbed me about this spot. It is the camera work. You obviously put a perspective correction lens on the camera and it just makes the buildings look way off in perspective, especially in animation. Tilt shift lenses should never be used in animation, and IMHO, should be not be used anymore in general. The tops of the building grow faster then the bottom which is the opposite of what should really happen. Also the area where the camera tilts up looks wrong too. But your sky motion also seems way off, and it may be a result of using that lens.

[paulison]

i think without camera correction you would need to keep the target point fairly level to control the perspective in which case you would probably see less off the top of the building? I like it the way it is...has a sort of monumental feel to it although personally I wouldn't use such a wide angle.

interesting point though to not use camera correction in animation. Learn something new every day!

in terms of the perspective, glass, toon and weird sky, i think they work to give the development a bit of an artistic feel while also being physically accurate in terms of the 3D model. In terms of cpnichols comments, I think they would be more relevant to a more realistic kind of presentation but its great to hear these comments to learn something new.

I still think this is really nice work.

Thanks,

Paul

[dejaVu]

gfa2: motion Blur was done in post with ReelSmart Mb, which is much quicker than VRay, but oviously less accurate.

Render times were between 5-12 minutes on a 2.6Ghz dualcore with 2Gb RAM. GI was IRMap set to Medium with a couple of little tweaks, and set to Single frame.

cpnicols: I understand your comments but I don't think you can ever say "never" or that every rules should be adhered to rigidly. Perhaps in certain industries, you shouldn't use camera correction, but as someone has mentioned, the aim wasn't for photoreal. The Tilt Shift was used because it achieved a certain look that the architect and client wanted. Not using it would have result in a totally different framing of the building and surrounds, and we explored this too. In the end, although not accurate or visually "right", it served it's intended purpose. Perhaps if this animation was going to be used for marketing, a different decision may have been made.
The sky motion looks wrong because it was poorly done, and not because of the camera.

[biglolly]

cpnicols - would you tend to avoid using the camera correction modifier even if it were a still? My work colleages always tell me to use it because our clients keep coming back asking why the walls appear to be coming in on themselves. I roll my eyes and apply it.

I agree about not using it in animation though - does look a bit funny. Still this is nice work though!

Perhaps I'm way off the mark here, but isn't the camera correction modofier not really a correction modifier? Surely the perspective distortion you get with wide angle lenses in Max is based on what you'd get with actual lenses (maybe not exactly but close!), so it should be called something else...camera alteration modifier?

[pailhead]

IMHO tilt shift should be used almost always when dealing with architectural work.

[rmejia]

wow, came out very nice, looks awesome!