d house

[PIXELBOX_SRO]

surely neither new nor revolutionary you definitely have the point, but only since he took the time to make some tuts on these techniques, theyve become being used more....its evident in in the forum and i myself use the HDRI/SUN rig he has explained in his blog...

the truth is that while presenting architecture, there ARENT endless posibilities in the creation of environment. Images willl probably always look alike from time to time in certain image features or post production techniques. Having said that, i have to take back the claim about the environment and foliage setting being "copied"

[pnel77]

Overall looks good although the first set of images lack light/shadow contrast - it's such a bright day according to your background, but the shadows are faint - contrast should be much higher?
Maybe play around with the hdri gamma setting..

[danieljhatton]

For the grass gravel merge I basically created a flat plain, the gravel, and an indented plane, the grass. Then I just used advanced painter to paint the vraymesh onto the grass plain. You just need to make sure the grass plain sinks away very gradually and just enough to take the height of both the gravel and the grass. The more dramatic the drop the sharper the blend will become.

[tricky]

Too many images to comment on in my opinion. I would focus on one or two of what you think are the best shots and let people make more directed comments. Nice compositions from what I quickly scan over, but for me they lack something. I'm not exactly sure what. Maybe its 'focus'. Maybe its interesting foreground detail. Maybe its contrast. Maybe its context (or lack of). The shots are quite general. You've put effort into the texturing: I want to see it close-up.

[CA Portugal]

Famous architects copy famous architects...

etc

Its all about references.

I believe that when an artist "copies" he should give his own personal touch, risk or go futher somehow but its not a must.

Who cares if DH is "copying" as long as his client likes and pays for it thats the most important thing in my opinion.



Overall good work.

I just dont like some of the grass seems too flat and equal sometimes. The flowers in some pictures (e.g. first img in first post) somehow makes the floor look repetitive.
Rest looks great and guthriesk.

[Dirk71]

Really nice and clean images! Would you mind to tell us a bit about your render settings? How did you achieve the clean and crisp look?

Cheers, Dirk

[MHenry]

Really nice clean work!

[flino2004]

I like them, they look very realistic...my only commentary is the pebbles need displacement, you see when the floor meet the white wall( it looks too straight in my opinion)

Fernando

[jason330]

This is a funny forum:P. Anyway great images if someone said my stuff looked like peters I would be more than happy, mind you the tone that it was said was a little rude. I would also like to know what render settings you are using I’m also using PG's HDRI's I set the image sampler to Adaptive DMC with a CLR thresh of 0.003 this is manly to reduce noise but render times are a little crazy.
Here is a link to some of my renders you can see what teh settings produce.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/23685049@N07/

[danieljhatton]

Thanks guys, there is a broad range of views on this one. I have definitely taken on board all of the comments and will be actioning them in the next set of images I produce. Grass being the first thing. I totally agree with the uniformity of being a bit too clinical. I think the evening shots are definitely too blue. Gravel wise. I think the gravel is quite nice especially for vast areas like this, and its dead easy to use. I agree with Fernando, I think the gravel disappears under the wall which is kinda ruining the roughness of it. I will definitely be cutting down the number of renders I create in future. Too many, and this had a direct effect on the quality I used to get them all done. I think Jason, 0.003 is good if you have shed loads of time to render one image, I think 0.005 is a good setting. I used 0.009 - 0.01 on these. Its a balancing act as well. If you render @ say 6000px you hardly notice noise from certain settings. I don't mind a bit of noise although it seems to attract negative comments. Some people prefer blotches from an irradiance map. Each to their own I suppose. Dirk. I rendered these with no AA settings and I think the sharpness is coming from Flickr. They seem to be sharpening images in the previews. The images on this thread are being pulled from flickr see. The other thing I am going to think about using in the future is square images. I think you have to move quite far away to make them work. I think then you loose some detail.

So to sum up what I have learned. Landscaping, don't go to clinical, try and rough it up a bit. Add more variation in Grass plants etc... I would be tempted to move away from Cut grass as opposed to keeping natural.
More variation in Background elements. Add foreground elements to allow people to focus.
Think about aspect ratios.
Don't do too many images, you have to kill settings to get them all rendered.
Give some time to work on Gamma and contrast a little more, camera settings.
Remember the little details that matter, (gravel going under the wall) they really stand out.

[pnel77]

..such a model student...good you are young padawan...