Building exterior (view ok?)

[Crayox13]

Hi guys,
I would like a professional opinion on this. We did several tries here, but the client is not satisfied. I like this eye level view with vertical correction, but the client says the building is completely distorted. I see the correction is visible, but it's normal for a building of this size and height. The client on the other hand would like a render from like 4th floor (so camera would be completely horizontal), I think that would be a totally boring view, and also it would show more road, ground, etc. Here the ground is "compressed" due to the low angle, and you see more of the building.

Thanks in advance for your advices.

[andybot_cg]

give it just the slightest convergence in the z direction. I agree it looks distorted because a shifted 2pt perspective is not something seen in real life. It looks too fat on the top

edit: here's 5 secs. in photoshop...

[glorybound]

I think the camera is already too high, it's an unnatural view. I think you can utilize parallax, if you want to stress height.

[flino2004]

I agreed with Andybot_cg and Bobby....on top of their commentaries I wold move the camera to the left a bit and center it in your composition.

Fernando

[Crayox13]

So in other words, first - loose the vertical shift all together and have the vertical lines narrow towards the top? I thought that was not ok.

Glorybound, I'm not familiar with parallax. What do you mean?

fino2004, yes, to the left would be the overall composition since it seams the building is pointing to the left, but they want the totems to be seen, I'll adjust it a bit better.

[glorybound]

I wouldn't say get rid of the vertical shift, necessarily. I usually straighten mine... I guess it depends on what your intent is. Do you want to emphasis height? If so, leave it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parallax

[andybot_cg]

yeah, I would still have a slight shift, just not completely parallel. If it's true perspective, then it tapers too much and doesn't look good either. Find a nice balance. (That's why photoshop is so nice - you can do a couple of quick transform-->perspective shifts and see which one looks best.)

[glorybound]

with that distance, you probably wouldn't get that much shift. If you pull the camera closer, and pull the target up, you'll get the vertical shift. I think the vraycamera z-shift is to correct lens distortion, which is subtle, and shouldn't be used to square up an image. Parallax is natural, and it is what our mind expects to see. If we change, what the mind expects, it'll look off and unnatural.

[Crayox13]

I see. Thanks guys...I'll use vertical shift just slightly so it doesn't look unnatural.

Oh, I see what parallax is, but I'm not sure how would I "utilize" it. What did you mean by that? Is that other word for tapering of verticals towards the top?

[glorybound]

Parallax

Is that other word for tapering of verticals towards the top

Yes, it is the same

[pailhead]

The two walls on the left hand side arent parallel? I think this is really hurting the perspective, i'd maybe try getting in closer, lower, and somehow making it obvious that the two walls have different vanishing points. But then again, i struggle with these things myself.

[Crayox13]

Hehe actually, everything is extremly parallel, that's the problem. Here are the latest changes. Thanks guys for help, I believe it's much better now with your suggestions.