North Dakota Elder Care

[elivnA]

They all look great, but the depth of field you're going for in the last 2 images is too much. It makes it look like a miniature version, or too "bloomy". The cars in the second image look like they were taken from a lowres photo and pasted in...

Other than that, nice vegetation and materials, good work.

[glorybound]

Here is a close up on the entrance. The grays make the building look cold an institutionalized, IMO.

[voltron7]

looks good Bobby, and kind of like a miniature model. Was that the goal?

[glorybound]

looks good Bobby, and kind of like a miniature model. Was that the goal?

I'm trying to break our habit of wanting to explain everything in one panoptic view, which I think is a mistake. I enjoy these close ups, which shows a lot of detail and is more theatrical.

[glorybound]

here is the view the architect requested, which I pompously refused to do



he requested this view, from a Revit camera, and the sun behind the camera.

[dlparisi]

Suggest this view next time.... It should let them see everything.



I'm not liking the DOF btw. Way too distracting.

[glorybound]

Suggest this view next time.... It should let them see everything.

[ATTACH=CONFIG]9278[/ATTACH]

I'm not liking the DOF btw. Way too distracting.

ROFL with the suggested view... The DOF is physically accurate; I used the vray camera. The whole model isn't modeled well, so I wanted to have everything out of focus, except for what I added more detail to. The Revit model was rough and every corner I took needed fixing.

[glorybound]

I still have to work on UVW's and modeling... I don't have a cap on one of the retaining walls and I need to move the CMU texture around. The stone columns also need to be fixed because the texture doesn't continue around like it should.

[glorybound]

there is truth in looking at something in grayscale. it looks spooky! Hopefully the owner will opt-in for some landscaping and warmer stone color.

[elivnA]

ROFL with the suggested view... The DOF is physically accurate; I used the vray camera. The whole model isn't modeled well, so I wanted to have everything out of focus, except for what I added more detail to. The Revit model was rough and every corner I took needed fixing.

The DOF is accurate, in the sense that it makes it look like a miniature. Seems your fstops are way too low.

[glorybound]

to get the look I was after, which might not be a good look, was an f-stop of 1.

[AJ Jefferies]

to get the look I was after, which might not be a good look, was an f-stop of 1.

That's why your DOF looks so strong, you'd be hard pushed to find a physical lens that goes lower than a f-stop of 1.4.

If an architectural photographer was to take the same picture, they'd most likely shoot around f8.

The DOF is physically accurate; I used the vray camera.

It's possible to enter non physical values into the physical camera

[glorybound]

It's possible to enter non physical values into the physical camera

it would be nice if something notified you when you went outside of a physical environment. Not just the camera, but materials, too.

[dlparisi]

It's not outside of the physical environment, it's just rarely seen...http://us.leica-camera.com/photograp...nses/5915.html

It may be that your FOV is too large for an f1 stop which makes the edges of your image look way too blurred and hence, unrealistic. I don't think a wide angle lens can go that low.

[ledisnomad]

Two questions from a beginner:
1. I've seen that orange glow you have in your first image at the left on quite a few renderings. Is that rendered light/V-Ray settings or is it post-pro? Either way, how do you do it?
2. I work in Revit and render with V-Ray (usually for Rhino, simply because that's what I know... trying to learn 3ds). What workflow do you use? The models I use are quite large (largest right now is an ~450MB Revit file). Furthermore, you said that the Revit model was not very good. What would you ask the architect to do to improve it for your use?
Thanks for any advice you may have!