Small house in woods

[OPEN_RANGE]

Here is a project I just finished. Very short notice and "gotta have it right away" project. Client is happy. I am starting to sleep better.

Any suggestions for improvement always welcome.

[werticus]

The image lacks contrast and feels off because of it. I would say your Reinhardt burn value is a little too low.

The wild grass looks a bit weird too... Too repetitive, not enough variation.

Also from this distance there is no defined garden it is just a mess of colour, so the camera could probably be closer and higher, not so much that you lose the concept of it being a wild place around the edges, but just enough to see how the garden beds are laid out etc.

If your going to jazz it up for yourself I would change the garden to a more native planting but with some order, change the garage door, lighten up the wood cladding, get rid of the shingles and put a metal deck roof or clay tiles with some shape, and switch it to a later arvo lighting, softer style.

[OPEN_RANGE]

Thank you for your comments. It does lack contrast. I do not use Reinhardt, but maybe I should? I am using linear workflow and have no gamma or color adjust being applied.

The wild grass is a combination of two Forest Pack presets. The meadow grass presets and then that is a collisions object for the straw. So it uses Forest Pack randomization as set up by preset. maybe I could increase the pre set scale, rotation randomized settings and that would help.

There was no landscape plan. I was left to invent one as fast as could. The client was very interested in showing th house and did not seem to care much about landscaping.

All of the plant species are natural to the site location. Ponderosa pine, juniper, perennials and etc. all native and common landscape choices in SW Colorado at about 7,000'.

Raising the camera is an interesting point. I did experiment with moving closer and thus wider focal length. It made it such that the sides of the house were no longer visible and that,s why I moved back out. Other driving factors, this simulates the actual topology. So this is a view angle one would actually have. The floating above the ground angle may be a nicer look, not sure. Somehow I weight matching the real world conditions. That also weights my choice of using 43 mm focal length as a preferred setting. Possibly I am so over weighted no these real world considerations.

The materials match photos and other source material supplied by client. I will not change their design. I do no want to risk them seeing an unauthorized change of what they planned and maybe be offended.

Thanks again for you comments. Exactly what i am seeking.