Here are a couple from a model of Falling Water that was posted on the SKetchUp forum and then converted to 3dsmax and rendered with VRay and Final Toon with some post in PShop
beautiful!!! :shock: :shock:
is the diagonal marker stroke in the first one done in finaltoon or in photoshop??
really nice…especially with added GI indrect light in the shadow areas…
paul
I allways love this project, and the images are very nice too! 
Did you model it or is somewhere avaiable on the net?
Gonçalo
awesome NPR effect
i have my own opinion concerning NPR. i hate them ! somehow i find it´s perverted to let a computer rendering look like a drawning. but that´s more a “philsophical” discussion 
nbevertheless it´s from a technical point a good picture…
very nice…gives me some ideas…
Hi…
very very nice images… i like the second one.
AtlJimK - did u convert the original model ??? i’m interested in how u did that - 3ds or DWG route ??? i’m modeling almost all of my work in sketchup. and still didn’t set my mind on the best way to export to MAX for texturing and rendering and still be flexable with design changes in the sketchup model… can u comment on that ???
regards,
bakbek.
in principle I agree w/ you…but they still look nice though…and hey, it’s whatever works in the end
paul.
i love npr! 
hyper real pictures are getting boring…
and npr doesn’t mean it has to look like painted…
it gives more creativ freedom…
btw: well done!
agreed. thats why CG vis is more effective than traditional model building in some senses.
oh,oh!!..hehe, that’s gonna open up another “can of worms”:
physical models and trditional drawing or 3d??..I guess they both have their advantages/disadvantages…just a matter of what’s appropriate for what one’s trying to communicate…
In Arch SChool studio I always tried to do a mix of both to keep a variation in the medium and a richer design process communication.
paul.
cocolas:
Stroke done with filters in PShop
GoncaloP:
Available on the SketchUp Gallery forum www.sketch3d.com
Dynedain:
VRay for GI, FinalToon for the line work, output and composite images in PShop. I spent most of the time in PShop tweaking/filtering/layering to get the “right” look.
bakbek:
My technique: Export to DXF and convert to 3ds using a program called Accutrans3D (www.micromouse.ca). In Accutrans; collapse vertices, collapse layers to by material, convert to quads and preset normals then save as 3ds and import to 3dsmax. Also, I would not texture in SU bit rather in Max.
I have clients that request ‘softer’ drawings and doing this with a 3D model allows for the most flexibility in making changes and rendering with normal photo-real techniques later if need be.
Thanks for the comments everyone.
could you explain your technique in PS?..that’s very nice marker look, did you use a custom filter?
thanks!
paul.
Filter is call Impressionist, allows a lot of tweaking for strokes
It is a great image and Falling Water is a classic. I find this interesting. In some cases, I have had clients request a looser look. Some architects feel that if they show there clients a polished photo-realistic image, they are locked in some how. No room for changes. As much as I love CG, I still have a love for a good old fashioned hand drawn rendering and this gives a nice example of that. I’m not familiar with SKetchUp. Could you please elaborate?
Thanks,
Scott.
oh,oh!!..hehe, that’s gonna open up another “can of worms”:
physical models and trditional drawing or 3d??..I guess they both have their advantages/disadvantages…just a matter of what’s appropriate for what one’s trying to communicate…
i guess that is what i was trying to say.
its a strugle with me sometimes…i spend my day either doing extremly lose concept sketching or, on the flip side, nailing down realistic visualizations of concepts that have been taken further (all this of course when im not arguing with engineers).
super realistic rendering of architecture make me think too much of photography at times. which isnt odd i guess because arch vis is kinda photography without the reality. but when i see images like this it makes me do a double take, not so much because its different (well that does affect it to some degree) but more because it feels more alive/created/artistic/etc.
there is no subsitute for being able to touch and hold and see something in a real model, which is part of the reason physical modeling will never die in architecture or industrial design. but at the same time CG modeling allows one the liberty to go beyond what is possible, so i absolutely love it when i see that happen. now some might say that is better left to the world of art, not to the world of applied art, but i have to disagree, after all one of our jobs as visualizers it to get ppl excited, to make them want to spend money and really care about the project and to give the project a visual soul.
sorry to hijack this thread but i think its applicable to his image and the idea of hyper vs creative in the area of visualization.
I think that’s the key, right there!..too many times we get caught up in the hyper real thingy trend…while that isn’t neccesarily bad…many times it fails to give character to a building/space…images like the ones above tend to add that character and unique identity…
paul.
Hi AtlJimK…
Thanks for the detailed response. i didn’t use AccuTrans but used Deep Exploration to convert the DXF… the workflow is the same and the result is what i wanted.
regards,
bakbek.
The one who posts NPR in the temple of hyper-realism is a “Troll”. NPR is for Sisies, it is like comparin AC/DC or Zeppelin with Cristina Aguilera or Poof Daddy Comms!
NPR is a good thing, and here’s why:
If you are in an architecture office, and you show a client a realistic rendering when the project is nowhere near finished designing…they start to say things like “i dont like this window trim, and this paint, can it be more green”…when you’re still at the point of trying to get them to decide where the building sits on the site, or how far out that wall goes, or whether you can see one room from another.
This is the same thing as doing archviz work by hand…if its very precise, as opposed to sketched, the clients focus on the wrong things. Its a matter of having a graphic style that is appropriate to the intent/use of the imagery.
Doing NPR just for the sake of NPR is pointless…but the same can be said for photorealism.