[a / b / c / d / e / f / g / gif / h / hr / k / m / o / p / r / s / t / u / v / vg / vr / w / wg] [i / ic] [r9k / s4s / vip / qa] [cm / hm / lgbt / y] [3 / aco / adv / an / asp / bant / biz / cgl / ck / co / diy / fa / fit / gd / hc / his / int / jp / lit / mlp / mu / n / news / out / po / pol / qst / sci / soc / sp / tg / toy / trv / tv / vp / wsg / wsr / x] [Settings] [Search] [Mobile] [Home]
Settings Home
/3/ - 3DCG

Thread archived.
You cannot reply anymore.

File: presentaciĆ³n4.jpg (1.56 MB, 1736x2456)
1.56 MB
1.56 MB JPG
Hello I'm begginer-intermediate 3d modeller-architect. Pic related is my current level, i know, it's not too great, but also it took me a lot of time to get these images.

I work mainly with 3d max and vray. Sometimes applying photoshop.

I was wondering if there was any good guide on how to streamline the work with these programs in order to be able to quickly make architectural images by following a series of determined steps rather than a trillion hours of test and error.

I was hoping for a guide that includes which renders settings, how to test lights, when to include models, textures, etc...

Thanks in advance for any answer, ill be bumping with pictures of the shit i made.
File: hall2.jpg (1.66 MB, 5000x5000)
1.66 MB
1.66 MB JPG
File: casainterior.jpg (1.32 MB, 5000x5000)
1.32 MB
1.32 MB JPG
File: exterior.jpg (139 KB, 915x1500)
139 KB
139 KB JPG
File: exterior28-1-10.jpg (240 KB, 979x1644)
240 KB
240 KB JPG
File: Capture.png (1.77 MB, 1338x706)
1.77 MB
1.77 MB PNG
general advice, photoshop is more powerful than the rendering engine if you give up the goal of total photo realism.

you can save a lot on performance by limiting transparent and reflective materials, especially avoiding materials which are both transparent and reflective at the same time. some times you can just render a reference texture of where the windows are and add a decent reflection in photoshop.

this guy does a good job explaining time saving techniques

post production becomes faster and less labour intensive if you keep most shots as single point perspectives, saving two-point only for the money shot

and also the post digital look is totally acceptable, even desirable, for basic skematic design. this may not be a popular opinion on /3/ but its worth throwing out there

in general, i've heard that fiddling too much with all the settings until it looks right in the rendering engine will push things away from what's physically accurate.
even if this guy is talking about blender the advice is good
woah this is very good advice thanks, all read it/hear it all and reply
File: 1541319218119.jpg (14 KB, 294x273)
14 KB
friendly reminder that the youtube link provided here is the definitive proof that blender is a mongoloid piece of garbage when it comes to rendering
did you study architecture or you just do 3d for Architects?
i studied, believe it or not. I have a major
File: Untitled-1.png (1.53 MB, 1920x1080)
1.53 MB
1.53 MB PNG
I used to struggle a lot with some reflections, gloss, angles and more features.
With post production I finished them in no time.
The video is pretty old. The filmic log setting comes standard prebuilt into blender now.

Delete Post: [File Only] Style:
[Disable Mobile View / Use Desktop Site]

[Enable Mobile View / Use Mobile Site]

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.