Per previous comments on my renders re: lighting and outside exposure, etc - I'm trying to pick it up a notch and welcome any comments and criticisms.
All lights (but soffit) are IES with color at 255, 241, 224 (all settings left at default)
Sun is set at 242, 225, 218
Created mask at any glazing and adjusted exposure setting separately (feathered selection otherwise it seemed to introduce noticeable jagged aliased edges)
Ran High pass filter (shocked how much detail it brings back to the render - though sometimes it brings in noise as well)
Some images may have been run through Topaz Adjust (lost track, the living room shot for sure)
I physically beveled many edges (any idea if renders are faster with physically beveled edges as opposed to beveled via modifier?)
Critique and comments needed
-
- Posts: 30
- Joined: Mon Jun 03, 2013 7:12 pm
Critique and comments needed
- Attachments
-
- 21_light_old_floor4_v2_final_small.jpg (397.76 KiB) Viewed 7405 times
-
- g5_final_small.jpg (408.93 KiB) Viewed 7405 times
-
- l21 copy_small.jpg (662.74 KiB) Viewed 7405 times
Re: Critique and comments needed
thexcadguy wrote:Per previous comments on my renders re: lighting and outside exposure, etc - I'm trying to pick it up a notch and welcome any comments and criticisms.
excellent.All lights (but soffit) are IES with color at 255, 241, 224 (all settings left at default)
Sun is set at 242, 225, 218
Created mask at any glazing and adjusted exposure setting separately (feathered selection otherwise it seemed to introduce noticeable jagged aliased edges)
Ran High pass filter (shocked how much detail it brings back to the render - though sometimes it brings in noise as well)
I love Topaz denoise!Some images may have been run through Topaz Adjust (lost track, the living room shot for sure)
I have no idea, my guess is that the difference is negligible.I physically beveled many edges (any idea if renders are faster with physically beveled edges as opposed to beveled via modifier?)
Superb results here. I think the only thing I don't like is the quality of the bricks material on the fireplace.
Where the light hits the floor in the first image seems pretty good, could be brighter a tiny bit. But where the direct sun hits the floor in the last image it should have a lot higher exposure. So the sun power itself should be increased a step or two when rendering, or you need to change camera exposure in the render dialog to tonemap the bright areas.
-
- Posts: 650
- Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 2:26 pm
- SketchUp: SU8 to SU2019 Pro
- Location: Adelaide, South Australia
- Contact:
Re: Critique and comments needed
Excellent results mate !
Re: Critique and comments needed
Since you asked for critique I'm getting out my magnifying glass as this is quite hard to find flaw with. But I'm going to try, I feel bad saying this because I couldn't do better myself, or even close to this really!
Lighting wise,
- I think the bed lights in the second shot are a little strong or over exposed making the hard light line on the pillow seem odd.
- The drop down lights above the bed and in the 3rd pic the spot lights during the day probably don't need the post sparkle effect on them.
(I'm being really picky here )
Design wise
- The gap above the bed in the second one scares the hell out of me! I live in Japan and we have earthquakes as it looks like something would fall on my head
- The fireplace is a fire hazard. It's too shallow in depth, it's not sunk down or has no barrier. If its intended to be an ornamental fire place by design then all good, ignore this one.
I even spotted the rainbow in one pic, not sure how you got that in there! post pro?
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: Ahrefs [Bot], Amazon [Bot] and 21 guests