topic Re: Cluttered Rendering in Visualization

Cluttered Rendering

Anonymous — Thu, 11 May 2023 10:29:31 GMT

does this look cluttered?

Re: Cluttered Rendering

Dwight — Tue, 14 Nov 2006 18:14:13 GMT

Not cluttered, but lacks focus. Eye knows not where to rest.

What is the story of the image?

How can you reposition the camera to encapsulate eye movement?

To capture and satisfy the viewer......

Can you adjust lighting to make a subject for the image?

Re: Cluttered Rendering

Anonymous — Tue, 14 Nov 2006 18:26:57 GMT

Thank you Dwight.

Yes, I see what you mean. The basement needs a facelift. I guess I'm try to show too much at one time. I will post another soon.

Justin

Re: Cluttered Rendering

Rakela Raul — Tue, 14 Nov 2006 18:55:27 GMT

check the pool table ht

Re: Cluttered Rendering

Anonymous — Tue, 14 Nov 2006 22:49:29 GMT

Agree on focus in image which has a lot to do with view point.

Working w/ what you have, a couple ideas:
I would dim down the lights in the pool room and enhance the daylight streaming in (including on the floor) along w/ better resolution of the exterior (trees, grass)...this will give the image a foregrd (full contrast and bright), middle (dim, lower contrast) and background.

Then I would take the piece of furniture 'out of the tv' and replace the image with something colorful [complimentary color (near opposite on color wheel) to the interior] and abstract in nature so as to not be a focal point, but instead a counter-point. Add slight reflection to TV so it doesn't look like a poster...good luck.

Re: Cluttered Rendering

Anonymous — Tue, 14 Nov 2006 23:34:43 GMT

Ok, maybe this one is a little better. Please don't be gentle!

Re: Cluttered Rendering

Dwight — Wed, 15 Nov 2006 00:51:21 GMT

Changes:

--Little dull - fixed in photoshop
-- cropped to subject ("think like a magazine editor") to eliminate black room on right and tighten focus (while keeping a little of everything from the original view - ceiling also unimportant in rendering - in future, tilt camera down to emphasise more important room elements)
-- did a blue color burn down from upper left
-- did a brown color burn up from foreground
-- overexposed display screen - good light on ceiling from display - are you using my plasma screen trick?
-- added second wine glass because if drinking alone in rec room on saturday night watching blue tinted minority report science fiction or whatever, who needs a glass? Suggest adding cheezits bag made with mesh tool and telephone that is not ringing to clarify the story.

Stuff done well:
-- compatible color scheme adds serenity
-- nice wall texture - where from?
-- suitable designery fabric on suitably designer sofa

A generally superior job acknowledging that in a room with television, the screen is hero.

Re: Cluttered Rendering

Anonymous — Wed, 15 Nov 2006 08:43:52 GMT

I get a bit confused with the square pattern on the carpet and the square legs on the coffee table. Hard to tell what's what, and to start with I thought it was a weird shadow. So maybe a slightly subtler pattern on the carpet?

Also - Dwight fixed it by cropping, but what's with the ceiling grid? It looks like you've put an otherwise new designery room into an old office building. Which may be the case. In a room full of nice textures and colours the ceiling leaps out at me...

Re: Cluttered Rendering

Anonymous — Wed, 15 Nov 2006 13:18:21 GMT

Thanks Dwight for the feedback and the help. Yes it is the plasma screen trick(learned a lot from your book). The walls are from the original Artlantis shader library. Is there a good book on Photoshop I can get into?
The basement is very dark and dungeon like, my client wanted a movie/game room. His taste is very plain, clean lines was the way I wanted to go. The accoustical ceiling was his idea, he said he wanted to use what materials he had. But I totally agree with you on the ceiling tiles.

Re: Cluttered Rendering

Dwight — Wed, 15 Nov 2006 14:33:57 GMT

Check my bibliography.

-- Eismann, Karin. Anything by her.
-- Kelby, Scott. Lot of tricks, but superficial as far as architectural solutions go.
-- Georges Gregory - as said below.

The problem with any of these book is that none provide automatic answers. You need aptitude and experimentation to arrive at architectural solutions. A combination of several overlaid tricks is necessary to make buildings look right.

The good news is that Photoshop Actions can be recoreded for quick application of future treatments.

Re: Cluttered Rendering

Dwight — Wed, 15 Nov 2006 15:47:06 GMT

A general observation about ceiling:

I don't think that anyone looks at a ceiling.
Unless it is the lobby at bellagio with the chihuli glass tidbits.
That ceiling is worth a sore neck.

In rooms with 8-10' ceilings, a six foot person is too close and is looking down to avoid stepping on the cat.

Generally, I thinkn we should tilt cameras downward to address the room elements. Ceiling not important.

Re: Cluttered Rendering

Anonymous — Wed, 15 Nov 2006 15:56:19 GMT

In a room with a short ceiling height, what angle and height is too high for the camera view?

Re: Cluttered Rendering

Dwight — Wed, 15 Nov 2006 16:00:08 GMT

You, like, want a camera setting?

Here it is:

Any angle that shows too much ceiling.

Re: Cluttered Rendering

David Pacifico — Wed, 15 Nov 2006 16:14:40 GMT

My 2 cents:
I don't like tilted camera angles, ever, becuase it always tilts the vertical edges of the image.

Another time when ceilings are important are when your on your back in a hospital or the dentist office.

Re: Cluttered Rendering

Rakela Raul — Wed, 15 Nov 2006 16:24:40 GMT

when your on your back

mmm!!! you'r rt

Re: Cluttered Rendering

Dwight — Wed, 15 Nov 2006 16:50:28 GMT

David wrote:
My 2 cents:
I don't like tilted camera angles, ever, becuase it always tilts the vertical edges of the image.

Another time when ceilings are important are when your on your back in a hospital or the dentist office.

Try and sell a project with a view from a dentist's chair.

Further, your observation about vertical edges is so 50's. When the computer rendered image first arrived, a lot of guys asked "how do we keep the sides of the building vertical?" Like it was a two-point perspective and the building looked like it was falling over backwards.

And they were right, because a square tower all by itself in a classical composition needed this treatment.

In Archicad, even tho we don't have camera shift-and-tilt features like professional view cameras do, one can always keep the camera level and crop out the unwanted.

However, things changed from the '50's. We shoot images in context, now, because the digital world makes it easy to place context in an image. That context is distorted and our rendered model should be distorted to match.

Another idea is that a photo of an interior should be all tilty to match the user experience. There's judgement here because you don't place the camera where wacky, exagerrated geometry happens. I suggest that image makers tilt camera angles to show what the user will really see in navigating the room. This involves using a wider angle than usual and aiming at unusual targets.

But this is esoteric talk compared to gross errors I see in renderings that include:

-- camera position too far back (Gospel song idea: "He's got the whole world… in his viewfinder… Second verse: "He's got the whole world… in his Google Earth…)
-- wacky dark bits of irrelevant rooms showing
-- too much ceiling
-- backs of sofas act as barrier to visual engagement.
-- over/under exposure