Time is money, people.
When I first started learning about architectural rendering, be it by hand or on a computer, I was struck by the sheer amount of time required to churn out quality products. Hand renderings, whether done with watercolors, markers, or some other medium, have the advantage of only being limited by the renderer's imagination, but this comes at the cost of extreme time commitment, and the finality of each mark made on paper. Computer renderings, on the other hand, have completely disrupted the traditional workflow of a project. With software like Revit and SketchUp, 3D environments can be built alongside typical construction documents, but this too comes with caveats; if the scene is to be rendered, it will be rendered exactly as it is built. Soffits and drop ceilings and other details can't just be fudged, they have to be modeled just as they would be built in the real world.
I don't really mind modeling with accuracy, I find it helps be stay conscious of the feasibility of each design decision. If I can't figure out how to model it, how will a contractor figure out how to build it? Since I'm already spending the time modeling my environment, it only makes sense that I would do my best to apply materials as extensively as possible in my software of choice. I prefer rendering in Revit because of the more advanced material options, but SketchUp is definitely an equally viable tool, with the requisite smattering of plug ins. Side note: if you didn't check out the link to John Carmack's talk on lighting and rendering in my last post, now is as good a time as any. I take my cues from him, and aim to keep my materials as physically-based as possible.
While modeling and material applications go more or less hand-in-hand, lighting is an entirely different beast. It's always a struggle to find usable Revit lighting families, and an even bigger one to find good looking ones. In a lot of scenarios, I end up having to model custom fixtures myself, and in these situations, I again try to keep things based in reality. What is the light source? Where is it located? How bright is it? Revit's rendering engine isn't the best, but it's definitely adequate, as long as you give it the right information to work with. Once all that is done, I let Revit do it's magic, and end up with something like this.
Not too shabby, right? The highlights on some of the glossier surfaces aren't perfect, but it's a rendering, not a photo. My next step is always to add a line overlay, and I do so by exporting the same camera view as a hidden line view, and then combining the two in Photoshop. Recently, I've added more detail to the hidden line layer by duplicating the base layer, then applying a Find Edges filter, converting that layer to black and white, and then setting the blend mode to Multiply. This not only adds more detail to the outline, it also helps enhance textures, and makes reflections more defined.
After that's all done, I do some quick level and white balance adjustments, and usually make another duplicate of the base layer, setting it's blend mode to Overlay, which I find to give a pleasant bump to saturation and contrast after the layer's opacity is tweaked. Once adjustments are done, it's time for entourage.
I'll just come right out and say it: I hate photo-realistic people. They are difficult to find at adequate resolutions, the lighting of the subject never quite matches up, and even when they're carefully placed and shadowed, they still manage to look out of place. I used to be a proponent of vector people, but I've recently started using a different technique. My new workflow involves finding typical entourage people, then placing them and doing whatever additional cleanup is required. After they're in there, it gets a little weird. I apply the same Find Edges filter we used earlier, and then a Black/White adjustment layer. I merge the Black/White layer with the entourage layer, and then lower the opacity. What you should be left with is a sketch-y looking scale figure, which can be blended to your heart's content.
I've tried blending this layer with the original image, to hint at the underlying color, but I haven't really found a combination of blending and filtering that really works for me yet. If anyone out there feels like giving it a shot, please let me know if you find something you're happy with. Until then, my people will stay achromatic and translucent.
Like I said before, time is money. For my most recent project, I cranked out around 30 renderings, plus 2D views. The beauty of computer rendering is that if you can optimize your workflow, you can do a lot of the work all at once. I take the time on the front end, and do as much work as possible where it will be applied to the project as a whole, and only at the last stages do I begin work on individual views. I like to work efficiently, and I've been told employers tend to appreciate that.
This week I only have one link for you, and that's to the website of Alex Hogrefe. His renderings inspired me before I ever started working in Revit or SketchUp, and they have continued to do so long after I began to consider myself competent. He's posted a bunch of tutorials, and I learn something new every time he shares a new one. Some are a little technical, or more applicable to exterior renderings, but most of the time, my mind is blown by how such simple techniques can result in such a killer rendering.