Maxwell Render | Official public forum

Another post on evermotion. Very interesting. Has some pretty cool features. Currently it's an open beta. For CAD users this may turn into a great tool.

here's the article on 3D Allusions

http://www.3dallusions.com/index.php?op ... &Itemid=72

here's a link to the actual software download on autodesk labs

http://labs.autodesk.com/Impressionlanding.html

Luis

Yea, we tried it out, but the thing is...EVERYONE in our office would have to create their drawings the exact same way, and that's near impossible because people are morons. You have to have everything Plined correctly, and on the correct layers, or it comes in all weird.

Cool idea though and the result doesnt look too shabby.

yeah I hear you on the cad end. I don't know how many hours I've spent cleaning up someone else' bad cad habits. So I agree it's probably only practical for the graphically inclined cad operator. Still it's pretty cool.

Luis

lsega77 wrote:yeah I hear you on the cad end. I don't know how many hours I've spent cleaning up someone else' bad cad habits. So I agree it's probably only practical for the graphically inclined cad operator. Still it's pretty cool.

Luis

Bad CAD habits?
For me CAD is like eating, sleeping, and f...(you know what)
Everyone does that his own way...
This is the greatness of CAD and BIM and modeling in general. There are thousands of ways and methods but the result is the same.
It would take out the magic if we all had to draw a building exactly the same way with the same layers,colors,linestyles...

Ive been testing this since the very early days of the program, its a great little solution for offices that dont do 3d but want to get into copmuter rendering and keep that hand rendered look

JTB wrote:

lsega77 wrote:yeah I hear you on the cad end. I don't know how many hours I've spent cleaning up someone else' bad cad habits. So I agree it's probably only practical for the graphically inclined cad operator. Still it's pretty cool.

Luis

Bad CAD habits?
For me CAD is like eating, sleeping, and f...(you know what)
Everyone does that his own way...
This is the greatness of CAD and BIM and modeling in general. There are thousands of ways and methods but the result is the same.
It would take out the magic if we all had to draw a building exactly the same way with the same layers,colors,linestyles...

When I say bad cad habits I'm referring to sloppy cad drafting in general (ie. open ended corners, exploded dimensions, unecessarily exploded hatches, 2d drawings that when viewed from ortho view have elements all over the place, etc).

Luis

I just think the whole evolution of archvis over the years is just bizarre.

In the old days, architects made cardboard models of their buildings and hand drew/painted perspectives to show to their clients.

Throughout the years, we've advanced computer and software technologies to the point where we can create photo-realistic images - in order for the client to see precisely what their buildings are going to look like in the real world.

And what are we doing now?

We render photo-realistic images of cardboard models and create special software to make our renderings look like hand-drawn pictures....

What's up with that?????



.

michaelplogue wrote:I just think the whole evolution of archvis over the years is just bizarre.

In the old days, architects made cardboard models of their buildings and hand drew/painted perspectives to show to their clients.

Throughout the years, we've advanced computer and software technologies to the point where we can create photo-realistic images - in order for the client to see precisely what their buildings are going to look like in the real world.

And what are we doing now?

We render photo-realistic images of cardboard models and create special software to make our renderings look like hand-drawn pictures....

What's up with that?????



.

Thats simple to answer, they dont spend enough time in school teaching how to hand render anymore, and the students dont want to learn it cause they wanna jump right into doing the flashy 3d stuff

michaelplogue wrote:I just think the whole evolution of archvis over the years is just bizarre.

In the old days, architects made cardboard models of their buildings and hand drew/painted perspectives to show to their clients.

Throughout the years, we've advanced computer and software technologies to the point where we can create photo-realistic images - in order for the client to see precisely what their buildings are going to look like in the real world.

And what are we doing now?

We render photo-realistic images of cardboard models and create special software to make our renderings look like hand-drawn pictures....

What's up with that?????



.

It's even more bizarre than you think. Anyways, its the market that determines alot of this stuff, so it's an 'evolution' entwined with a whole other bunch of factors, quite different with respect to the 'good old days'...

I guess - just like some clothing styles - the 'retro' look is back in fashion....

I just think it's funny how hard people are trying to mimick the hand rendered / pencil sketch look with 3D renderings and are failing miserably. Learn how to draw.

Well it's much more efficient and I think that's the point. If you already have the cad drawings and you can turn it into an impressionistic render, then that can be very valuable.

We render photo-realistic images of cardboard models and create special software to make our renderings look like hand-drawn pictures....

What's up with that?????

michael, one point might be the costs.
but from the architects point of view it is also important in an early stage of the design process to not be too precise in the declaration how the building will look like. as said it is a process and right in the start it all is about mass, structure and spaces.
you do not want your client to say, hey i do not like the stone you used for the floor, when the main focus should be on the basic subjects.
it leaves place for imagination which is important to come to a solution together.

it is a matter of making a good statement without going to much into detail.
(imagine when you want to do highend renderings, the whole design must be done. (details, materials etc.) which takes a lot of time.
a lot of renderings are done as acquisition, where it is not clear if the client is ever going to build the stuff. (and pay for it)

hope this helps a bit
michael

I for one will take the new technology.
As I look back, the good old days off ink drawing on white board and physical model making weren't necessarily all that great.

As Mihai mentions, working with the new software is much more efficient, clearly less dangerous and surely a lot less heartbreaking.

How many former architecture students out there can remember pulling a series of all nighter's putting together an ink-on-board presentation only to have the pen explode just as your are about to finish? Or picking up the wrong ad marker only to ruin another nearly completed drawing. I certainly do.

As for physical modeling I have yet to cut of a fingertip with a 3d model,
have it smashed during transport, and then find when I get it home there is no place to store it so that it has has to be photographed and discarded.

Personally every now and again I miss drawing preliminary floor plans on tracing paper, but what I gain by working in 3d is just as valuable as what I gave up. 3d modeling and real time modeling changes the process but also changes the result. It allows me to see and highlight issues that previously were not as clearly delineated.

big K makes a nice point about staying loose with a drawing as to not scare clients and keep things flexible. But it is redundant to design and draw in CAD and then trace, a plan or elevation, freehand for presentation. But I do think there is a huge benenfit in tracing a hidden line perspective and finishing it off with the sensitivity and attention to detail that hand drawing provides.

From my experience some of the best architecural designers in school who went on to do very good work also had some of the best freehand and perspective sketching ability.

I think part of this discussion really goes to issues of the single artist crafting a object/product versus items that are created through technological or mass production means.

I think we are at a better place as architects than we were twenty years ago. Not to ignore crashed computers, corrupted data files, and jammed plotters. I would rather deal with digital files that can be saved and reproduced than to with a pencil on vellum or pen on mylar drawing that is essentially a one-of-a-kind drawing that is vulnerable to loss or damage.

A client probably won't know or care if you spent twenty minutes or 2 hours on a drawing. For me at least if you can save a coulple of hours by using your computer that is time that can be spent improving the design, or providing and alternate scheme, or developing an idea more thoroughly, or even getting caught up on some long overdue sleep.

The old ways aren't necessarily bad, it's just that some of the new ones are different, and sometimes that is a good thing.

In the end though I think I agree with Hyperballad, we should "learn how to draw".