[nappy]

Hi messire.

I know that the columns are too thin and thanks for the suggestion! I am an architect as well but
for visualization I like to make the columns smaller...because most clients wouldn't know.

Yes you are right the triangular shape should be much thicker.

However, i am not entirely FOR modelizing as you would be building!

Conceptually, it would be best if there were no columns at all.

Nappy

[macray]

So you're using Maxwell to create a picture as real as it gets and the model is incorrect?

I think that's ridiculous. If the clients don't realize they are looking at smaller columns - then they won't realize they look at the real measurements and you won't need to change the model at all, no matter how fine it'd be if there were no columns...

[nappy]

macray

there's a fine line between belief/disbelief...sometimes for visualization you try to
exaggerate certain things by de-emphasizing other things. I'm not talking about
floating floor plates with no columns.

For example, the concept for the project and render was to exaggerate the length of the space
and its continuity with the exterior in the background. Using thick columns would a) take away from
the concept for example..fatter looking columns would distract the viewer from the depth of the space.

ALAS...to exaggerate the depth of the space i only used a focal length of around 20; you did not comment
on this did u? BECAUSE if u were actually standing in this space...it is much more shallow than it appears.

things are just not as black and white as you say it should be; especially not for visualization and that's also
dependent on your audience; these renderings were not presented to a panel of engineers. and ALAS, if u want
empirical data...look at the plans

[Josephus Holt]

hey Nappy, the second image is a great improvement, much more pleasing...not so computer cg'ish. I like the architectural changes, especially the mesh panel you added...really catches the light nicely. Besides what others said,
1. the glass guardrail in font feels like it could use some thickness, and maybe the last glass panel (above left) where it meets the wall.
2. The lighting inside the room with long horizontal glass is overexposed.
3. the vertical concrete face (?) of the ramp in the foreground seems unresolved...can't really tell what's going on there...just a drop off?
4. is the figure upstairs the right scale..."he" looks rather large
5. I would get some lights in those recessed cans in the ceiling if that is what those are...even in daylight they would be on in a public building.
6. contrast is such a personal preference, a matter of style...I tend to prefer a full range of values in an image, but a more middle-value image like this is quite pleasant.

Joe