sw101
Forum Replies Created
- Posts
tis a bit. i’d show you some comparison stuff if i was on my own pc.
anyone familiar with viz will know of the annoying scattered ray effect produced by the scanline renderer. increases in the complexity of the light create huge problems with making decent sized renders in anything less than a day, even with a decent processor and a big pile of ram. brazil is one solution.
brazil is a render engine developed by splutterfish for application with viz 4. it has an excellent luma server which creates very natural shadows and can render models more smoothly and faster than the native viz scanline renderer.
http://www.splutterfish.com/sf/sf_gen_page.php3?printer=1&page=brazil@modular man wrote:
Thanks for the advice guys. Is the book that you are referring to SW101 strictly to do with VIZ as I will be using 3dsmax? The reason I am not using Viz is because I don’t have access to that programme at the moment and also because it is a programme that is very tied into to Autocad and therefore not as versatile vis-a–vis other drawing packages.(as I understand).
max and viz are effectively the same thing to my knowledge. i use viz 4 and have used max 6 and the are almost identical. as ryan said, viz is more geared towards architecture with the ability to create windows and doors and daylighting. max would be more for industrial designers and animators.
they are all autodesk products with the same basic interface. if you can use one you can use another. i have had no problems moving drawings and models between viz, cad and sketchup.
if you get viz 4 you can use brazil by splutterfish and create photorealistic images very easily.
this here.. http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/ASIN/0782141323/qid=1121092041/sr=8-3/ref=sr_8_xs_ap_i3_xgl/026-4287671-3344417 .. is my bible when it comes to viz/max.
if you’re starting from scratch there are a few very good tutorials on how to model ronchamps and villa savoye, and as you become better it’s an excellent book to refer to for advanced ligting effects, animation, radiosity and so on and so on.
my advice would be;
first, figure out the basics. know what the purpose of each tool is, it’s basic application.
do some simple tutorials exploring materials, uvw mapping, basic lighting effects, daylight systems.
do more advanced schemes of projects you’re familiar with, you house in as much detail as possible, maybe invent a building as you go and learn to use viz as a modelling tool as well as just a renderer.
consult the book above chapter by chapter and go into as much detail as possible on each facet of the program. spend a day mastering the use of sunlight, spend some time on reflections and shadows. spend some time on creating tracked cameras and animation sequences.it will take some time to get the hang of it, but once you have the basics down you’ll find your skill and speed increase constantly. i’ve been using viz for 3 years and i’m still learning.
as for the cad/viz argument..you’ll probably find that most models will be based on 2d cad drawings. and depending on your ability to model in cad, you might find it easier to just make the 3d object in cad then import it in. problems with this include stippling if you’re not very careful about avoiding concurrent faces in the cad model, and a lack of ability to edit the model in viz afterwards. i would advise that you learn to model and edit in viz/max, and use it as much as possible because of the limitations of 3d cad.
if you’re considering developing your skills to the level of a professional modeller, you might want to consider professional tuition. expensive but worth it if you’re very serious. as a self-taught amateur, i’d say that for most purposes you can just pick it up as you go along.
best of luck with it. any questions or problems, don’t be afraid to ask.
i’d politely suggest we don’t discuss this topic further until the owners of the site make a decision on how they intend to deal with the matter.
couple of pics on his website http://homepage.eircom.net/~njbrady1/Housing/NJBA_BrookeHeussaff.html
haven’t seen plans anywhere, except for a couple of axonometrics on the board in the RIAI exhibition. it’s in the crawford gallery in cork at the moment. the RIAI might be a good source if you want more info, or ask the man himself.
you could do a preparatory portfolio course somewhere and reapply through the CAO next year. with the extra experience and maturity you should fly through the aptitude test and interview for DIT, either for the diploma as a start, or straight into the degree programme. i know that 430 points could get you in to the degree, so long as you do well in the other parts of the application process.
another option is repeating the leaving cert and concentrating all your efforts on your top 6 subjects to try and get the high points required for UCD. maybe bruce college or the institute on leeson street.
how many points do you expect to get this year?
one way to do it is to do the diplome course in architectural technology in UCD or DIT. it’s a 3 year course and afterwards you would be qualified to be an architectural technologist/technician, and would be able to work in most practises with emphasis on detail work and drawing preparation rather than design.
with the diploma in technology, assuming you get an honour and pass an interview within the college, it is possible to go straight into 2nd year of the architecture degree course. this would mean 4 more years in the degree course, 7 years in total, rather than the usual 5 to become a qualified architect.
i know a couple of people who have used this route and they are eminently employable, with a grounding in structure and detail, and further education in design and conceptual work.
the points are a bit lower for the diploma course. less than 400 in cork i.t, probably the same in dublin, check with the CAO.
best of luck with it.@sw101 wrote:
type [img]then%20insert%20the%20url%20(http://www.whatever.com/image.jpg)%20then%20close%20it%20with[/img]
see? …………………
lunched in wagamama (cork) today. food is just as good as dublin, but the atmosphere isn’t the same as the great space under the stephen’s green s.c. pretty building in the flesh from the outside.
from paul’s site…
before
during
after
i don’t think the middle image sells your idea at all. it’s garish and in my opinion, inappropriate, even on a temporary basis.
that mosaic is terrible. not a big fan of the central tower. it looks like a brick wearing a discoloured graduation hat.
there’s a spot in today’s examiner with a bit of spiel about mr. kenny’s big glass thing on the quays and a pretty decent internal render. seems to be designed around sustainability and the requirements of the revenue crew.
there’s a second render of the quay elevation sneakily stuck into the next page, hiding amonst the ads.
