Quick Photomontage

[bokkins]

Hi guys, did this one recently. just a quick photomontage to show the new structure. design was done by my architect client. hope you like them.

[brian.coates]

Nice. The design isn't my cup of tea but the images work very well.

How quick is "quick" BTW?

[bokkins]

thanks brian. the modeling and rendering took me quite a while to do, but the photomontage process itself took only about 5-10minutes.

here's how I did it.
1. I rendered an image that I think would best fit the photo, a few camera tweaking and all done by eye. no computations (on camera angles and other stuff)
2. I saved the output image in .png format to retain the alpha
3. I Inserted the background, after which, I calibrate it again with the transform tool to fit it and make it a little more convincing. erase some of the unwanted parts.
4. Then I copy the background image and paste it to make it foreground, then I erase parts of the images to reveal the middle image which is the rendered image.
5. It's done.

I intended it to look sketchy and messy since its still in its draft stage and so it would look a little architectural. thanks.

[neil]

Nice modeling and texturing. May be you can change the roof colour and the window glass and the balcony to me very strange. You can tweak a bit....

[Sjaak Boer]

No comment on the photomontage. A job well done and it looks very convincing.

Maybe a bit off-topic but still something worth to consider.
Can we still call people who design things like that architects?
Somebody who is willing to tear down fine traditional building to replace them with whatever "design".
Architects like to be seen as guards of esthetics. I disagree in many cases. This is one of those cases.

Sjaak

[bokkins]

thanks neil, my mistake on the windows, it's a "not so fitting" HDRI image, I should have used a more appropriate one, I'll try to change it.

Thanks Sjaak Boer for the insight on design. by the way, I find this structure not so bad at all. not my design and preference though, but I guess there's still a certain aesthetic in it. the planning of spaces was really good and the the spaces inside were well lit. So I think it can still be considered as good architecture. Same argument was tackled in one of my favourite architectural documentaries, Alain de Botton's "A Perfect Home". its a 3 part series that talks about old and new architecture and which is better. He showed how different sets of people vary in design sense and preference. There's the minimalist architecture, modernist architecture and my first time to encounter the word "pastiche architecture".

I must say, that documentary broaden my knowledge in design and architecture. so, I think this architect's design isn't really that bad after all.

[rpadc2002]

for me...the windows design doesnt fit for the overall design of the structure.. much better if you use french type window on wooden frame for sure.. or change the wall to something that will fir for the design of the window.

Changing the reflection of the glass will might help to, just adjust it base on the environment reflection...

Just commenting...

[anonyma]

thanks for sharing your photomontage process with us, sometimes a single step (trick) can make the difference, although i agree with sjaak boer, it'll be interesting to watch some of the interior design so we could have the whole picture regarding the outside result, and would like to discuss the aesthetics issue, but maybe that's a whole different thread that we might start from this. keep us updated if possible bokkins

[TheAllusionist]

You notice I have stayed away from this thread, I couldn't comment without commenting on the design, so I will keep my mouth shut Good integration Bokkins!

[bokkins]

Thank you guys for your comments. I did some really draft interior images since I don't have the final design yet.