Comments on: 12 Reasons to refuse to Render!

By: Elliot

Elliot — Wed, 16 Nov 2011 18:28:07 +0000

By all means, don’t render.

There aren’t any firms doing interesting work out there who aren’t doing it in 3d software, unless maybe those living on a mountain in Switzerland – so by all means don’t render.

Please commit professional Seppuku.

Less competition for the rest of us.

By: Adele

Adele — Wed, 16 Nov 2011 17:58:27 +0000

Of course not!
I want to see a sketch that illustrates FLW as well a building constructed as a render.

By: Diah Lionasari

Diah Lionasari — Sat, 17 Sep 2011 05:52:44 +0000

baca @Sylvi_Kurniawan –> http://t.co/2Ug4Axjt

By: paty juárez samperio

paty juárez samperio — Thu, 02 Jun 2011 02:00:03 +0000

12 Reasons to refuse to Render! | ArchDaily http://t.co/Ot1Q6AH via @archdaily

By: Ryan Sulit

Ryan Sulit — Fri, 03 Sep 2010 06:00:37 +0000

12 Reasons to refuse to Render! http://bit.ly/Pxg5 (from @archdaily)

By: Ola Dellson

Ola Dellson — Wed, 02 Jun 2010 13:21:50 +0000

To think about for you guys who graduate from schools of architecture and get sucked into render-hell. http://j.mp/9JpbC6

By: Thomas F.

Thomas F. — Thu, 14 Jan 2010 15:09:21 +0000

http://www.archdaily.com/19360/12-reasons-to-refuse-to-render/#more-19360 sollte ich mir mal zu herzen nehmen :)

By: Thomas F.

Thomas F. — Thu, 14 Jan 2010 14:47:05 +0000

http://www.archdaily.com/19360/12-reasons-to-refuse-to-render/#more-19360 sollte mich mir mal zu herzen nehmen :)

By: tshoda

tshoda — Tue, 12 Jan 2010 22:14:06 +0000

so true! but to those who like rendering:

http://www.rendercatalog.com

By: Markus

Markus — Thu, 19 Nov 2009 23:17:30 +0000

This isn’t good or bad. It’s just the way of things. Nothing stays the same.

By: Lisa Wan

Lisa Wan — Mon, 18 May 2009 17:56:00 +0000

exactly! EXACTLY! http://bit.ly/P5PLt

By: Shaderkul

Shaderkul — Fri, 15 May 2009 08:58:20 +0000

Originally Posted by AJLynn @ CGArchitect.com
“You’re all missing the point. This article isn’t for aspiring 3D guys, it’s for junior architects (the most underappreciated form of life). Junior architects don’t want to get better at rendering. They want to become senior architects.

The way to do this is for them to practice working on architecture, but senior architects keep giving the junior architects rendering work (which is not architecture work) to do. The better the junior architect gets at rendering, the more rendering work is assigned, until it becomes almost impossible for the junior architect to do real work. The rendering work is unappreciated because the senior architects don’t consider it real work, thinking it’s something a computer does and not something a skilled junior architect does.

The best approach for the junior architect is to pretend not to know how to render.”

Just wanted to share this post so you all can understand the point of this article

By: George

George — Wed, 22 Apr 2009 06:10:44 +0000

I’m a professional 3D/visualisation guy at an architectural practise. It is absolutely the best setup to have. This article is somewhat ludicrous. We have the technology to see the building before it is built, like we had pencil sketches before then, and the reason this guy presents for not doing them? – they take too long! This is, like all newly introduced technology, something for the new architect to learn, not to reject.

Having said that, it is better to have someone dedicated to the task, because as you point out, it’s time consuming. As for the Dubai thing – that’s on account of them having warehouses full of people paid $1 a day.

By: aufi

aufi — Tue, 21 Apr 2009 10:11:03 +0000

its not a crime to enhance the quality of ur works..

By: Ralf

Ralf — Fri, 17 Apr 2009 00:09:22 +0000

A perfect render can impress to a client but can not convince them.

By: kc

kc — Thu, 16 Apr 2009 16:59:30 +0000

Rendering 3d shouldn’t be the final say (too bad it is) and is not worth THAT much stress and time. In 20 years these images will look like…

By: jonasll

jonasll — Thu, 16 Apr 2009 15:05:30 +0000

As a student, i would have to say that renders are part of what we learn, but this has to be learned on our own… no techers to give us tips, etc… so thats kinda frustrating when you get into a studio critics day, and all your getting criticized about are your damn renderings (theyre not showing things, too dark, not realistic enough, etc, etc, etc….) what about architecture…. what are selling the packaging, not the product…

By: Stan

Stan — Wed, 15 Apr 2009 03:50:47 +0000

As for me – as and architect – I tend to see images and glimpses of a real building in my head. Then I have to try and transcribe some of these into an organic building by rough sketches, cardboard assemblages. After that I think modeling in Sketchup is invaluable in providing feedback since you can view and shape the building at so many levels. You can make so many cool images from a textured sketchup model and also adding creative touches in Photoshop. These models still have an open ended creative possibility conveyed. Beyond this you can render more realistically and quickly in SU with Podium or IDX Renditioner ( I just discovered!)

In my opinion this should be developed by the architect in design or someone working with him. The client should be in on the progress and only then should the CD’s or BIM model be detailed. If your BIM software is flexible like I have found Archicad to be – then you can quickly convert that SU model into Archicad for further work.

This whole problem is occurring because Architects are not designing in 3d to begin with and the project progresses so far in a vague way in 2d before the 3d ‘experts’ are called in. Oh! and then they finally see what they have been working on all along and are surprised. Then they want changes.

We live in an amazing age to have a tool like Sketchup and that process blows away all the old 2d methods in my opinion. Be thankful and show the architects how stupid they are to not design in 3d. There should be no excuses.

By: Ion

Ion — Tue, 14 Apr 2009 14:53:31 +0000

If you don’t have a passion for rendering you’r doomed :)
You have to be able to visualy express your product as good as possible to win.
On the other hand I’m all too familiar with the story: an ANALPHABET in 3D asks for an awesome looking render in no time, hocus-pocus stuff. He does’n know the necessary effort requaired, he won’t be able to appreciate it or recompensate for it, nor allocate time and resource (man-hours load). He knows 2 things : 1-he needs the renders in no time; and 2- if he pushes you maybe you’ll be able to do it.
Let’s face the options:
a) you don’t do it coz it’s too little time for too much work and you have other stuff to live for (like running after ciks, drink beer and discuss the future of humanity with friends). output: you’ll take all the blame for the failure, like it’s your fault that 3d doesn’t appear instantly from poor 2d.
b) you do it poorly, fast minimalistic stuff. output:again you’ll take the blame for practical failure and risk overnight remakes for no good whatsoever regarding the finish product
c) do it properly, against time am odds, changing the change of the change and then going back 5 steps, you know, proper f**k. output: you live one more month in that miserable office, reading articles about how successful and awesome your boss is (guess how good you’r gonna feel about yourself, and just wait till the next deadline…)

So this is a NO-WIN situation. The only way to win from this is to make clear the conditions for doing a proper render (if your able to do one in the first place): moooooooooney and a deadline for modifications. (don’t forget you have the boss by his balls, he needs the renderings).
otherways just avoid at all costs. only pain and sorrow involved.

By: Pixel

Pixel — Tue, 14 Apr 2009 12:28:26 +0000

It’s true, It’s better to leave the renderings to the guys who only do that.
It leaves more time for the architect to do his/hers job and at the end of the day the renderings look good because they were done by professionals.