CompuServe Messages

Hi people; Thought I'd throw my two-cents worth in this thread… some great/practical perspectives. The way I use 3DStudio with Architecture (yes, I know the focus of this is animation) is in stills. We sit the client down with modular materials and designs ready to import at a single pick (a kitchen for example) and go through color schema, motif, proportions, cabinetry, lighting… the whole nine yards. We basically make the owner the director of the film. This person storyboards for us the design, and then we do simultaneous animation during building drawing construction so that about 1/4 of the way through the construction drawings (CDs), we have animations. This has saved us on numerous occasions as the owner was able to finally visualize the tougher, more sophisticated concepts of a given 3d design. My point… part of the effectiveness of 3D Studio on the design process is the timing of the product in its use. The bidding session isn't the only time animations become practical in the design process. More often than not, stills will do the trick (which are very quick to generate with diverse materials and lighting combinations). For developers, animations are far more crucial in the beginning phases (at least in our experience). But for owners, stills work great, and if animations can be performed on the side while CADD gets underway, we can usually turn out something intuitive through animation before the first 25% of the CADD side is done. This is where we usually catch design flaws anyway with or without animation, but animation makes the problems far more easy to grasp, thereby saving us time in explaining anything. I can't help stressing to people that animations is only ONE benefit of 3D Studio. Photorealism in stills can be just as effective and profitable if "immediacy" is an issue. -dave / toxic frog multimedia