2D or 3D: Viewpoints in Question
Just like a good film, no matter how good the effects are; if the script or acting is lifeless, then it isn't worth buying the ticket - you will not return for a second viewing and will not want to learn more. But, if the idea is new, the effect captures an ora of a time, place or memory, then it starts becoming something more.
Style over Substance?
We are in a world where 'effect' has been served as paramount importance.
At 7 I was inadvertently introduced to digital art in terms of a basic 2D game running on a cassette-loading Amstrad. It set off fascination with digital imagery and animation. Since then, I have consistently followed the development of CGI, vividly remembering its breakthroughs - the first feature articles in 3DSWorld magazine on believable hair, then eye lashes, then cloth simulation....wow! But, that was then - it was new and exciting to me. Now it is commonplace and to be quite frank, quite easy to ignore. The allure of something hand-crafted and impressionist remains desirable - something full of vibrancy, not telling the viewer every little detail, but giving them a hint from which their mind can expand, walk around and experiment. As art providers, working from space plans it is important to remember the desired outcome is an indication - not a rule. And really, when you scratch the surface, computers haven't really made life any easier or faster for producing a 3D effect image for selling an idea. Its just made it a photorealistic method - in some ways this can be useful but as an explanatory device for conveying a concept within a series of contracted teams, to the client , the planning office or a community, it doesn't really add much extra wether it is photorealistic, impressionist, or as in the case of Zaha Hadid's painted concepts, vaguely abstract.
Workflow integration - Pros & Cons
Computers are great tools to utilise from a mechanical standpoint, potentially speeding up heavy work flows: Construction of steel frameworks and functioning parts can be sent directly to the manufacturer from a CAD file - the same set of files used the same week to output space plans and sections for planning or to integrate into a client presentation.
For some reason making a 3D room is thought of as a very easy, quick business - perhaps its simply marketing's strength - everything has an instantaneity to it: "at the click of a button", "there is as app for that". However behind the ease and autonomy we are told, then click and a room appears is not a good reflection of reality - certainly a very rudimentary block filled CGI image can be created in an hour or two, but to give a sense of atmosphere and finish takes much more and to create the glossy imagery we are sold day in day out can take a lifetime. The rendering times make this not necessarily as desirable as its traditional alternatives.
Another big problem with harnessing CGI for integration into a buildings workflow, at early stage, is that expectation is imbalanced compared to actual requirement and logical financial & program control, often leading to time spent polishing an image when a new task should be tackled.
Getting into 3D too early can also have its disadvantages - Yes, 3D software enables great changes, but again, the render times bring uncertainty to wether the benefits outweigh the cons. Digital assets used in scene can be very costly, so many items will often be bespoke to fit an interior designer's or architect's design and so will be made by hand in 3-dimensions to appease a brief - in 3D it takes a LOT of time to get a single object looking correct and from first hand experience I can tell you that a full week can easily be taken up in fitting-out, texturing up and lighting a conservatively sized kitchen! So the last thing you want is an aggravated studio and a client desperately hanging on for results after a "minor" change such as the doors being routed oak instead of moulded polypropylene plastic - it means a total refit and texture set.
For presentation-level imagery the CGI alternative may be chosen and a worth while pursuit.
The final image is likely to take a substantial quantity of time and rendering capabilities still result in many many hours until a final shot is ever produced. ( 15 - 20+ hours render time is presently an average time for a single final image to be completes by a 3D computer program once all ambient and procedural effects have been implemented; texturing, cloth and hair simulation, lighting, depth of field, faux-camera lens setup etc.) The end result has the potential to be stunningly detailed - good if you are selling on quality of fixtures & fittings maybe - not that the inclusion of high quality furniture brands such as a Mies Van Der Rohe or Le Corbusier chair cannot show this in 2D.
One big advantage is obviously to take out much of the mental calculation that goes into drawing out a perspective image, manipulating the 3D space allows for much of this tricky stage to be passed relatively easily, though time will need to be spent up-front creating basic forms in 3-dimensions to work with.
Another big advantage is the ability to control a virtual camera along a track, allowing for the presentation of fly-though sequences - very attractive, although not required for planning or discussion, this would be more for the whim of pleasing a client's personal interest and if they are willing to pay for this then fair enough.
Overkill of deliverables
All in all, only fundamental pieces of information are needed to help a group, associated contracted teams or a planning department understand a floor plan; intrinsic to an image is capturing atmosphere; through lighting, content and occupants. It serves to give an indication of scale, volume and atmosphere - something tangible within an instant by the client.
These are elements achievable by both traditional and digital methods.
Depending upon style the practice and/or client wants to achieve, traditional architectural illustrations can hold much applicable information and an array completed in comparably significant shorter times, a more in-depth and visually refined artwork may take several days upwards. But, it is something that makes the space plans easier to digest off-the-bat and why architectural impressions continue to remain a worthwhile exercise.
Conclusions
2D traditional art continues to thrive today in architectural illustration and looks set to stay for the future. I guess the to determine which medium to go towards is ultimately dependent on advising the client best as possible towards a solution for their stage of the process: 2D earlier, 3D later.
Blog post subject matter:
Flip-Country: Unique as a Practice
We are affiliated to a architectural practice which has project experience in all four continents. This expertise enables us to offer an executive bespoke service from initial property search and feasibility to complete after facility. Our senior partner is a qualified UK and USA registered architect with 30 years knowledge Mallorca including hotels, commercial as well as residential market.
For those seeking to own property within Europe, we are able to source properties for most budgets. Simultaneously we provide service packages to help with setting up mortgages, finances, and insurance.
Uniquely we are an architect-led team with a long-standing background of the property market abroad and experience of surveys, feasibility studies and so forth.
If you are a non-european looking for a home or a possible property venture within Europe, new legislation means, that in many cases, purchase of a property at a minimal level set out by that country, may provide other opportunities above the obvious advantage of free travel between countries with the visa scheme in place.
Our business endeavours to provide an all-round service to assist quickly and efficiently with property searches and related transactions to fast-track your move.