What's new
By:
Photoshop Gurus Forum

Welcome to Photoshop Gurus forum. Register a free account today to become a member! It's completely free. Once signed in, you'll enjoy an ad-free experience and be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Amazing work, but was it done with photoshop?


A

A Squarecan

Well-Known Member
Messages
61
Likes
0
Hey everyone,

I was surfing the internet for a picture of a good brick wall and came apon this picture...
DB%20Stone%20Wall%20Nite.JPG


This is amazing work IMO for you guys who know a lot more then me, do you think it was done with photoshop? or do you think it is a specific house design program or something along those lines? I would love to be able to create pictures like the one shown above(I am really big into arcitecture) Any info would be great.

Thanks
Keith
 
Hi A Squarecan,

That image was definitely modeled in some 3D program. I can't guess which one as I don't recognize the specific textures. I would think it most likely is one of the CAD/Architect 3D programs though it could have been modeled it one of the non-specialized programs, Maya, Strata, and the like.
 
Something like this can be done with Photoshop (beginners excluded).

If it's done in a 3D program then it must have been a crappy one, because the lighting is very poor. Just look for example at the shadows, razor sharp.
Also the texture on the wall on the left shows reapeating patterns.

I think that most exprienced Photoshop users on a board like this can do better than that and I'm dead serious.

Personally I think it's done with a program like Sketchup, a program in which realism is less important.
 
I'm pretty sure it's a 3d render.

The one thing that really gets me is the light being cast just underneath those 2nd story windows. A little sloppy on the modeling, and that's what happens. I don't know much about architecture and carpentry, but I imagine that the porch roof would be joined with the wall and no light would be cast just under the windows.

Even then, I can't imagine the porch roof overlapping the corner. Can't say that I've ever notice a porch roof built like that.

Then again, like I said, I don't know much about architecture and carpentry.

Also, I seriously doubt a PS user would put that cast light right there. I know I wouldn't.

edit:
Hey, there is some light across that other 2nd story window. To me, that just screams 3d program (and sloppy modeling).
 
John,

I excluded Sketch-up because it doesn't use textures of near this sophistication. It really is a sketching tool more adapted to architectural concepts. Great software, though I did't buy it after the demo timed out.

I can't imagine someone good enough to produce that image in PS doing so in such a mechanical manner when other programs earmarked for creating images like this are so much faster and produce results like the sample.

Also the lighting doesn't necessarily mean it was a poor program. You never know, it might have been the desire of the artist to have it look like that or that was the best they could do.

Stroker

While I don't doubt there might be a porch roof built like that somewhere (by an amateur), I've never seen one in 40 years of making a good deal of my living as a builder. That lighting on the second story doesn't approach real, even if the porch roof was cut away at the house's exterior. There's no light source unless it is hidden in that cutout. ;)
 
Welles, I'm pretty sure the funky lighting is coming from a light on the porch. If you look at the floor, you can see that it juts out a little bit. Then follow it up and there is a lamp.
I think the funky lighting on the 2nd story is coming from that light, and is passing through some bad modeling.
Can you see it?
That would explain the large light casting, but doesn't feel right for those little bars of light on the lonely window.

Ahh! Bleh! Yech!
Make it go away!

Thanks for confirming the porch roof thing.
I'm not a builder of any sort, but it did make my Stroker sense tingle a little bit.
 
Welles said:
John,I excluded Sketch-up because it doesn't use textures of near this sophistication. It really is a sketching tool more adapted to architectural concepts.
Click to expand...
Welles, believe it or not, but I own SketchUp so I know what the program is all about.
I use it to quickly model 3D objects for my other 3D program.
And if you think that this kind of house is not possible in Sketchup, well then you might want to look at this;

http://sketchup.com/gallery/free-form.php?recordid=102&gcid=1&page=6

Welles said:
John,
I can't imagine someone good enough to produce that image in PS doing so in such a mechanical manner when other programs earmarked for creating images like this are so much faster and produce results like the sample.
Click to expand...
I don't agree with this either. I've seen several people trying to create 3D objects in Photoshop when the objects and lighting could have been created faster in a 3D program.
I also disagree that nobody can do this kind of work in Photoshop, even if it?s architecture. Guides and grids for example are a great tool for this and so are vectors.
I don?t want to sound pompous, but I know that I can make a better house that this one and more realistic, not because I?m that talented, no simply because I know what I?m capable of and what Photoshop is capable of. I was going through some old threads on this boards a while back and that has convinced me that you can also give a member like wbiss this kind of assignment.

Welles said:
John,Also the lighting doesn't necessarily mean it was a poor program. You never know, it might have been the desire of the artist to have it look like that.
Click to expand...
Somehow I have to agree on that one, but the reason I said it was because I haven?t seen any good 3d software in which the default lighting wasn?t set to soft shadows, but like you said, it might have been his intention.

But don't let us forget what the question was all about.
The question was: "Amazing work, but was it done with photoshop?"

I know it can be done in Photoshop, but that doesn't mean it's done in Photoshop, so the answeer to his question is; I don't know (yet).
 
Stroker

Aha! I see what you are referring to as the light source and you're right. It's just so wrong architecturally that I didn't give it creedence.

John

I stand corrected about everything. The strength of your opinions is overwhelmig. :D
 
wow guys,

Thanks for the quick responces. Kinda intresting to see everyone's opinions. The guy actually owns a company some work better then others but I agree the shadows are off. Considering my skill level I can't say anything about that though [shhh] %} . Keep the input coming :righton:

Keith
 
Oops Welles, you just replied when I added (and corrected) the text "But don't let.... ....I don't know (yet)."

No serious, the question was is it done in Photoshop?

Who knows? :D
 
I agree with with you guys about the lighting and tiling patterns.


I think the effect you really like Keith is the bump mapping,the way the bricks jut out of flat and look like they have depth.You can create depth in PS using the lighting filter if you wanted to make bricks.If for some reason I am unable to use 3D I would use a piece of photo tex and use the transform tools to fit it into place keeping vanishing points in mind,and I also use gradients and screen mode for lights and multiply usually for shadow areas,its time consuming but you can do it if you spend the time to tweak and re tweak.


I have a couple of PS only 3d images somewhere I will dig them up for you.
 
Nice thread guys. :righton:

My take on this is that is IS possible, most definately. But that this particular image was NOT done in PS. Specifically because of Photoshp's pixel-based rendering engine. It does not produce sharp clarity and hard edges like those seen in this image. At least, not by default. With a little manipulation you might get an image to have those qualities. But i don't think anyone would want to since it looks so unrealistic.

It may however have been done in a vector app; like Illustrator.

Bert's artwork is excellent. Albeit, even though he strives heavily for real world realism, even he tends to create scenes that are a tad to "pristine" looking.
 
wow that guys art work is AMAZING!!!!!

thanks Kiwi I would be intrested in see what you got :D
 
Have agree with the majority here, this was defintaly not Photoshop, it was done in a 3D program without too much attention to the lighting.
The light on the porch is not bad but it would not extend as far as under the 2nd story winbows. The roof overhang above the enterance would block it.

As well the shadows are to defined, in reality there would be a little blur and softness on the edges.
 
Here ya go.......keep in mind this really old work,and now it makes me kinda cringe.
 
I agree with the Keeper on this one. I think Burts work is technically amazing but misses something . If you want to see a better artists work check out Robert Cottingham and his sign series, the inspiration for Bert Monroys work. ;) ;)
Of course thats just my opinion - and you know what Clint Eastwood says about opinions. :D
 
Wow Kiwi! I didn't see your pics before I responded. Cringe }P Don't you think youre a little hard on yourself? Looks good to me :righton:
 
Back
Top