Hi anons, what do you think about this scene lighting wise. Also,

>lighting wise

Way too bright, what were you thinking?

I think it looks fine. Depends on what time of day you want .

>>551422
Well, the company i work for always ask for bright scenes like this. I personally dont like too bright, looks tacky. But i guess depends on the situation.

>>551422
Seconded. There's brightly lit white rooms, but this is "I can't even see what is what".

Your artificial lights are raping everything. There's a big AF halo coming from the neon above the kitchen counter and that shouldn't happen. The light coming out of your window also creates some really fucking bright reflections, but that might be a problem with your materials.

There's at least three basic properties you gotta consider for all of your materials: base color, reflection amount and reflection glossiness (whether it reflects blurry or clean). Be aware of those, and rely on real world reference when creating your materials. A lot of shit in your scene seems way too reflective, especially the floor and walls. Meanwhile, your black material (windowframe and stool legs) has literally no reflections, which makes it seem dumb (what material is it even supposed to be? are these stool legs made out of super light-absorbent rubber?)

The idea is OK. But with that brushed metal everywhere it totally blows out the lighting. Maybe this would work for a room with a wood finish.

>>551421
>hat approach do you take when lighting an interior scene.
remove all light
start placing slight ambient light
focus on guiding player with lighting.
Rest lighting is focused on hitting important areas that I want lit/unlit or creating cool shadows.

Realism bears 0 relevance.

for me its to bright, too much white light, i think this will look better with more reflecs and less light, and this metal door looks weird to mee, what program do u use? its look like archicad visualization

>>551422
>what were you thinking
White is right

File: 2016.08 (3).jpg (66KB, 1200x500px) Image search: [Google]

66KB, 1200x500px

too bright?

File: IMG_20170214_133544162.jpg (2MB, 4160x2340px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 4160x2340px

>>551533
Nah these are good but give the walls bump or texture and chamfer your edges, even if this is minimalist hard edges are not perfectly square.

Shitty photo but you get the idea.

>>551532
>>551533
The brightness is good, the lighting and materials are shit (quality wise). What are you rendering in?

Things that stand out the most (for being bad) are the glass boxes in the bathroom (those are weird, if you show me a ref I might be able to tell you what's wrong with them), the windows have a weird design and the HDRI dome is a bit too noticeable, the direct lighting in the bathroom is poorly handled (it needs some light bleed, and could probably be done at a more interesting angle), and the stools' materials in the kitchen are really really horrid.

You should also consider adding a little bloom/lens flare around your primary light sources in post, so these aren't just white dots.

>>551563
this

the modeling/texturing/lighting is pretty shit honestly, the whiteness/brightness is acceptable though

>>551553
Would you chamfer all edges tho?

>>551566
I would't say all, but most.

>>551567
I would say all. Some more than others, but definitely everything. a perfectly sharp 90 degree edge really does stand out like a sore thumb. Even a shiny new knife should have a chamfered cutting edge to catch light.

>>551563
Rendered in Rhino with Vray in one sitting. For efficiency sake I don't fillet much unless I really have to. It gets really tricky to snap around a chamfered object. The plans at my work gets changed far too often, and having these mediocre looking renders but fast is what the company needed. They never asked for better and that's why it never looked finished.

>>551570
Not kidding, have you taken a look at Lumion or Twinmotion?
If you need to churn out mediocre renders quickly they might be worth a shot

>>551656
Thanks for the tips. I've been playing around with UE4 and it's actually much better because it's free and I don't have to sit around waiting to render everytime I need to change something, instead I can do it in real time.

>>551693
yeah, its basically the same but UE4 is more advanced with more options but also a steeper learning curve.

>>551693
I don't have to sit around waiting to render everytime I need to change something,

You're lucky you weren't around for the Lightmass days.

>>551693
first of all, all time is real.

>>551695
Steeper learning curve if you're building a game. Archviz in UE4 is actually quite straightforward, no scripting needed. Using a 1st person template I can just import meshes and edit the collision properties, then import materials and edit the blueprint to add specular, roughness, etc.

>>551716
Didnt mean to imply that UE4 is hard, but it does have more to it than Lumion and the likes.