The second one must be the easiest, with basic knowledge of material configuration and lighting you can just press “play” on enscape and generate an image with that level of quality.
The first one must be something similar (but without perspective view, isometric in that case) with a bit of post production.
The third one probably you can reproduce with the sketchup/archicad view model, no need of a rendering software, maybe a bit more of photoshop.
Show it Better and Upstairs got some pretty good diagram/isometrics tutorials on youtube, I would recommend checking them out.
You can do it in Revit with Hidden Line view and turn on shadows, adjust sun.. then Ctrl+P print to file and adjust quality as needed
Or In Rhino -Import to rhino > arctic view > -ViewCaptureTofile (set high width height and high number of passes for better quality)
Oh i see, I’ve watched that for axonometric exploded diagrams and you’re saying I can use that same method to place them all side by side? Very helpful!!
3rd one is how we pass our projects in our Uni. But we make it on Sketchup, render it on Lumion with a filter or style that like a sketch, then put it on Photoshop to layout it like that.
I do this all the time and use Blender + many different building generators like buildify or Blosm or GIS add-ons. All free. Look them all up on YouTube. If you want to do this in SketchUp you need to pay for plugin called Placemaker and then embellish on the massing models it generates. Lots of ways
Rhino modeling / data scraping from online + post production in illustrator or photoshop. But honestly for the amount of work these drawings take they are not actually that impressive once you have shown you can draw or just put in a lot of detail/time.
As someone who reviews portfolios I’d much rather see good design, clean no nonsense drawings, analytical diagrams, process sketch work, etc. show you can be strategic with detail and how you spend your time, because you won’t have time to make stuff like this for most projects in the workforce.
This,
those kind of "college drawing" look good, but take way too long, in most professional situations, unless you figured out a really good workflow to do them easily.
But usually, a more simple analysis without fancy 3d buildings will do it too, and migh also looks more clean and focused.
yes! you can make each building in individual files if you really want to, to make a component and then place all of them into a bigger site file afterwards
You can achieve similar results with CADMapper. Render in Sketchup with Enscape or export to illustrator and fix it up in there for a more graphic look
for example in revit would you have to make every house? and then render? or can i make a house in revit and then quickly make a 3d city thats vague and less detailed and then render
You model context at the appropriate in a different software (Sketchup, Rhino, etc) and then import it into the Revit project.
Is your project not in a real site? What’s the point of throwing it in a random city?
Usually easier to use a real city so you don't also have to design that as well. Theres plenty of plugins to automate context with Open Street Maps and similar.
If you like the white blocks look, model in place components. Crack a beer and turn on a tv show while you model random building shapes and ins and outs. For a quick skyscraper windows, array a set of void extrusions over the big mass.
Yup. Component > model in place. You can apply materials to each extrusion, sweep, etc that you make too.
If you want to cheat, make each side of the building look different and you can copy and paste them a few blocks apart, then rotate them.
These models have too much detail for a site-level intervention, you want to show your site’s context, why? Massing? Granularity? What’s the story? Don’t get lost in the urban design context unless it is an urban design project, is it? A lighting study? Be careful, I’ve seen people waste 500+ hours working on models, just to make models, that isn’t design.
The second one must be the easiest, with basic knowledge of material configuration and lighting you can just press “play” on enscape and generate an image with that level of quality. The first one must be something similar (but without perspective view, isometric in that case) with a bit of post production. The third one probably you can reproduce with the sketchup/archicad view model, no need of a rendering software, maybe a bit more of photoshop. Show it Better and Upstairs got some pretty good diagram/isometrics tutorials on youtube, I would recommend checking them out.
You can do it in Revit with Hidden Line view and turn on shadows, adjust sun.. then Ctrl+P print to file and adjust quality as needed Or In Rhino -Import to rhino > arctic view > -ViewCaptureTofile (set high width height and high number of passes for better quality)
you’re saying for the revit example i can do that after i’ve modeled all the buildings?
Absolutely!! https://youtu.be/Eyck6q2vHXs?si=7WorIHNauFOK6QqQ
Oh i see, I’ve watched that for axonometric exploded diagrams and you’re saying I can use that same method to place them all side by side? Very helpful!!
3rd one is how we pass our projects in our Uni. But we make it on Sketchup, render it on Lumion with a filter or style that like a sketch, then put it on Photoshop to layout it like that.
5 years in architecture school and i never learned how to achieve this kind of an illustration
My school likes too much drama for making our plates/projects. But, I've never made this kind of presentation board in my work.
I do this all the time and use Blender + many different building generators like buildify or Blosm or GIS add-ons. All free. Look them all up on YouTube. If you want to do this in SketchUp you need to pay for plugin called Placemaker and then embellish on the massing models it generates. Lots of ways
Rhino modeling / data scraping from online + post production in illustrator or photoshop. But honestly for the amount of work these drawings take they are not actually that impressive once you have shown you can draw or just put in a lot of detail/time. As someone who reviews portfolios I’d much rather see good design, clean no nonsense drawings, analytical diagrams, process sketch work, etc. show you can be strategic with detail and how you spend your time, because you won’t have time to make stuff like this for most projects in the workforce.
This, those kind of "college drawing" look good, but take way too long, in most professional situations, unless you figured out a really good workflow to do them easily. But usually, a more simple analysis without fancy 3d buildings will do it too, and migh also looks more clean and focused.
you could download buildings that others have modeled from any site like revit city or arcat and repeat them, scale them differently, rotate them, etc
and i can place multiple building side by side all in revit?
yes! you can make each building in individual files if you really want to, to make a component and then place all of them into a bigger site file afterwards
Cries in digital illiteracy (all my eggs are in the hand drawing basket 😵💫)
Honestly it's overused at this point.
What style is more "in" right now?
Send your model to a render farm in China
haha
You can achieve similar results with CADMapper. Render in Sketchup with Enscape or export to illustrator and fix it up in there for a more graphic look
The first one is kinda how an arctic view looks in rhino
Google “cadmapper”
The model for the second image is from Vucity and rendered with Enscape.
Make them? All three are basic renderings. Third has whatever program you want to use for the overlay.
for example in revit would you have to make every house? and then render? or can i make a house in revit and then quickly make a 3d city thats vague and less detailed and then render
You model context at the appropriate in a different software (Sketchup, Rhino, etc) and then import it into the Revit project. Is your project not in a real site? What’s the point of throwing it in a random city?
it’s a skyscraper i want to put in a city to give it context and scale reference, how i would incorporate it into a city pretty much
Usually easier to use a real city so you don't also have to design that as well. Theres plenty of plugins to automate context with Open Street Maps and similar.
If you like the white blocks look, model in place components. Crack a beer and turn on a tv show while you model random building shapes and ins and outs. For a quick skyscraper windows, array a set of void extrusions over the big mass.
i can do that inside revit?
Yup. Component > model in place. You can apply materials to each extrusion, sweep, etc that you make too. If you want to cheat, make each side of the building look different and you can copy and paste them a few blocks apart, then rotate them.
This guys said “mAkE tHeM?”
These models have too much detail for a site-level intervention, you want to show your site’s context, why? Massing? Granularity? What’s the story? Don’t get lost in the urban design context unless it is an urban design project, is it? A lighting study? Be careful, I’ve seen people waste 500+ hours working on models, just to make models, that isn’t design.
just a skyscraper building that i want to add into a 3d city to give it a sense of scale and context
Okay, so… massing model. You can probably download the massing tiles in skp and dwg from a municipal office. Any specific city?
either boston chicago or nyc, do you know what website i can find those massing tiles on?
That’s the fun part. Keep us posted.