Becoming a better artist - Part 2 of 3

Written by: Johannes L

It’s not about the lighting…

So let’s get back to the topic. Why don’t your images look realistic??

I want to start with the lighting. Let’s first realize that lighting is a simple concept. Light is made up of light rays bouncing around; every time it hits a surface, it changes in color and intensity. All this is math. Pure simple math, and there’s no subjective way of looking at it. It is what it is, following the laws of physics.?

This also means that all descent renderers calculate light more or less the exact same way because they are programmed using this math. If you’re for example having issues with color bleeding it’s not because the renderer is doing something wrong, it’s likely because you have too saturated or bright diffuse colors (nothing in real life is 100% white or 100% saturated).?

One mistake that many do is to blame the lighting every time their images don’t look photo-real. If it doesn’t look good, you try another lighting technique or another HDRI. You move the light, change the time of day, add artificial lights or bouncers, and when you still don’t get it to work you start tweaking all the settings. Or you start to retouch the heck out of your image in a desperate way to save it, instead of actually fixing the real issue.

I did this too, for years, but eventually, it dawned on me:

If you take a photo in really bad lighting, the image looks photo-realistic. It may look like shit, but still realistic. It doesn’t matter what lighting circumstances you take your photo in, it will always still looks realistic, since it’s obviously a real photograph. Regardless of how shit it is.

And the same principle of course applies to 3D as well, even if you have bad, ugly lighting, that alone is not the reason why your image doesn’t look realistic.

… it’s about the models and textures

Let me share a little story.

For a couple of years, I was working at a local electronics store, and my main responsibility was to sell digital cameras or DSLRs. Time after time, I had customers asking me what camera body to buy, often they wanted the best. For example that could be a 5D MkII, a really competent and, at the time, expensive camera. Now because they were about to spend $2500 on a camera body, they wanted to buy a simple, cheap lens since they couldn’t really afford both that body and a $1500 lens.

Now if you know anything about cameras, you realize how stupid that is. Why?

Because nothing is ever stronger than the weakest link.?

It’s a pretty obvious fact, that every single light ray that reaches the camera sensor must first travel through the lens, basically meaning that it doesn’t matter how good the camera body you have, with a shit lens your images will always look like shit.

Now, in this story, you can easily replace the words “camera” with “lighting”, and “lens” with “models and textures”. It doesn’t matter how good lighting you have, with shit models and textures your image will always look like shit. But with great models and textures, it will most likely look realistic even in bad lighting conditions. Just like in real life.

As for interiors, your image should look realistic even when only having a pure white environment background color lighting the scene, without any lights or HDRI added at all (this would more or less simulate a completely overcast day).

If it doesn't, lighting is simply not your issue.

Don’t forget the artistry.

So what makes a good artist, really?

So let’s say that you already know how to make kick-ass shaders and that your lighting already is good. Your images look realistic but still, they are lacking something? They are lacking emotion?

Well, being a good artist doesn’t only mean that you know how to technically make realistic images. Artistry is so much more. It is about colors, harmony, composition, and balance.

It’s about feeling.

You must know what colors look good together, how to create harmony in your image by matching design styles, and the use of camera angles. You must use foregrounds and backgrounds to your advantage, the rule of thirds, focus points, and depth of field. You must work with shadows, not only with light. Shadows are often what create the mood and make your image evoke emotions.?

Your images shouldn’t just show an object, they should tell a story, create a need, or at least be inviting. There should be a reason for every camera angle. That reason could be as simple as it “feels good to look at”, but that’s reason enough as an image that feels good also evokes emotions.?

And that’s what you want to achieve, getting the viewer to feel something. If he or she doesn't, then what good does the image do?

I posted a render online a few years ago and someone asked me: “Why do your images always evoke sadness?”. He was referring to that my images not rarely are dark and desaturated. Even though I got a bit surprised since that was not really the purpose of the image, his reaction made me happy. Because 99% of all 3D visualizations out there don’t evoke any feelings at all. They are just an image, showing an object or a space, but nothing more. They don’t make me feel, they don’t make me want or think. If you can evoke any feeling at all, regardless of if it’s happiness or sadness, anger or fascination, you have succeeded.?

The Why?

If you shoot a chair in the room, why are you shooting that chair??

Maybe the purpose is to sell the chair. Or you’re doing interior renders to sell an apartment, and that chair should look so inviting that the viewer wants to sit in it, right there, in that apartment. The image’s purpose is to invoke a feeling, a desire that will make the viewer open his wallet.

If the image doesn’t succeed with that, it’s actually quite pointless. It’s easy to show what a chair looks like, but it’s harder to actually make people want it.

To enhance that feeling, you may for example want to have the sun shining on the chair while keeping the background in shadow, and you may want to add a plaid hanging over the chair to make it look inviting and cozy. Shoot it with a zoom lens to get some interesting perspective and let the depth of field add drama and focus to the image.?

There are tons of creative ways to achieve this, but you must start looking at your images and asking yourself, do I feel something?

3D is not the real world

Don't forget this. Too often I see people getting totally caught up on real-world physical properties in surfaces and materials, referring to scientific texts, diagrams, numbers, curves, and whatnot, believing that if you can learn this by heart, you’ll become a better 3D artist.

You probably won’t, because 3D is not the real world. 3D is digital, it’s a replication, approximations, and most importantly, it’s art. In the end, you’ll always end up eyeballing everything anyway because it didn’t turn out as you wanted it to. And in the end, it’s up to you to be an artist, not a scientist. You’re making beautiful, meaningful images, not scientifically correct images.

"Beautiful" and "technically correct" are two completely different things.

I have never cared very much about how things really work on a scientific level, the correctness of values, and so on. I just don’t let those things occupy my mind and hinder my way forward. Stopping to be so obsessed with real physical values and start being an artist. If you rely 100% on that your values are correct, you’ll never really know how to control your image.

Ask the right questions

Stay tuned for the third and last part.