Are Artists Impressions Boring Now?

[whhistle]

Was thinking about this the other day.
Are artists impressions boring now we have computers?

Take the Class 341/342 and how you can see the development of the 365/465. The Class 157 and how it developed into the 158 is another good example.

But now with modern computers and programs, it seems the artists impressions are pretty much spot on to what the final train will actually look like.

So are they boring now? No surprises.

 

[hwl]

But now with modern computers and programs, it seems the artists impressions are pretty much spot on to what the final train will actually look like.

They aren't artists impressions - the CAD/CAM packages can all do very high quality renders in a variety of projections and then you just pull in the back ground and tweak the angles, can all done by engineers no artists required all done in the time taken to make cup of tea or make an RUKforums post

A good intro for fusion360 here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sejMq84YREs

 

[Clansman]

But now with modern computers and programs, it seems the artists impressions are pretty much spot on to what the final train will actually look like.

Although in comparison to the finished product, the computer animated ones still throw up the odd howler every now and again...

 

[D365]

I can't say I agree with that statement. For example, a clear evolution can be seen in the styling of the Crossrail Class 345.

 

[Southsider]

Although the computer animated ones still throw up the odd howler every now and again...

I think they tweaked it to look less ugly than it actually does! I understand the reasons for the corridor connection but it looks much better without.

 

[43021HST]

They aren't artists impressions - the CAD/CAM packages can all do very high quality renders in a variety of projections and then you just pull in the back ground and tweak the angles, can all done by engineers no artists required all done in the time taken to make cup of tea or make an RUKforums post

A good intro for fusion360 here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sejMq84YREs

As someone who's currently studying a field of design, and also has an active interest in CAD modelling.

Firstly I can assure creating the actual model takes far longer than 5 mins, however if you're talking in the time it takes to generate a render from the 3D model, depending on your hardware you are indeed correct.

Old Fashioned drawn artists impressions are still relevant though, particularly in the early days of design development as it's far easier and more flexible to put your thoughts to paper in a quick sketch than to go straight to 3D modelling. Everything from animated films, games and cars start off as a rough sketch before it becomes a 3D impression.

Saying that, I used to work for an architects firm and they still used old fashioned artists impressions for the final visualisations alongside 3D renders, both have their merits and one of the good things about old fashioned artists impressions is that you don't need a knowledge of 3D modelling or expensive software. Many Architects/designers themselves left university about 20 - 30 years ago, so are often more proficient with the traditional mediums than with CAD. Artists impressions still very much has it's place even if you don't see it in official publicity material anymore.

In fact in many architects offices you'll still see traditional desks and drawing boards.

In the field of design I'm studying, we're still encouraged to use traditional artistic mediums.

 

[DarloRich]

I can't say I agree with that statement. For example, a clear evolution can be seen in the styling of the Crossrail Class 345.

I don't think i even understand the question!

What are we actually talking about? The first concept drawings? Design drawings? Publicity drawings? Renders? mock ups? I don't really know?

 

[43021HST]

I don't think i even understand the question!

What are we actually talking about? The first concept drawings? Design drawings? Publicity drawings? Renders? mock ups? I don't really know?

I interpreted the statement to be a rather convoluted way of asking if traditional artists impressions over CAD modelling are still relevant.

 

[DarloRich]

I interpreted the statement to be a rather convoluted way of asking if traditional artists impressions over CAD modelling are still relevant.

Thanks - the answer is yes they are relevant but they serve different masters surely?

 

[43021HST]

Thanks - the answer is yes they are relevant but they serve different masters surely?

That was basically my initial response, the only difference being that you don't see much of the traditional artists impressions in the official publicity, although they're still very much used.

 

[destere]

I really don't understand. The examples the OP uses were of projects that were cancelled. That has nothing to do with how concept artwork is created.

In short: No. Longer answer: The situation that you suggest exists doesn't actually exist.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

The word "now" in this thread title is somewhat redundant!

 

[whhistle]

Perhaps I used an outdated term.
Artist impression meaning anything from a concept drawing up to full renders.

With a lot of the older stock, there were concept drawings that ended up changing for the real thing, where these days there seems to be less changes.

Isn't there a Networker that looks a bit more futuristic, but the real thing actually looks nothing like it?
Yes: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Rail_Classes_371,_381_and_471

Turns out like the other person said, these are more concept drawings that were never actually fully realised, even though the ideas ended up on other stock.

 

[507021]

I don't think so. In fact, I think they have improved over time.

 

[daikilo]

I don't think i even understand the question!

What are we actually talking about? The first concept drawings? Design drawings? Publicity drawings? Renders? mock ups? I don't really know?

You've put your finger on the answer i.e. it depends when in the design cycle (and the purpose). In my job, we gradually transitioned to digital renderings decades ago of which some were very conceptual for marketing purposes and others used to produce 1:1 mockups. The people involved depended on the result desired and the level of detail. Visuals of trains on HS2 may omit details like brakes but will give the impression of travelling at speed (whatever that is - it was easier in the steam days).

Personally, I find it more interesting today as my mind is taxed to decide what elements of a visual are concept "impressions" and what are "ready for metal cut." I remember commenting on the first images of the class 68 nose thinking they were conceptual, only to find they would be the real thing.

 

[bastien]

They've certainly got better at perspective & proportion. I mean, look at the state of this! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Rail_Classes_341_and_342#/media/File:Class_341_Crossrail.PNG

 

[Peter Mugridge]

They've certainly got better at perspective & proportion. I mean, look at the state of this! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Rail_Classes_341_and_342#/media/File:Class_341_Crossrail.PNG

They actually built a full size mock up that looked pretty much identical to that; I have a photo somewhere of it being displayed on the concourse at Paddington...

 

[goblinuser]

So they are boring as they are too close to the end result?

I always find the mockups to be quite useless. They have loads of changes usually. Also I dislike it when they publish the 3D mockups in a stupidly low resolution and at poor angles. It would be nice to utilise the power of 3D and publish some actual high quality renders for once instead of the typical 45 degree angle camera shot of the train passing at 600x400px.