3D Rendering in Architecture
Christine Kim’s post  on 3D rendering captured my attention when I was looking through the posts for week 5. In her post, Christine discusses how the 3D rendering of an architectural piece often differs from the real experience, which is an increasing problem because it has compromised the trust between clients and architects. “Most of the time, the 3D computer graphic photos focus on artistic values of the render rather than the creating realistic experiential render”, Christine identifies the cause of the disparities, suggesting that clients should be more understanding of the gist the rendering, instead of focusing on the “realistic experience.”
When I was reading the original article mentioned in Christine’s post , I noticed a recommended article by the website named “How to render your building to sell it, not just show it.” It is interesting that, although most of the differences can be attributed to limitations of the rendering software and the variability of the reality, architects’ intentions might also play a crucial role. Just for clarification, I am not implying that architects knowingly deceive their clients; instead, architects are often forced to accentuate certain details of their designs to sell their projects to their clients. For example, going for an impactful POV (point of view) or composition instead of one that most accurately depicts the reality.
Going back to Kim’s advice to clients of not focusing on the”realistic experience”, a question arises: do the client actually want the “realistic experience” in a rendering, or rather a heightened representation that deviates from the reality within an acceptable amount?
 Christine (Hae Wann) Kim – LookingOutwards post
 “Are 3D renderings deceiving architects and clients?” read here
 “How to render your building to sell it, not just show it” read here