Not much to say. And then I feel a bit like I’ve talked too much about my other projects, so here, anyway, not much to say.
As indicated, I will perhaps come back to it, to add a fantasy, to make the image stand out from the ordinary. But I fear, in this type of exercise, that I am not doing anything that really escapes a certain form of stereotype.
That’s a bit why I often use this word here, in general: the visitor may have noticed it. 
4 Likes
I would say the image doesn’t stand out because it’s overlit. Everything is in bright light, there are almost no shadows and this makes the scene look flat, like the lighting you would find in an office building.
I think this would look better if there were fewer light sources, but each one was better used (with their size, intensity and color carefully picked to look pleasing). In an interior render, even lighting the whole scene with just a single window that’s well placed can create interesting gradients and look more pleasing than putting lamps everywhere.
Yes. Not to mention the electricity bill, at a time of environmental anxiety!
The chromatic choices perhaps do not favor the nuance of contrasts: the original image was a bit like this: “minimalism keeps away from bad taste”?
This is part of what I find interesting in 3D interior modeling: we can simulate real lighting; thus realizing bad architectural choices, noting that natural light does not enter enough. If I remember correctly, having tested professional software for architects or design offices (Revit, Archicad): this aspect is taken care of by the software, quite extensively (time zone, month of the year, days) .
It’s always surprising to see, in films, series or commercials, excessively electrically lit interiors… Like here? Well, it could be LEDs, which consume little energy. Bad luck we are told that “blue light” is harmful… Ye gods!* (good translation of “Diantre!”?).
No mistake, I take your comments seriously. When I spoke of “returning to the image”, it would rather be to introduce an event, a “story”. But this is where I fear falling into the banal. What’s going to happen? Introduce a corpse, limp watches, an upside-down Spider-man falling from the openwork ceiling… A reader, an e-reader, a couple… The surrealist temptation… I even thought of human skins left here and there, like snakes shed their skin: but in hindsight I find it ugly, almost in the first sense of the word…
What is this window under the table? What’s so cool down there?!
Whatever I might add, the production would still have to be up to par. Which is not a certainty.
This interior is cold and ultimately not very warm, looks healthy, easy to store and clean. I shouldn’t have so much to say about it
Thank you for your comments.
Ps : I didn’t know the term “e-readers”: a woman reading?
1 Like
I’d disagree with the idea that the lighting is “bad.” I’ve been in a lot of real interiors which are “mostly white, and very brightly, very evenly lit.” For instance, in the lobby of some fancy hotel. I could easily be persuaded that this was a photo taken in just such a place. The details are delicious.
1 Like
Thank you. I note your remark.
I only made this image as an exercise, to see what I could achieve (or the Cycles engine) in “realism”. Ultimately, I have very few choices for this image, which is essentially a reproduction. The well of light dominates the objects, hence the fact that the shadows are “hidden” under the objects. For the first time, it seems to me, I used some IES (I didn’t know it existed). I just had to model it roughly correctly.
Using FSpy (standalone version), I mismanaged something, which led to a sort of scaling fault (partially visible on the sofas), which I had to correct by eye.
I tried to do my best for the rest, but there were no particular challenges.
There is ultimately always an element of subjectivity in everyone’s eye, and that is not a bad thing: that’s the “human factor”. When we are completely and permanently replaced by droids, there will be “single point of view perfection”… And maybe a little boredom.
In the meantime, let’s continue to make mistakes, be imperfect, and experiment (?).
Thanks for your intervention.