Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Antirender: remove the glossy shine on architectural renderings

antirender.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

401–410 of 478 posts

Re: Antirender: remove the glossy shine on architectural renderings

#401

Post by beklein »

fdb wrote: post #393
beklein wrote: post #260

Would love to see the original prompt for Nano Banana from OP somewhere. One that yields decent results, for me, is: { "image_generation_prompt": { "subject_focus": { "primary": "Architectural exterior scene", "constraint": "Strictly preserve original building geometry, facade details, and structural layout", "reference_adherence": "High structural fidelity to input image" }, "environment_and_season": { "season": "La…

It's on Lovable so you can just fork it and take a look (the prompt is in supabase/functions/transform-render/index.ts): Transform this idealized architectural rendering into the most brutally realistic, depressing photograph possible. This is the WORST CASE scenario - what the building will actually look like in reality: - Set on a dreary, grey, overcast late November day with flat, lifeless lighting - The sky is a…

Thank you! Learned something new today. Will try to look out for this trick on other Lovable sites I will stumble upon.

Re: Antirender: remove the glossy shine on architectural renderings

#402

Post by smnrchrds »

yawnxyz wrote: post #4

That's funny, the second example is the Peace Bridge in Calgary. On a nice day the render actually looks close to the real thing!

> From the site: Get back what it'll actually look like on a random Tuesday in November

It's Calgary. The landscape will be a lot snowier anytime in November.

Re: Antirender: remove the glossy shine on architectural renderings

#404

Post by dahart »

amelius wrote: post #396
usrusr wrote: post #327

Pretty much what has long been my dream "make the world better" product (long as in from pre-genAI days), only that this one happens in image space: take an architectural model, look at the surface material specifications, analyze it for where rainwater would run down etc and generate weathering texture, how would this look when it's not new anymore. Because as I see it, a lot of aesthetic decisions in architecture,…

That's maybe nice for prestige projects but imho the main problem in architecture is projects on a budget and how money is allocated. There should be a law that says that X% of the building costs should be in the facade, the part that everybody sees. That alone should help a lot in making cities look nicer.

That sounds like a recipe for skimping on safety and design systemically. No thank you. You can’t legislate aesthetics, and there’s already a huge incentive to make buildings look great. People already spend a lopsided amount on the facade making it look better than it is, rather than spending on where they should: foundation, structure, good design, and longevity. In my city, apartment buildings used to require steel structures and lawmakers relaxed the requirement so they went back to wood because it’s cheaper. Now the new ones look great but they’re burning down and falling apart at higher rates than before.

Re: Antirender: remove the glossy shine on architectural renderings

#406

Post by fnord77 »

usrusr wrote: post #327

Pretty much what has long been my dream "make the world better" product (long as in from pre-genAI days), only that this one happens in image space: take an architectural model, look at the surface material specifications, analyze it for where rainwater would run down etc and generate weathering texture, how would this look when it's not new anymore. Because as I see it, a lot of aesthetic decisions in architecture,…

this is what gets me about brutalism. Concrete looks nice when brand new, but a few years of acid rain makes it look like dog shit

Re: Antirender: remove the glossy shine on architectural renderings

#407

Post by jebarker »

I currently have a landscape designer planning our yard landscaping. When I see the impressive renderings they produced I immediately thought that it’s some idealized version of how it will look on a sunny day after 10 years of bedding in. I asked them to also produce renders of how it’ll look on a gloomy winter day 6 months after planting everything. Seems they don’t have the tools to produce those images really though

Re: Antirender: remove the glossy shine on architectural renderings

#408

Post by lukan »

arjie wrote: post #298
ex-aws-dude wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is something I've found over the years with traveling. You watch a bunch of travel videos and think the place you're visiting is going to be so different but its just the same overcast sky and ocean and washed out color palette as home. Once you remove all the filters, color correction, and drone shots from influencer travel videos a lot of places look the same IRL.

I cannot relate to this at all. Even just Valparaiso and Venice (two towns) are so different from each other. Even if you make weather dreary it’s a different feeling. Then you consider Patagonia or Norway and compare it with the California Coast. The world is full of beauty.

Agreed. Also the trick is, if you end up in an ugly place while traveling ... you just move on, until you find beauty again (so don't book in advance too much).

Re: Antirender: remove the glossy shine on architectural renderings

#409

Post by sbarre »

dahart wrote: post #404
amelius wrote: post #396

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's maybe nice for prestige projects but imho the main problem in architecture is projects on a budget and how money is allocated. There should be a law that says that X% of the building costs should be in the facade, the part that everybody sees. That alone should help a lot in making cities look nicer.

That sounds like a recipe for skimping on safety and design systemically. No thank you. You can’t legislate aesthetics, and there’s already a huge incentive to make buildings look great. People already spend a lopsided amount on the facade making it look better than it is, rather than spending on where they should: foundation, structure, good design, and longevity. In my city, apartment buildings used to require stee…

> In my city, apartment buildings used to require steel structures and lawmakers relaxed the requirement so they went back to wood because it’s cheaper. Now the new ones look great but they’re burning down and falling apart at higher rates than before.

Are you in Denver?

Re: Antirender: remove the glossy shine on architectural renderings

#410

Post by Aurornis »

amelius wrote: post #396
usrusr wrote: post #327

Pretty much what has long been my dream "make the world better" product (long as in from pre-genAI days), only that this one happens in image space: take an architectural model, look at the surface material specifications, analyze it for where rainwater would run down etc and generate weathering texture, how would this look when it's not new anymore. Because as I see it, a lot of aesthetic decisions in architecture,…

That's maybe nice for prestige projects but imho the main problem in architecture is projects on a budget and how money is allocated. There should be a law that says that X% of the building costs should be in the facade, the part that everybody sees. That alone should help a lot in making cities look nicer.

> There should be a law that says that X% of the building costs should be in the facade

Cities solve this with design requirements and through the approval process. Specifying a minimum spend isn’t going to make the buildings look nice by itself. You’d just get weird budget games being played.

Cities with restrictive planning commissions can push buildings toward certain looks. People get angry about it, though, because it gets harder and more expensive to build things in an era where it’s already too expensive to build.

Post reply on HN