3D Modeling & Rendering

It is always been fun and amusing to watch the Super Bowl, the commercials, and even the halftime show. I noticed the last few years that more and more digital technologies are used in all aspects of the viewing experience, whether it is talking babies, animatronic chickens, or just the 3D transitions in and out of commercial breaks. Of course this should not be shocking to anybody since technological advances have reached new heights with the release of Avatar. In “Building 3D Worlds – 3D Geometric Graphics II,” a chapter from the book The Computer in The Visual Arts, Anne Spalter explains not only how everything behind rendering 3D digital objects and animations works but also how everything has evolved. B.J. Novitski discusses in his two part article “Once and Future Graphics Pioneer” not only how the creation of photorealistic rendered images surpassed expectations, aiding proposed building design, but who and what had direct influence on the development of the technologies that led to these renderings.

In B.J. Novitski’s article, the research leading to algorithms on slow, large computers to revolutionary interactive virtual spaces that change with the swipe of the hand is shown through the changing medium discussion, from Donald P. Greenberg, the Program of Computer Graphics and Cornell University. “In Greenberg's opinion, the typical user interface for architectural software, with the familiar mouse and monitor, is badly suited to the hand-eye collaboration that characterizes architectural design… The equipment that solves this consists of a transparent digitizing surface, a cordless pen, and a high-resolution, rear-projection display, driven by a powerful microprocessor (or several working in parallel). Using this device, designers can sketch comfortably with the pen on the large, gently tilted surface” (Novitski, 2000a). Greensberg’s education in architecture and engineering, mixed with the fact that he saw potential in computer aiding design in the 1960’s, had direct impact on his instruction of students at Cornell. They were allowed to access PCG’s innovations aiding in learning the software at the same time they were giving software developers valued information to make the software better. Moreno Piccolotto, Greenberg’s fellow instructor at Cornell, notes “that the sophisticated technology not only allows the students to present their work interactively, but it also enables average students to achieve a much higher level of expression than they would otherwise be able to… Because they work with the most advanced possible technologies, Cornell students are getting an education using technologies they can expect to work with a few years from now rather than on today's technologies, many of which will be obsolete by then.” Greenberg adds, “We have always emphasized the teaching of concepts so that the students can ride the technological wave and never be outdated” (Novitski, 2000b). Learning with software before it is fully developed, giving students the chance to know and use the technology as professionals before it becomes obsolete, is smart and exciting.

It is great to know how and why computer rendering techniques work. Anne Spalter explains this and even how it can be used in the chapter from The Computer in the Visual Arts. She unweaves the complexities of color, reflection, light, shadows, and texture mapping. The basic definitions and context of these elements are shown along with examples, both software snapshots and through diagrams. I specifically like the detailing of Ray-traced shadows, Radiosity, and global lighting; these are all things I have used several times but I never understood how they actually worked. Spalter explains this potential problem with too real render images: “The reality ascribed to traditional photography is challenged not only by the computer’s ability to alter captured data from the real world, but also by its ability to construct artificial worlds and create realistic visual data from them”(Spalter, 1999). I agree with the questioning of how real is the photorealistic renderings and are they blurring the truth to the point that manipulation is better than the real thing. This technology is important and should continue to be developed, but one has to be careful in what he or she does with technology. The better the technology gets, the easier it is to fake a reality. Is this negative? About everybody has seen how easy it is to manipulate photographs in Adobe’s Photoshop, and I cannot help but see possible problems with the ease of replacing real images with artificially created ones.

Whether it is students learning with new software at same time it is still being developed or software pushing the edge of reality, these readings have made me think not only about how quickly computers and software have grown but how fast and successfully they have directly affected architecture and design. With any new invention you first have to question its purpose and its need, then decide after repeated use and advancement if it is worth the effort to keep or if it causes more trouble than it helps. You can put this on anything, I guess: a toaster, or a car. These things have specific simple uses; the computer and its software, on the other hand, has come to the point that it and its user can create false realities that could be used to really mess with people.


Novitski, B. (2000, September 13). Once and Future Graphics Pioneer. Architecture Week, T1.1. http://www.architectureweek.com/2000/0913/tools_1-1.html

Novitski, B. (2000, September 20). Once and Future Graphics Pioneer II. Architecture Week, T1.1. http://www.architectureweek.com/2000/0920/tools_1-1.html

Spalter, A. M. (1999). The Computer in the Visual Arts. Reading, MA: Addison Wesley Longman. pp 257-293