/3/ - 3DCG

>>937256
>also im impressed by the photoshop seamless editing of the building on its context lol. seems like there's even refraction going on in the windows or maybe im tripping lol

You are tripping anon this is NOT a good Photoshop job by ANY standard. If you watch closely all images have integration defects and wrong perspectives matching the backgrounds. I know what you mean: 'the images look natural' but that's not because it is seamless its just standard cg trickery:

1.When taking background/drone shots take them with the least amount of contrasted light this will let you bake colored contrasted light in both rendering and bkg plate so the image looks integrated'

2.Divert the eye to what matters: All images are badly seamed onto the background (That is because the client asked for preliminary images of a building these are not final designs just a draft for investors) so I usually brighten up and saturate the building a little more so no one notices the bad editing on a first view. Look the images up close and you'll see that the backgrounds are far from perfectly integrated.

3.Use photography to your advantage: I think that by 'refraction' you mean that glazing seems to reflect the environment of the building. Well that is just a quick 360 photo of the place. Also the sidewalks and asphalt are just cleaned up plate of the real stuff with normalized lighting.