Will CGI (Computer Generated Imaging) replace architectural photography?

Will CGI (Computer Generated Imaging) replace architectural photography?

Lately I have heard a few architectural photographers expressing concern about the future of architectural photography . Their concern is primarily the result of three factors.
1)    The economic recession.
2)    The increasing use by architects of photo-realistic software.
3)    The effects of CGI on automotive photographers.

While the slowdown of the economy is very real and is having a very serious effect on the building industry and on architectural photographers, this is a temporary situation. I believe that those who can weather this storm will find themselves very busy when the economy rebounds.

CGI has replaced photography in the majority of new car catalogs because of cost. Advertising campaigns must be shot and the new car catalogs must be in the dealer showrooms before the new models come out. In order to do this the car companies had to produce prototype vehicles specifically for photography. As you might imagine, this was very expensive.

The engineering and design data for every vehicle has been available in digital format for years. The only thing missing was software that could produce photo-realistic images from this data. That software became available just a few years ago.  Suddenly it was less expensive to produce a photo-realistic CGI rendered image of a car and drop it into a stock photograph of a winding mountain road than it was to take an entire crew and prototype vehicle to the location for photography.

Once production vehicles are available it is usually less expensive to actually photograph the car than it is to produce a photo-realistic CGI image with all of the natural reflections and highlights. So while the studios that once specialized in shooting the new car catalogs have been hurt by CGI, there are still a good number of photographers producing real photographs of actual cars for editorial and advertising use.

CGI renderings of buildings are great for presentations before the project is completed, or even before it is started. But once a project is finished, photography becomes the least expensive method of producing realistic images. Photographs become proof of the viability of the design. Anything can be rendered, but you cannot photograph a building that does not exist. When I see a CGI rendering of a building, I wonder if the building has been completed. Or even started. If the building has been completed, does it really look like the CGI rendering? As part of a photography project I am often given CGI renderings and asked to duplicate the depicted views. These CGI renderings were produced before a shovel was ever put in the ground and often show substantial differences to the finished project.

Photography began to replace illustration in advertising in the early 1920’s because of its realism and cost advantages. Photography still holds these advantages over any other image producing method. As long as building owners, architects, designers and others in the building industry want affordable and realistic images of their finished projects, architectural photographers will be in demand.
http://www.claytonstudio.com
Follow me on Twitter

Posted by Curt Clayton at 3/15/2009 9:32 AM
Categories: Professioanl photography, Architectural photography, Digital Photography, Photography
Tags: photographic lighting professional photography photography interior lighting architectural photography interior photography
 

What did you think of this article?




Trackbacks
Trackback specific URL for this post
  • No trackbacks exist for this post.
Comments
Display comments as (Linear | Threaded)

Leave a comment

Submitted comments are subject to moderation before being displayed.

 Name (required)

 Email (will not be published) (required)

 Website

Your comment is 0 characters limited to 3000 characters.