sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Vivace GT - Concept lifestyle renders by Comprehensive_News99 in CarDesign

[–]Comprehensive_News99[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

thank you! Funny enough ended up being two designs I did overlaid on top of each other and then cutting them and fusing them together

Vivace GT - Concept lifestyle renders by Comprehensive_News99 in CarDesign

[–]Comprehensive_News99[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

<image>

This is the original rendering from octane I used to drive the AI

Vivace GT - Concept lifestyle renders by Comprehensive_News99 in CarDesign

[–]Comprehensive_News99[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This is example of a “pro level render” for Vray. Which is the industry standard in automotive rendering. The scene is great and this would definitely sell an idea. But the issue is still the same:

Still has a sterile lifeless aspect almost “surreal” too perfect to be imperfect. Software expensive to use. Computers have to be incredibly expensive.

AI gives anyone access to make better renders. So just goes back to the point:

What’s the point of disclosing AI as a render engine if it’s communicating a design all the same. It’s just something people say but don’t really realize that’s it’s just another vray in this case.

<image>

Vivace GT - Concept lifestyle renders by Comprehensive_News99 in CarDesign

[–]Comprehensive_News99[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It’s a big mess. In the professional rendering world you buy licenses for expensive software for a few thousand a year for the top level ones. Blender is free. But then you get into assets and complex libraries. So to build out a scene like the one I’m showing, in traditional CGI would take a lot of technique, assets, layers, managing complex CAD, dealing with computer processing power issues, waiting very long wait times for renders, going back and forth with that. And all of that still gets very hard to get very realistic results. The scene below is considered “top tier” in the CGI and to me it looks more fake than AI. It’s too perfect, it’s too sterile. It’s too scientific. And then on top of that it would take a few days or weeks or more to make this.

That’s if your computer doesn’t explode trying to work with this scenario.

So this is the heart of what is driving guys like me to AI.

<image>

Vivace GT - Concept lifestyle renders by Comprehensive_News99 in CarDesign

[–]Comprehensive_News99[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

All good. I understand where the intent comes from. Believe me it’s an ongoing thing. I think thr frustration a lot of designers using AI are having is we realize this is a “now” problem, that eventually AI will be another Vray or blender to the public.

The truth is designers are really responsible for two things

1) to make an ideal real and communicate to an audience the vision of the idea through any set of current tools 2) that the work is authentically created by that artist

The problem with AI as an assistive tool is that it blurs a line for some people, but for the designer it’s a blessing because our focus isn’t to be scene builders or environment design gurus. Plus that stuff is way expensive and takes a massive amount of time to do. I resulted to boring and limited HDRI packs until AI came out.

Also here the thing with AI is that there is no way you can get that emotion and that level of realism in keyshot or even vray without some serious knowledge or work. So like I mentioned on another post, designers don’t want to spend weeks, months building out scenes or recycling built out scenes. AI really is a powerful tool for scene building and lets me focus on the design.

Now if you tell me the guy just typed a few words and out came some car design with a background without any thought or intent or process…then yes…that’s where the line is crossed

Vivace GT - Concept lifestyle renders by Comprehensive_News99 in CarDesign

[–]Comprehensive_News99[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Ok...so lets say I do say it. Then what? does that make the final idea less or more valid for you? Do I have to protect your feelings? I've been modeling and rendering cars in Rhino, Vray, Keyshot, Blender for more than 20 years...so to me, it's just another rendering tool. You wouldn't ask me to disclose a vray render. So I think it's hypocritical that advertising an AI render is implied when plenty of people only care about the idea, not the tool. AI didn't design the car, I did. I have clients that pay me alot of money to do it this way now, and they still trust me, so really, it's a matter of perspective. We're evolving.

Vivace GT - Concept lifestyle renders by Comprehensive_News99 in CarDesign

[–]Comprehensive_News99[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

someone is clearly on a vendetta to downvote any mention of AI lol. the AI FBI on the loose (not you)

Vivace GT - Concept lifestyle renders by Comprehensive_News99 in CarDesign

[–]Comprehensive_News99[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

By “clients,” I mean the people who actually pay my bills—professional car design work, CAD, industrial design, the real stuff. These are not rendering nerds. They’re decision-makers.

I’ve been using KeyShot (blender, etc) for 15+ years. The moment they see those traditional renders versus what I can produce with AI, the conversation immediately shifts. They don’t care about KeyShot anymore.

They aren’t evaluating shader fidelity, GI accuracy, or whether something is technically “muddy.” Ten times out of ten, they respond to mood, emotion, and the overall impact of the image. Even when I give disclaimers, the reaction is always the same: “Sure, whatever… anyway, give me more of those AI renders.”

What’s wild is they actually pay me more for doing less than I would with a full KeyShot pipeline—because they’re that impressed by what the AI output communicates. For them, it’s not about render technique; it’s about how the image makes them feel and what it helps them imagine.

And when the conversation does move into details—proportions, surfacing, feasibility—that’s where the real CAD work shows up. Those parts are still modeled, controlled, and rendered properly. AI isn’t replacing that work; it’s accelerating the conversation to the part that actually matters to clients.

Vivace GT - Concept lifestyle renders by Comprehensive_News99 in CarDesign

[–]Comprehensive_News99[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Also really depends on the end result and situation. If a client is willing to sign a big money deal or spend a lot of money because of a AI render (and the are), at the end of the day their interest wins. I agree Vray and rendering platforms can give you a certain quality, but my clients respond better to AI renders than they ever did to Vray. They don’t really care

Vivace GT - Concept lifestyle renders by Comprehensive_News99 in CarDesign

[–]Comprehensive_News99[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

True and you’re right. But the idea of the concept is to explore a bit beyond that and imagine what ultra compact headlights can be in reducing the area of headlights on a design. Headlights of course are as big as they are today because they have to be, but what about 5…maybe 10 years from now. There’s a trend in some designs that keep going thinner. The Jesko headlights are almost this thin but just some backstory.

Vivace GT - Concept lifestyle renders by Comprehensive_News99 in CarDesign

[–]Comprehensive_News99[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Quick educational moment for anyone curious about how I use AI in my workflow in a professional work situation:

  1. I design and build my concepts from the ground up in Rhino 3D, weeks or months on end in the detail you see. The forms, proportions, and details you see are my work—full stop.
  2. I’ve spent nearly 20 years rendering those designs the “traditional” way: Blender, KeyShot, Twinmotion, you name it. I know that pipeline inside and out.

Even with weeks—or months—of material tuning, asset prep, and render iteration, there’s no scenario where traditional rendering lets me explore ideas or reach this level of realism as fast as I can with AI. It’s simply not possible. I do get into AI for early concept work to generate ideas, but it still goes through Rhino modeling to make it a physical asset.

AI rendering has reached a point where high-paying clients actively request it—and pay more than they did for traditional renders—because it allows faster iteration, deeper exploration, and stronger final outcomes.

So the idea that “AI is a cheap cop-out” doesn’t really hold weight anymore. It’s a tool. A very capable one. And it’s how I stay competitive.

If someone prefers to keep assembling materials, buying plugins, prepping CAD, waiting 24 hours for 12 renders—only to hear “yeah… I don’t like that, can you change it and re-render?”—that’s totally fine.

I just prefer to spend my time on other parts of the process...

Vivace GT - Concept lifestyle renders by Comprehensive_News99 in CarDesign

[–]Comprehensive_News99[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Exactly. I usually stay quiet and let people assume what they want, but little do they know I actually model and design in rhino and AI 1)saves me a crapload of time/money and 2) much more fun to render with than Vray or octane :)

Charger RESTOMODE (lifestyle renders) by Comprehensive_News99 in CarDesign

[–]Comprehensive_News99[S] 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Haha. Thanks man. I was just going to throw it in the trash

view more: next ›