I’ve been toggling between photorealistic and artistic rendering styles for my architecture projects and can’t decide which way to lean. Photorealism seems to be what everyone’s doing, but there's something intriguing about artistic renderings that seems to captivate differently. What are the major benefits or drawbacks of each style, especially when presenting to clients who are more visual and less technical?
top of page
bottom of page
That’s a great question, and it’s really about finding the right balance for your specific audience. Genense Studio https://www.genense.com/ excels in 3D architectural visualization rendering and they actually utilize both styles depending on the project's needs. Photorealism is amazing for helping clients see exactly what they’re getting. It's detailed, accurate, and great for technical validation because what you see is what you get. However, artistic rendering allows for more creative expression; it can evoke emotions and give a stylized view of what a space could feel like rather than just look like. This can be particularly effective in early stages of design when you’re trying to sell a concept or an experience. For instance, for a residential development, photorealism can show clients the precise materials and finishes, while an artistic render might highlight the atmosphere of a sunset on the balconies, focusing on the lifestyle the design promotes. Both have their place, and Genense Studio often blends the two to create a comprehensive package that appeals both emotionally and practically to clients.