Which rendering? Left or Right?

[Carlyle Rood]

I'm going to do a color rendering of a residential golf community for my design class.  I was fooling around with different palettes.  Some of them are too embarassing to share; however, I've narrowed it to the following two choices.  Which do you prefer--Left or Right?



The trees use the same color palette in both.  (The picture color isn't entirely accurate.)  The Left uses Linden Green and Chartreuse.  The Right uses Willow Green and Grass Green.

If you have any other palette suggestions, then I'd be interested in hearing them too.  I'm making this up as I go.  I'd especially like to learn of a good Autumn palette.

Try to imagine that you're the developer for this project.  You're trying to sell housing lots.  

[Neil Regan]

Carlyle,
  Left.
  The housing lot colors in the right picture stand out too much. Someone buying a house on a golf course wants a sense of quiet privacy. The colors in the right picture look sort of like stadium seats. In the left picture, the cream color is more subdued.
  The greens are better in the left picture, too.

neil

[ed_getka]

I prefer the cream colored lots also. The tree color looks fine, but for the grass I think the linden green fairway should go with the grass green rough.

Now, about #6 in the right picture, looks like a good place for a double plateau green, and just add a bunker at the back for shots that go through the green. If you need any further help...

[Jeremy_Glenn.]

Carlyle,

Both look very good, although the housing on the right, as was said, stands out too much.  I would NOT combine linden and grass green.  Linden is a "warm" green, whereas grass is more of a "cool" green.  I don't believe they would go well together.  I would, however, consider combining the willlow/grass combo with the cream housing, but you might need a couple of bold colours somewhere else on the plan to give it life.

What I really whant to know is how do you get the "water colour" effect?  The trees, for example, look superb.

[Bye]

Either, they both look good.

I think the golf course on the right reads better, cover up the lots with your hands and look at it -  the golf course looks pretty good - a little dull though. Change the lot colors to the Cream on the left or a Celray and they'll fade to the background.

A few comments on the left-
The fairway color should be a little more "solid"
Fairway bunkers are too small and out of scale and get lost

General-
Use a fat marker (Sharpie or Vis a Vis) and outline the fairway edge and the fairways will pop!
Even though the roads in actuality will be black don't color them to dark a grey - use a cool 2 or 3 or a Light Ivy.

Good luck!

[Bruce Katona]

As someone who went through this when I was in design school, I would answer your question with a question: "What are you trying to highlight and how far away is your audience ?"

The rendering on the left is very warm and friendly and will sell the project well from a close distance. The rendering on the right has more contrast and will be read very clearly from the back of a room if you are doing a presentation to a group.

If this is an academic exercise, I would go with the example on the left. If you are in school, though, it is the time to try pink, purple and other non-traditional renderings. You should be rewarderd for creativity.

In school I loved to use colored pastel chalk to render. I could make the colors I wanted and it was much faster than using markers. You just need to remember to spray your pastel rendered drawing with hairspray or fix to stop the pastel from smearing.

Best of luck.

[Dan Kelly]

Two observations:

(1)  I prefer the one on the left -- so, based on the fact that I'm NEVER in the majority, I'd go with the one on the right.

The standard-issue Joe (or, of course, Jo), sitting there in his (or, of course, her) cart, drinking his (or, of course, her) Bud Light, will like the one on the right. Trust me on this.

(2) Trees a little thick?

Why would I want to buy a lot on a golf course if I couldn't see the course? (That's how it appears.)

[Mike Benham]

Try to imagine that you're the developer for this project.  You're trying to sell housing lots.  

If the developer is trying to sell lots, then the "right" version with the brighter colors, draws the potential buyers eyes to the housing lots.

The version on the left does a much better job of showing the attributes of the golf course, even to the point of using different shades fo green to show the "not-perfectly-green" fairway.

[Keith Williams]

In my experiences thus far in residential design I have had to prepare a fair number of "presentation" drawings for clients or whoever.  In regards to this, Mike is right.  The developer is trying to sell lots...period.  Many developers couldn't care less about the presentation of the golf course, so for those presentation purposes one would want the lots, their layout and other attributes to be the focal point of the drawing.  The lots should probably be presented in brighter colors, color coded by size, phase, or some other designation while the golf course should probably be portrayed in somewhat muted tones so that a typical (see possibly a non-golfer) buyer knows that there is a golf course there but their eye isn't distracted from the actual product (lots).  Me being the ever present optimist of peoples' interest in GCA, I prefer to present two separate drawings to clients or potential buyers: one like described above featuring on the individual lots and another almost the exact opposite showing the golf course as the focal point.  The lots might be shown in a bland manilla-type color while the golf course (and often times other recreational facilities like pool, tennis and natural open space due to client request) would be presented in more vibrant tones.  I imagine that these dual presentations might work pretty well in a sales center too, where Mr. and Mrs. Smith (or whoever) would walk in and Mrs. Smith would immediately look over the lot layout trying to picture her dream home situated in various spots while Mr. Smith focuses on the golf detail plan and lets his eyes wander over the risk/reward opportunities of the 18th hole on his soon-to-be home course.

Keith.

By the way, I don't mind the trees between the lots and golf course; I would happily sacrifice the house view in order to have a home course where the holes had a backdrop of forest and not brick, stucco and stone.

[Carlyle Rood]

The photographs of the renderings (they're not scans) are a little misleading.  The Cream color is much richer and brighter in person.  Actually, all the colors sort of got washed out.

The RIGHT side doesn't have as much contrast either.

By the way, the scale of the drawing is 1"=200'.  Information about the number of lots and type of lots will be summarized under the main title (including minimum, maximum, and average lot size).

[ed_getka]

Keith makes a very good point regarding dual presentation for different target audiences.

[Carlyle Rood]

My "client" (my instructor) perceives the key selling point of the property to be the golf course and adjacent parkland.

[Dan Kelly]

Just noticed the boomerang (or Red Sox sock) green on No. 6. I like that.

[Forrest Richardson]

I'd leave the sand bunkers devoid of color — always looks better. Less is more.