#13 Share Both 'Good' and 'Bad' Images: A Guide to Smoother Architectural Visualization Production (Includes Phrase Collection for Better Communication)
Introduction
Many of you have likely been asked to 'share reference images' when commissioning architectural visualizations.
Finding and sending photos with a similar atmosphere from Pinterest or Instagram—this step has already become standard practice.
However, in actual production environments, this kind of 'image sharing' often leads to trouble.
For example:
'The atmosphere is right, but it's too bright.'
'The composition is good, but the texture is different.'
'It's a bit different from this feel, but I can't explain it well.'
These are all discrepancies caused by sharing only 'Good' (i.e., preferred, ideal) images.
In this article, we will organize why sharing both 'Good' and 'Bad' images—something we actually feel is necessary at the GRUND production site—is essential, and how to share them to make production smoother, using real-life examples.
1. Image sharing is the first step that determines production
Not limited to architectural CG, 80% of creative success is determined by sharing the direction.
No matter how skilled a creator is, they cannot see inside the client's head.
It is sad (?), but creators are not magicians.
For example, when asked for an 'elegant atmosphere,' the final result will change completely depending on whether that means 'elegance with subdued material textures' or 'quiet elegance with dimmed lighting.'
Reference images are what bridge this 'range of interpretation' at the beginning.
Even parts that are difficult to explain in words can be conveyed instantly by looking at images.
That is why what kind of images you share becomes the point that determines the overall direction.
2. Why 'Good' images alone are not enough
Many people only collect and share their 'preferred atmosphere.'
Of course, you can see a certain direction that way, but for the production side, the 'safe zone' is still too wide.
'Good' is a sign saying 'I want you to aim for this.'
But just with that, it is unclear where the 'NG' (not good) line is.
In architectural CG production, 'information subtraction' is constantly occurring.
The intensity of light, the roughness of materials, color tones, depth of field, the sense of distance of people...
Even looking at 'Good' images, it is sometimes impossible to judge which of these is considered important.
As a result,
the creator makes it while guessing, 'Is this the direction?'
the client feels, 'I thought it would be different up to this point'
—a discrepancy is born.
In other words, with only 'Good,' you can see the 'direction' but not the 'boundaries'.
3. Three benefits of sharing 'Bad' images
Sharing 'examples I don't like' or 'examples I think are wrong' might take a little courage.
Many people might feel, 'I don't want to be seen as negative' or 'I don't want to seem like I'm making too many demands.'
But in reality, this 'Bad image' is actually the most valuable information for the production side.
① The 'limit line' of the direction becomes clear
By knowing what is 'too much'—such as 'this kind of brightness is wrong' or 'this way of including people is a no-go'—you can clarify the range of adjustment.
This directly leads to shorter production time, which means shorter delivery times.
② You can understand the 'basis for preferences'
When you share Bad examples, what you value stands out in contrast to the Good ones.
For example, even within the same 'natural' style, you can see fine-tuned distinctions in sensibility, such as 'the wood grain tone is Good, but it's Bad if the plants are too prominent.'
Also, if you share several Bad images rather than just one, it becomes clearer what kind of atmosphere you dislike or where you feel something is off, making it easier to grasp the direction.
③ You can make proposals that are 'different but close'
Knowing the Bad examples allows the production side to propose things by saying, 'This is a different direction, but it should be close to your preference.'
It increases the accuracy of guessing the client's 'unspoken aesthetic sense.'
Also, if you share several Bad images rather than just one, it becomes clearer what kind of atmosphere you dislike or where you feel something is off, making it easier to grasp the direction.
Imagine you are going to cook a meal for someone.
In that case, it's easier to think of a menu that suits them if you are told not only what they like to eat, but also what ingredients they dislike.
Architectural CG is the same; by sharing not only 'images you like (Good)' but also 'images you dislike (Bad),' the creator can accurately find 'the dish that person is looking for'.
4. How should you actually share them?
▪️ Prepare 3–5 images each for Good/Bad
Not too many, not too few.
About 3–5 images each is ideal.
Lining them up to see 'I like this atmosphere' and 'this treatment is wrong' will help organize the direction all at once.
▪️ Write down 'what you like/what you dislike' about them
The most important point is not just to paste them, but to add the 'reason'.
For example:
Good: 'The light is soft and natural. The color of the flooring is also close to my ideal.'
Bad: 'The light is too strong and unsettling. The gloss of the material is too strong and looks artificial.'
It might feel like an exaggeration to write it out, but from the production side, this short sentence makes the judgment criteria 10 times clearer.
▪️ Any sharing tool is fine
Notion, Miro, Google Drive, or any 'latest' tool is fine.
What is important is that it is organized in a single link that everyone on the team can access, and is in a state where it can be updated at any time.
Examples of words you can use when sharing Bad images
When conveying images you dislike, it is recommended to use words that slightly shift the direction rather than extreme words like 'wrong' or 'hate.'
Please refer to the following ways of saying things.
1. Communicate gently (impression-based)
'I would like it to have a slightly more composed impression.'
'It might be a little too flashy.'
'With this tone, it feels a bit too cool.'
'A slightly more natural atmosphere would be ideal.'
'I feel the intensity of the lighting stands out a bit too much.'
→ Using 'too' conveys it as an adjustment request rather than a rejection.
2. Communicate by limiting the direction (distance-based)
'This feel is also lovely, but this time I am thinking of a slightly quieter direction.'
'Not in the direction of this texture, but I am envisioning something closer to matte.'
'I like this composition, but the atmosphere might change if people are included.'
'The overall tone is close, but the background feels a bit too assertive.'
→ Instead of just stating the 'difference,' the key is to add 'which direction you want to go in'.
3. Communicate by element (concrete-based)
'The saturation is a bit high, so a slightly more subdued color palette would be ideal.'
'The reflection is strong, making it difficult to convey the texture of the material.'
'The way the people are included stands out too much, making the architecture look like it's in the background.'
'The contrast of the shadows is strong, and the softness is lost.'
'The density of furniture and accessories is high, making the space look a bit heavy.'
→ Communicating based on facts, such as 'what looks like what', allows the creator to respond immediately.
④ Conveying nuances with care (based on impressions + sensations)
'It gives the impression that the 'assertion' comes first.'
'With this brightness, the sense of staging stands out more than the depth of the space.'
'It feels like there is too much information, and there is no place for the eyes to rest.'
'The colors and light are competing, making it difficult to convey a sense of tranquility.'
→ This is a way of communicating that is not emotional, but rather objectively puts into words 'how you feel.'
💡 Read this too
If you want to know how to communicate other than using 'Good/Bad images,' we introduce tips on how to convey ideas with 'words' rather than 'images,' complete with detailed examples, here.
5. Initial sharing changes the level of perfection and speed
If you proceed only with Good images, it becomes difficult for the production side to judge 'how far they can go.'
As a result, the first draft tends to be kept within a safe range, and revisions often increase before completion.
On the other hand, if there are Bad images, such as 'this feeling is wrong' or 'this is too much,' we can propose ideas from the start that 'won't miss the mark.'
In other words, the perfection of the first draft increases.
As a result, retakes and schedule adjustments become smoother, and consequently, the overall speed increases.
Having you share both Good and Bad images not only helps the creator, but is also the shortest path to reducing the burden on the client themselves. Revision exchanges decrease, the schedule stabilizes, and in most cases, you will feel that 'the deadline was met' or 'it finished faster than I thought.'
Just by being a little more careful about sharing images at the beginning, the efficiency of the entire project and the quality of the finish will change surprisingly.
6. Summary
'Good images' show the direction, and 'Bad images' show the boundaries.
It is not one or the other, but only with both can you see 'where the correct answer lies and where things go wrong.'
Architectural rendering production is a project where the client and creator search for the same 'way of seeing the world.'
Image sharing is the starting point for that.
Both Good and Bad are important elements that create the outline of the work.
Saying 'this is not it' is not a denial.
Rather, it is a process to make your 'likes' clearer.
Next time you compile reference images, please try creating a 'Bad folder' next to your 'Good folder.'
I hope that the moments where your previous 'it doesn't quite get across' turns into 'yes, this is it!' will increase, even if just a little.
📌 In this note, I share practical know-how for architectural visualization production and tips for making ordering and progress smoother. Not limited to architectural renderings or CG production, I am updating
articles from a field perspective twice a week that are also useful for those involved in 'work that conveys space,' such as design and planning. If you are interested, please follow and check them out.
GRUND Inc.
The only vetted CG studio in Japan specializing in architectural visualization, with the concept of 'I want this person to create it for me.'
We deliver the intent and atmosphere of architecture as a beautiful single visual.
We create the best encounters between creators who possess both technical skill and sensibility, and clients who seek authentic visuals.
Consultations are free. Please feel free to contact us.