Vehicle Design with Sam Brown Available Now!

[MassiveDVD]

One can’t design the incredible without knowing that which is credible in the first place.

In this Photoshop demonstration, Sam walks the viewer through the design of two cars in side view. He uses real terminology and goes about the design process in a way that is more akin to vehicle design than concept design. Through watching this video, one will learn that by simply changing the proportions of a few key elements one can completely change the feel and function of a vehicle. So study up and eat your vegetables.

Sam graduated from The University of Cincinnati with a degree in Industrial Design. He studied product and automotive design, including prestigious internships with Adidas and Hotwheels, but gradually shifted towards concept art. Shortly after finishing school he began working full time for Massive Black where he has contributed to more than 30 major video game and movie projects.

Trailer:

1.5 hours, $20

https://www.payloadz.com/go?id=468944

As always, we appreciate your feedback!

[Taj]

This one looks really informative according to the trailer, cant wait to see it. Does Sam Brown have a website or an account here?

[[void]]

Finally I can hear your soothing voice again sam!

The demo looks really good, any chance of hearing you thoughts on robot design?

[steak-tron]

Yaaaaaay!

[Unbreakable]

Sam Brown!!!!!!!!

[facosta]

Hi Sam,

Thanks for taking the time and doing this tutorial.

I really enjoyed it. I'm not really a big car buff, but I'm slowly trying to do different things with my art and car design is definitely on my to do list. I think you overall covered the different aspects you came across really well and I also appreciated the technicality of your approach and explanations.

Overall another excellent tutorial. Thanks again Sam and MassiveDVD.

PS: Would love to see how you'd tackle the 3/4 view of one of these puppies.

[janni]

Damn, this is a good one! The lecture is FANTASTIC. Thanks Sam and everybody involved! Great work!

[Jason Manley]

great work sam!

[SamBrown36]

I figured I should put a post here. Hope anyone that picked this up got something out of it. Let me know if you have any questions or anything.
Thanks
sam

MassiveDVD- Thanks massivedvd
Taj- I have an account here. I haven't posted work in a while but I guess I should probably do that.
[void]- Ah, you can hear my voice whenever you want to now. I'm thinking about putting together a robot sketching video with a bunch of thumbnails and a couple refinements. I guess it depends on how things go.
steak-tron- I've gotta watch your videos sometime soon so I too can harness the powers of sketch up.
Unbreakable- I grill the best cat.
facosta- Thanks, I wanted to make this more how to think about design instead of specifically how to draw cars. So I guess I didn't really think about making a 3 quarter video but maybe.
janni- Thanks for picking it up.
Jason Manley- Thanks jason.

[evamonkeyn2]

I really loved the tutorial, and your attention to detail and explaination of the terminology of car design, and the visual langauge of auto design was really valuable.

One thing that bugged me though was the mirrored reflections of the cars.
I don't understand why you squashed them vertically. If the camera angle was high i can see how that would simulate perspective depth. But from side on wouldn't the reflection be pretty much identical in height. If the surface was slightly rippled that would elongate the reflection like a reflection in water, but i dont think i have ever seen a reflection shortened in a flat surface like that. I'm probably wrong but i would prefer to be sure.

[SamBrown36]

Thanks I really tried to give a language and logic to what I was doing. I'm glad you found it valuable. As for the floor reflection. It is just a cheap trick to add a little bit of flash. Side view doesn't create a flashy image. It's really all about design. Adding that bit of reflection makes the image look a little more interesting. At least I think so. I guess it could have been more subtle though.

[dark eagle]

Originally Posted by evamonkeyn2

I really loved the tutorial, and your attention to detail and explaination of the terminology of car design, and the visual langauge of auto design was really valuable.

One thing that bugged me though was the mirrored reflections of the cars.
I don't understand why you squashed them vertically. If the camera angle was high i can see how that would simulate perspective depth. But from side on wouldn't the reflection be pretty much identical in height. If the surface was slightly rippled that would elongate the reflection like a reflection in water, but i dont think i have ever seen a reflection shortened in a flat surface like that. I'm probably wrong but i would prefer to be sure.

Actually I don't think perspective was a big issuse there considering theres no se for it.But if you were to put that into perspective I the ground plane is in perspective and as it comes toward you it gets "bigger" so tje reflection would also get "bigger".

[yoitisi]

dark eagle: That is not true. If you'd put something on top of a mirror like that, the reflections would be the exact image of the car only flipped vertically. The perspective of the ground plane has little to do with the actual reflection, unless it's at odd angles in which case it would show a different reflection, but I take it that's not the case here.

What Sam uses is nothing more than a quick trick to make the drawing more interesting and dynamic than just a neutral sideview, and I'd say it does work for that. By the way, another trick I saw being used in a magazine was that they made the reflection 1.5 times bigger than the actual car. Thanks to strategic placed text and graphic elements I didn't notice it at first, but it works to make a sideview more interesting too

[evamonkeyn2]

If you'd put something on top of a mirror like that, the reflections would be the exact image of the car only flipped vertically. The perspective of the ground plane has little to do with the actual reflection, unless it's at odd angles in which case it would show a different reflection, but I take it that's not the case here.


Actually, that statement in itself is untrue. There is only one instance where a flipped reflection would be identical, and that is with the camera running parallel to the plane of reflection, directly on the plane of reflection. In any other position, the object to be reflected will differ from an exact flipped 2d image of the original on 2 levels not counting perspective falloff, any plane not perpendicular to the plane of reflection will appear different as rather than a reflection being a flipped 2d object, its a virtual 3d object. Similarly, even the reflection of a flat plane can appear vastly different in terms of reflection, with it being possible to face a glass fronted surface, like a building, reflecting in water, and see no reflection of the sun in the glass of the building, but being able to see the sun in the reflection of those same surfaces in the water, changing the hue and value of the reflection dramatically compared to the actual object as it appears to you.

Also, mr brown, i 100 percent agree the reflection adds a lot of interest to the image and god knows im no superstar of art, i just could not find a reason for it to be compressed vertically, but absolutely wanted to know if there was one and how it would happen because then i could understand it and use it. I fail hard at the feelingy, art side of art, so i try and make up for it by understanding the sciences of art as much as possible while i try and get my head around the less tangible aspects to me.

[yoitisi]

Evamonkeyn2: Please note the "on top of a mirror like that" I didn't want to go hairsplitting here, and since mr. Browns car seems to be standing on a a flat plane perpendicular to the side of the car I kept it to that. Indeed, stuff like water or at odd angles to the mirror will change the reflection.

Also, there can never be a perfect reflection without perspective changes since viewing something parallel to the plane of reflection would mean you look at the sides of the mirror, which means there is no reflection visible since the plane that actually reflects isn't visible any more. In fact, looking at the car up top you can see that the wheels are on a single line, meaning we are actually looking at the car on the ground level, so there shouldn't even be a reflection.

Again, tricks can sometimes win it over the real thing. That's why we are artists Sorry for hyacking this thread...