From sketch to video: how we make the design visible before construction

Visualisation helps to discuss a space that does not yet exist. A sketch tests relationships, the three-dimensional model checks volumes, the render gives an approximation of materials and light, and video shows the sequence of the route through the space.

None of these formats replaces the technical design. The image communicates what is intended; the construction drawings explain how to build it.

At Diaplant, the tools are used at different moments, according to the decision that needs to be made.

The sketch is quick and lets you test alternatives without investing time in detail.

It can explore the position of a swimming pool, the relationship of a path to the house or the mass of a tree.

It does not aim for realism. Its advantage lies in showing the idea and allowing it to be crossed out, moved and compared.

A sketch used well avoids modelling in detail a solution that has not yet been validated.

Diagrams simplify information: circulation, sun, views, water, uses and vegetation.

They help to explain why the design is organised in a particular way.

They do not show the final result, but they make the reasoning legible.

They are useful for comparing scenarios and communicating decisions between disciplines.

The moodboard brings together materials, plants, colours, light and references for atmosphere.

It serves to align meanings. One person may call irregular stone ‘rustic’, and another weathered timber.

Each image should be chosen for a reason and not just for its general look.

The moodboard gives direction, but does not guarantee that all the materials exist or suit the site. Technical selection comes later.

The plan shows the whole layout and can use textures and shadows to make it easier to read.

It lets you grasp proportions, routes and the relationship between areas.

It should keep to scale and match the technical geometry. An illustration cannot alter dimensions to make the drawing more pleasing.

The key distinguishes elements and phases.

The 3D model checks levels, volumes and views.

It helps to see whether a wall is too high, whether a tree blocks a window or whether a flight of steps is too dominant.

It also allows the sun and the relationship with the architecture to be studied.

The model can start simple and gain detail as the design progresses.

The render adds materials, vegetation, light and atmosphere.

It is useful for comparing finishes and for helping those who do not read technical plans.

Vegetation needs to be represented honestly. A mature tree chosen at the nursery can be shown close to its real shape; a young planting should not appear as a mature mass without explanation.

Nor should the images hide equipment, finishing details and unavoidable limitations.

Where there is a photograph of the site, the proposal can be superimposed on the real context.

Perspective, scale and light need to be consistent. A tree that is too small or too large changes the perception of the design.

Photomontage is especially useful for assessing views and the relationship with existing buildings.

It does not replace a three-dimensional survey where the levels are complex.

Video shows movement, transitions and sequence.

On a site with changes of level or several distinct spaces, it reveals relationships that a still image does not show.

The pace should allow the space to be observed. Very fast movements impress, but make assessment harder.

The camera position should come close to the real experience of someone walking through.

Showing the garden on planting day and a few years later helps to explain time.

Growth is an estimate, not an exact forecast. Species, soil, water and maintenance all change the rate.

This device can show why a spacing looks open at first, or why a mature tree gives an immediate effect.

The stages should be labelled so as not to create an ambiguous visual promise.

AI tools can generate references, explore atmospheres and speed up iterations.

They need supervision. An image can invent species, alter the architecture or create construction solutions that are impossible.

When used to communicate a design, it should start from verified geometry and decisions and be reviewed by someone who knows the site.

The ease of producing an image does not reduce the need for design.

A visualisation can represent real specimens from the nursery, but availability should be confirmed.

For specimen trees, photographs and models help to get close to the shape. The final image is still an interpretation.

Materials also vary from batch to batch. Natural stone is never completely uniform in colour.

The design should communicate this variation instead of promising photographic reproduction.

A render does not resolve drainage, structure, waterproofing or planning consent.

A beautiful image can hide a ramp that is too steep or a tree over an underground service.

That is why visualisation is always cross-checked against plans, sections and the specialist disciplines.

Approval of the image should not be confused with approval of every technical detail.

Each stage needs the appropriate level.

At the start, sketches and moodboards are more flexible. At concept design stage, plan, 3D and renders help to settle the layout. At detailed design stage, details and models confirm specific solutions.

Using the right tool avoids excess detail while decisions can still change.

Visualisation is not only for persuading. It is for understanding, comparing and correcting before building.

• What a concept design includes
• How a project is developed
• Detailed design

1. Diaplant’s workflow with ArchiCAD, SketchUp, D5 Render, Lumion and Photoshop.
2. Principles of visual communication and design coordination.