CGs vs "cartoonized" or filtered photos

[Tyrantauranox]

I think well-done photo manipulations can yield decent results. I do a combination of both photo editing and 3D, myself. A building might be modeled and rendered, but common trimmings like bushes, trees, and the sky may be cut out and edited from photo sources.

[OokamiKasumi]

I think well-done photo manipulations can yield decent results. I do a combination of both photo editing and 3D, myself. A building might be modeled and rendered, but common trimmings like bushes, trees, and the sky may be cut out and edited from photo sources.

Quite a few commercial "Hidden Object" games were clearly made by combining photos and CG graphics then rendered to look like they'd been painted. "Gardens of Time" in particular. Also, rendering a photo composite image to look like a painting is very commonly used for professional book covers.

[sendo]

I personally prefer hand-painted or 3D rendered backgrounds. I don't see why filtered photos shouldn't be used though, but I agree that the photos should match the quality and look-and-feel of the rest of the art.

I certainly like the idea of artists drawing over existing royalty free photos, or even over 3d renders.

I wonder how the artists themselves feel about it though.

This is one of my preferences for making backgrounds. It's not much different from how many manga artists do their backgrounds, although they go out and take the photos themselves.

I think it just depends on the artist. I use 3d to set up my backgrounds and paint over it myself. I don't think it's cheating because reusing models and the ability to move around the scene helps my overall efficiency and productivity. If starting with a photo as a base for a background helps, then I don't see any problem with it, provided that you own the photo or it's royalty-free of course. But well that's just me.