Fukorami Sightseer by EMAS Design
made in collaboration with @KSIolajidebt
yes ik these pics suck i’ll take better ones when i have time
Submissions are ending at the end of today, EST time. People who’ve submitted only ads please submit the .car too 
Imo, Cool offroad concept, but with nonfriendness design, your build allow me to conclude that he is winner in nomination (rigid, sportivness) also yet.
The design of the taillights is also great, but their narrow band, I suspect, will enhance the effect of piercing brightness so that they are noticeable.
absolutely none of these words are in the Bible
Yep but they are in the Russian to English translator he resorts to using.
Kalan these are CONCEPT vehicles, they are meant to be extreme. My design keeps turning out uglier than a vulture so I may keep my entry out of this round. So many prettier birds around this time
Wait, wasn’t 00:00 EST on 12/27 already past before this post was written? Or did you mean the end of the day (11:59 EST) on 12/27?
I’ve opted to push the deadline till the end of the day to give people from other timezones more time to submit, since I won’t be home the time the original deadline ends either way - FINAL deadline is 23:59 27/12 EST
Sounds good. Is it fine to resubmit before the end of the day if I already submitted my entry last night? I was hoping to spend a bit more time refining the rear end of my car but wanted to make sure I didn’t miss the deadline. Totally understandable if you’d rather not though.
It’s fine, you can resubmit
Cool, thanks!
Deadline is OVER Reviews will be out in a few days or maybe even hours. No qualis just detailed finals for ALL
With only 7 entries total, it makes sense to go straight to the final round of judging for this CSC…
CSC 53 - Finals
DISclaimer.
I tried to give everyone as best a shot as I could, and was pretty lenient with body choice and proportions. That said, not everyone got a free pass for their body choice.
Of only 7 cars, one still unfortunately ended up getting canned. @HelloHi's entry had an improper naming scheme.
pen15's entry
PROPORTIONS
This entry nails the front and rear overhangs (although the rear one is quite unconventional), however it falls short from a side view; the whole car looks top-heavy and unbalanced vertically. It’s not because of the raked belt line, nor the absolutely gigantic 23” wheels, but because of the way the wheel arch cutouts are positioned - too low and small, giving too much empty space over the rear wheels. Although the rear end of the side view is bordering on looking like a funny Asian-market minivan/suv, the problem was mitigated to an extent using vertical breaks (creases) in multiple areas over the rear wheels. Light catchers visually separate two large planes and the over-arch molding tries to give us the illusion of there being a black, empty wheel well. Moving onto the front: floating surfaces, recesses and light catchers are all present and help separate the front design elements despite there being minimal use of blacked out trim. The rear end is much more traditional, however it still sports the body-colour motif and, yet again, manages superb separation of different components, making the proportions instantly intelligible (something which I cannot stress how hard doing with minimal use of the colour black is).
SURFACES/SURFACE QUALITY
In the right lighting, this car pops. The balance between smooth surfaces with gentle curves, and brutish and harsh surfaces is spot on, especially at the front. Basically all my main requirements for this design were fulfilled - the once mostly harsh and wayward surfaces of prior cars were refined and made more gentle, while still maintaining a killer road presence and a supreme sense of overall quality. Attention to detail just with the surfaces is amazing (see how the chrome bezel of the grille changes angle from the front view). One decision I didn’t sit well with though was the hood molding, which in my opinion, is far too insubstantial and gentle for this type of car. I can see you struggled with my design direction in some areas, although otherwise, surfaces utilise smart and often surprisingly simple and elegant solutions to lighting limitations. Without looking at the .car, you wouldn’t be able to tell that front the axles-up, nothing remains of the original body - and perhaps even more impressively, the A and D pillars are hand-crafted with 3D.
BRAND IDENTITY/DESIGN LANGUAGE
As with most entries, it forgoes the single-unit headlights in favour of a split-beam system, and goes for a less curved, practically triangular grille. Lights on the front still keep the single, thick and gently raked DRL design theme listed in the reference sheet. Front and side have a strong origami-inspired theme to them, which is very much in line with the company’s current design language. The rear is focused on being gentle, refined and sophisticated. Overall, this is a great adaptation of the previously harsh and overwhelming design language into something incredibly sophisticated, purposeful and refined.
DETAILING
The headlights (main beams and running lights), as well as the taillights, are very intricately crafted with pretty patterns (which I unfortunately can’t show you due to Automation randomly breaking all the lighting slots). Apart from that, and a few sorta uninspired grille detailing bits, the car’s detailing lies in its molding, which I’ve already talked about a lot.
kookie & KSILolajidebt's entry
PROPORTIONS
Right off the bat, this entry’s design philosophy centers on a more traditional style. Front and rear overhangs are by-the-book, and the front and rear wheel arches don’t have too much meat on their bones. The whole car exudes a more dynamic and gentle vibe, contrary to the previous entry. Thanks to tasteful utilisation of black trim on the bottom and a completely black cockpit shell, the car looks much less tall than it actually is. The front is absolutely spot-on; the grille is the perfect size and all the main elements of the design maintain a visual clarity from even far away. From front-on, it looks planted, purposeful and just generally simple. The lights on the front wrap around quite far (exactly as they should), however the same cannot be said for the rears. The rear is unfortunately quite unfinished looking, and the rear lights being so close and small only amplifies this feeling. It would have almost been okay if there was some surfacing below it substantial enough to break up the vertical height, but there isn’t.
SURFACES/SURFACE QUALITY
Side molding is simple and it works. I was mostly impressed by the gigantic child-bearing hips you managed to place on the back, which are a nice touch, and again help make the car look less tall without any tacky solutions. I also quite like how you decided to forgo a traditional indent at the bottom of the door to catch some light, and instead went with a big crease that climbs halfway up the door and matches up with the origami fold below the A-pillar. The front doesn’t utilise a lot of clever surfacing, but it’s clear it was designed by someone who knows how to utilise indents well when they should, and fill in negative space with black design elements. Rear uses a lot of black to hide the height, but the gentle crease halfway up the door just isn’t substantial enough to mask the sheer height of the body paired with tiny rear lights. Excluding the rear hips which get kinda blocky the further back you go, it’s exceptionally clean for something that utilises this much 3D fixtures. The front main grille molding and side origami fold in particular are my favourites.
BRAND IDENTITY/DESIGN LANGUAGE
As stated before, the front design is pretty much exactly in-character for what I had in mind. One thing I will still find time to complain about though, the DRL bar that droops down through half the car’s height and meets up with the main beams. I assume you were trying to get some line flow going, but in my opinion you didn’t need to and/or could have executed it better. I get the main beams are at a steeper angle compared to the grille, but as long as there’s negative space and they’re both curved in the same direction that’s okay (this is called a shear angle, basically if you imagine stretching some vertical line closer to the center, and its angle changes according to some other line its next to). Although the rear is unfinished, I absolutely think it could’ve passed easily as a Fukorami had it been given more time.
DETAILING
One thing that immediately caught my eye upon further inspection was the fully functioning air curtain that comes out the front wheel wells and goes along the side of the car. It’s impressive how realistic it looks and how it doesn’t draw attention to the fact that it exists. Rear lights are another part I found pleasing. Their general shape and pattern is pretty nice and would’ve definitely worked well if they were made to be bigger. The lower part of the rear bumper is quite barren though, with the essentials in place, but no clever ideas. My final gripe is that the A and B pillars have nice door seams, but the C pillar doesn’t, nor does it have a door handle. It’s a shame because otherwise it’s remarkably clean back there considering how much effort went into that bulge, but it makes the car look like a 2-door at first glance.
lazar's entry
PROPORTIONS
111 design’s entry revolves around a more traditional body-on-frame SUV style, which is just as valid as any of the other entries. The wheelbase is on the longer side, however, and paired with that big rear overhang it looks almost American, not Japanese. Front end has much of the same vibe to it; grille is distinct but oversized to match with the rest of the car’s extreme proportions. Origami folds with a secondary contrast colour are a nice touch which was pulled off surprisingly well, and the lights are nice and wrap around far enough. Rear end still looks pretty flat despite all the molding that went into it. No bumper surrounds means it’s difficult to make out and separate the rear tailgate from the bumper itself. No complaints with the overall height of the vehicle from a side view, though. Nice use of big wheel arches and low belt lines (although I feel like it rides too low).
SURFACES/SURFACE QUALITY
Although the side bears the origami fold on the front doors, and the rear arches are supposed to resemble it in its sharpness, I’m just not a fan of the way it transitions into the door. It looks like it was just chiselled out of place. I do however, like the clever interpretation of my front end surfacing with this attempt. Below the origami folds and its surrounds are simple but clean light catchers and deep insets. The hood has some nice and substantial insets and molding that looks purposeful and bold. From a side view, the rear is basically vertical, and that’s my problem with it. From a head-on, the rear has a lot of stuff going on (which is good, just to be clear), but it fails to transfer the same feeling over to a three-quarter angle or a side angle. I think this is mainly because of the fact the tailgate is flush with the rest of the rear end. Front and rear is where this design shines. It’s supremely clean and elegant. Sides, however, I can’t say the same thing. Sure, most of it looks fine, but again I am not a fan of the rear hips at all (there’s a bit of light catcher from the base body left and it’s something you can’t unsee when you spot it). The window line has been edited from the base body too, and it looks pretty dodgy in some areas.
BRAND IDENTITY/DESIGN LANGUAGE
111 design did well in terms of coming up with something in-character for a vehicle this big. The front retains a clean and purposeful appearance while being tall and substantial enough to draw just that little bit of attention to itself. The side would also be recognizable pretty quickly, even though it isn’t as elegant as I’d have liked it to be. Unique take on the rear lights, much appreciated. They’re very 3D and carry the sharp motif from the front. I do think they would’ve looked more in-character had they been lower below the window line.
DETAILING
The floating surfaces at the front have nice separation, although there’s not much fine design other than that. It’s all pretty one-dimensional, not to say it’s bad because of that, but some extra flashes of detail would’ve been much appreciated. Sides have nice cutouts and are detailed as much as they should be, however the door seams stop abruptly near the top of the door which looks quite janky. Rear is again more of the same, amazing design direction in certain areas (like the taillights or the lower part of the tailgate), but just lacking that extra punch that some delta would’ve given it. Maybe some patterns in the lights or some faux aero parts on the bumper.
OT Motive's entry
PROPORTIONS
Straight from the bat, you might not be able to pinpoint exactly what’s wrong with the side view, but you can definitely feel it. Rear overhang is a bit too long and definitely too high off the ground. This is only made worse with the amount of black trim. It could’ve maybe been salvaged if the window line didn’t extend so far back. Front lights are nested entirely in the front ortho view, which makes sense given the body chosen, but is a bit disappointing as it doesn’t look as dynamic as it could’ve had the lights stretched further back. A more prominent grille was achieved by creating a vertical space before the droop which lines up nicely with the headlights, not complaints there. Bottom vents maintain visual clarity as well, and are relatively nicely defined with surfacing. The rear end looks a bit funny because of how much black trim was used. It sort of looks like a monster truck with how high it is. It looks squashed from certain angles. Rear lights are fine and scaled pretty much exactly as they should be, but again they don’t wrap around as much as I’d have liked them to.
SURFACES/SURFACE QUALITY
There’s some nice, gentle curves on the side that both flow in the same direction and look cohesive. Front surfacing is probably where the design shines in this regard. It utilises creases and empty space effectively without being overbearing or difficult to comprehend. The hood looks pretty plain though and it doesn’t really fit with the rest of the front end in my opinion. Rear end’s molding attempt is pretty embarrassing compared to the front. Minimal use of black was abandoned in favour of minimal surfacing to design in the first place. It looks quite chunky compared to the front’s nice, organic lines, and has some quite questionable fixture use (like the two creases next to the plate holder inset, which don’t flow into anything). Side surfaces have a bit of a gap between the two fixtures, but I’m willing to let that slide. Front is also a bit patchy in areas but from a bit further away it conveys its message pretty effectively.
BRAND IDENTITY/DESIGN LANGUAGE
Unlike a lot of other entries, the side bears no iconic origami fold on the doors, and doesn’t experiment a lot with the way it treats surfaces and how visual height is perceived. The front has The Beak and it’s curved too. I quite like the idea of single-unit vertical headlights positioned in this way. Rear doesn’t really do it for me in this category either. The verticality of the front was completely flipped around, and now the entire design is laid out very horizontally. This is probably because of the oversized rear black insets.
DETAILING
There’s some nice detail in the headlights and the grille with the triangle bits that mimic The Beak. The side doesn’t have cutouts, which is okay, but the door handles are quite ghastly. They don’t fit the era, shape, type or even price bracket of the car. The lower half of the rear end is pretty okay for the type of car, but above it gets quite bland. The lights don’t have the same pretty internals as the fronts, and the text used is pretty chunky and unintelligible from farther away.
the-chowi's entry
PROPORTIONS
The entire car looks squished from almost every view. This is probably due to your body choice, which was just extruded vertically from the wagon it was based on. Side looks pretty alright though, but that weird C pillar makes it difficult to separate the car into two distinct halves at a glance. The front end leaves a lot to be desired unfortunately. It takes the intern’s sketch and smooshes it into a package 10cm too narrow for what it’s supposed to be recreating. The headlights don’t wrap around to the sides enough, and neither does the rest of the design. It all doesn’t look very dynamic and elegant from a three-quarter or side view. Rear suffers from much the same issues. The light assembly in particular is quite chunky and doesn’t wrap around almost at all. While from the rear, yes it’s not badly proportioned, from any other angle it looks chunky and bulky.
SURFACES/SURFACE QUALITY
The side fold on this entry is probably my favourite of all submissions. It’s simple, doesn’t draw attention to itself that much and it is well executed. Going further down the side panels, you don’t see any kink or crease along the bottom of the doors, which makes the car look kind of funny from some perspectives. Front molding emphasises the grille and lights nicely, and it’s not too cluttered or dirty looking, though the lower half looks kind of bare. Rear molding by comparison is very cluttered looking. Random creases along panel gaps (?) as well as multiple vein moldings around the bottom bumper trim. The plate inset is okay though, it matches the taillight shape, even if it’s a bit uninspired. Surfaces are for the most part clean and crisp, however it all gets very messy at the rear end. The bottom half of the design especially has way too many overlapping premade fixtures frantically placed over one another and it just doesn’t look nice under certain lighting.
BRAND IDENTITY/DESIGN LANGUAGE
While I am not a fan of proportions, if adapted a bit this could be a solid attempt at a car design around the Swan design language. Front grille is a bit too triangular, and overall the front is a bit too bulky for something Fukorami. Rear end focuses a bit too much on traditional design trends for my liking. Bottom half is a bit uninspired and the rear lights have a very “trendy” and “cool” light bar that narrows up at the top, between two main housings. I am not a fan of this direction, and think it could’ve been massively more in-character had you gone a different path.
DETAILING
The front and rear lights have pretty patterns. The rears in particular are very nice to look at, but just don’t fit the car well with how narrow they are. Aside from that, there’s some nice grille detailing both front and back, and nice cutouts over all the side doors.
KILO's entry
PROPORTIONS
It’s tall. It’s wide. It’s got a belt line that’s sloped the wrong way. I’ve tried to be lenient with body choice, as this is sort of a niche segment in terms of body choice, but this is a complete miss for me. The roof is extremely tall, pretty much exactly as tall as the shell if not taller. There was an attempt at hiding this, but there’s just a point where no amount of black paint can save you from an error this elemental. The front end of the body curves abruptly to the sides where the headlights are supposed to go, which means you get a pretty dorky front ortho view. The wheel arches on both the front and rear end are jarringly wide, almost like some race car. The roof at the rear is literally twice as high as the tailgate, it somewhat reminds me of an army vehicle. The taillights are in an awkward middle ground between being not substantial enough from the rear view, and not wrapping around enough to the sides. Overall, these proportions don’t scream Fukorami at all, not even a whisper.
SURFACES/SURFACE QUALITY
There’s some attempts at surfacing, mainly on the side. I quite like the gentle light catcher at the bottom, and the simple side treatment, with only a tight character crease at the top of the doors. At the front, it tries to be a body-coloured, failing pretty badly. The surfacing is not substantial enough to remind me of any main design elements, and instead, looks like it’s missing a number plate. The rear has an attempt at surfacing, but it really just looks like there’s nothing there. There’s not many custom surfaces, except for the ones at the front which are veiny and thin. I like the aforementioned side treatment, because it’s nice and clean, brutish even. I think if you’d have latched onto that visual clarity and crispness, you’d have had a more focused and concise design direction, and would’ve brought some new design elements to the company’s language.
BRAND IDENTITY/DESIGN LANGUAGE
Aside from the badges and logo (which isn’t centred on logo holder by the way), you’d be hard pressed to find anything even resembling a Fukorami…
DETAILING
Apart from some half-assed attempts at light patterning, there’s again nothing for me to talk about, really. It’s a shame, cause even a bit of attention to detail would’ve lifted my opinion on this entry. The only detail to speak of is inconsistent DLR lines at the front and rear, and some tiny, badly placed door handles.
SCORING list.
• @pen15 - 1st place
• @Lazar - 2nd place
• @kookie & @KSIolajidebt - 3rd place
• @OT_motive - 4th place
• @the-chowi - 5th place
• @KILO - 6th place
Thank you @Urke101 for a really great and precise write up.
Seeing as I have made very few cars and don’t have a proper lineup for any of my brands, I’ll pass down hosting to @Lazar.
@Urke101 That feedback was fantastic thank you
now looking back I can’t believe I forgot the origami fold lol.
oops lol… should have looked more closely at the naming. My bad
KSI and I have an idea in the works and we should have a brief drawn up by the end of the week.
Once again thanks to @Urke101 for the amazing level of judging and feedback!