Capturing (or exporting) a Material-ID picture

Please note: Should you experience issues with Enscape or your subscription, and in case of any urgent inquiries/questions (e.g. regarding our upcoming licensing changes) please reach out to our dedicated support team via the Help Center or Support button as detailed here.
  • Hi All

    exporting a material ID image is an essential part of my workflow - so I am happy that Enscape offers this possibility.

    Usually, a material ID image is used for PostPro (e.g. for making color variants in PSD etc. etc). However, this only works if the exported material ID

    dummy-color-areas are sharply contoured and exportet without any Anti-Alias, for example for making the use of mask tools possible etc.

    Unfortunately Enscape does not provide the necessary export quality here and I can't find the possibility to get this quality?

  • Hi EGIE

    I have seen output channels without AA at Vray too, but never understand how to use this. How can you select a part at your scene without AA, did you not get only 99%, since the edges are not full selected? How did you get the part selected within the AA area?

    I used the antialiased ID masks with a selection tool that allow to define a tolerance range and it works quite good, for example at Photoshop per color selection tool.

  • Hi Micha

    Material IDs from render tools (I know these for example from Artlantis Render or RenderIn as well) always output this pixel image without AA. In this case, this must be without AA, so a selection always functions precisely contoured. (In practice, this works better the higher the resolution is, of course.) By the way, you can also render these IDs natively from SketchUp without AA. - Or you use the plugin SU-CH which automates the many styles settings, e.g. also for shadow or hidden line etc.


    There is hardly any project, I don't use this technique. In the case of Enskape this could be a little less important here and there because the render time is so short . For Exteriors In general I always use Photoshop to mount the finished image...

    Or if I make project variants with different colors only, I never render these variants, but multiply these color variants in Photoshop then. So you see, such a Material-ID thing is very important, at least for me ^^

  • I know the output of channel without AA, but still I don't understand, how you can clearly select an object (AA) with a mask without AA. You don't get the AA blurry edges of the object selected and so, a red object adjusted to blue will still show a small red seam. Do you know a web page where it is explained? Since your rendering is using AA, how can this ignored for selection?

    OK, for very high res images the AA doesn't matter so much, the rendering could be done without AA too.

    Did you tried the AA masks with a tolerance based selection tool?

  • I agree with Micha here, using a tolerance usually does the trick.

    In a previous Enscape version we had the masks without AA. You always had stair-egdes, no matter which tolerance you used so the results were bad.

  • Thanks to All - and you all are right :) this topic depends very much on the individual accustomed workflows.

    I only knew the "without AA"-variants so far, so I think (as an option for the future) keeping a selection checkmark like in the SkUp export could be ideal.

  • Hi Micha

    I´ll share an example here which is not particularly sophisticated at all, but real at least ;)

    The render is created with Render[In]. If you specify PSD as render-output-format there, Render[In] creates a bunch of additional layers automatically next to the render itself. - e.g. Ambient Occlusion, Z-Depth, Object ID, Material ID, etc.

    The PSD screenshot shows only the layers I kept. Additionally I post the original material ID layer in png-format as well as a finished colored example.

    Since the resolution is quite high, I can print the image on A2 sice even without the above mentioned "non-AA-stair-egdes" would be noticeable that much or even disturbing for me.

    The "conflict" - antialiased object vs aliased mask - does not arise in my opinion, instead, this system guarantees me a perfectly colored result without psd fumbling or masks errors ... Again: this is not any lecture or wiseassing, but just a look how I work with this topic ...

  • I don't see the advantage, the jagged edges wouldn't make me happy. You would get a better result with an AA mask. OK, for high res it doesn't matter, but using a selection tool with tolerance is really simple - see screenshot where I colored the wood. And if you should get little errors of the tolerance based selection, than I suppose so they are not stronger than the errors of the non-AA mask. ;)

    magic wand tolerance 70 selection

  • ... a nice example ! - thanks :thumbup:

    as I said before - I don´t claim to have an advantage but such kind of workflows often grow independent and in conjunction with the tools available.
    I worked with Artlantis Render long and long ago which was my first rendering-thing ever - there was and still is only this non-AA option which is better than nothing, the same in Render[In], which is the little "Abvent-Sister" from Artlantis ...

    Now Im looking forward to your mask tolerance tutorial, hopefully in Photoshop :):)

  • Just curious: with the speed of Enscape and the 'live' updating, why go to all this bother?

    I can tweak colours live, export, tweak again, export,... all within the time it would have taken you to load the post-production program, never mind work with it.

  • At Photoshop you can use the magic wand and set the tolerance like at my last screenshot above. An other way is the "color range selection" (in german it is named "Farbbereich"). I like this tool since you can adjust the tolerance slider and see the selected area - see screenshots. Some times, if there are to much nearly same colors at the MatID, than you can make a raw lasso selection around your needed object areas and than start the color range selection. Now, only the color range in the lasso selection is active.

    Sidenote: some months before I send a request for a MatID that shows the DOF effect too (like at Vray). In this case the tolerance based selection is your only chance to get a soft selection of blurry objects.

  • Hi to all!

    No it does not!
    I totally agree with EGIE. its a Problem when ID masks are blured or unclear on egdes. speculating how many pixels are needed expand to fit the the selection. I would say its an industry standard that you should adapt to, to keep the ball rolling. ;) You should listen to people daily workflows othervise they will turn to other softs.

    650 bucks yearly to me means: "thanks for taking your time and leaving your valuable feedback, and we will try to improve" not " What do you need it for anyway, just trace the objects individualy with magic wand tool" answer... btw I never had similar problems with V-ray.

    I agree with Micha here, using a tolerance usually does the trick.

    In a previous Enscape version we had the masks without AA. You always had stair-egdes, no matter which tolerance you used so the results were bad.