Previous Release / Preview Threads Merged

Please cast your votes in our two ongoing feedback polls here and here!
  • So essentially, you can only import or export material settings in the Asset Editor only, versus also having an export option available in the Material Editor?

    What I'm trying to work around is having to physically re-match every single value for assets that were already edited in the Material Editor and saved as a component, in the Asset Editor. When we import that component via proxy, those values are saved from when the model was edited in the Material Editor and we wouldn't have to adjust anything in the Material Editor ever again. Is it possible to incorporate an option to export Material Packages from the Material Editor, for models that were already done, into the Asset Editor to save redundancy? Otherwise, there is a poor intern who will be importing models into the Asset Editor, and completely re-doing each model from scratch. Like most, there are hundreds if not thousands of models that are saved as individual components...and not all of them use similar material names or values. In total, we lose a week just to process our components as custom objects.

  • I'm curious if you guys had a look at the previously saved materials.

    Seems like the last preview version (2.9+4) couldn't correctly load the parameters (additional textures and slider settings in general) of materials created with a previous version.

    I've done TONS and I wouldn't want to re-make these :thumbsup:

    This has been fixed sorry for the inconvenience

  • Testing the custom asset editor:

    Observation: Currently 3D mesh files have to be at time of creation/export from other software apps in meters or it will import at a wrong scale. Using FBX as file format for testing.

    Question: Will auto scale detection and conversion / or toggle to other scale units be available?

  • Regarding the User Account and licensing questions:

    Nothing changes about the behavior that we had in previous releases. And using an account is optional, not mandatory.

    It is just the first step for more administration functionalities as well as export management capabilities that we will add in future.

    Hi JoH

    It sounds like a precursor to have finally Company control over Uploads of Panoramas and WebStandalones a long outstanding issue

    We need to be able to have Visibility and Control over Uploads

  • Por favor:

    -Objetos basados en la cara.

    -Cambiar texturas de objetos.

    -Agua y Hierba en planos verticales.

    -Objeto de neblina (Ej: para cascada).

    -Administrar luces en videos.

    -Más objetos del sitio.

    -Seleccione Vistas isométricas predeterminadas en Vista ortográfica. (Actualmente solo se pueden seleccionar fachadas o vistas de piso).

    -Gestión manual de la cámara por coordenadas en Video Editor (Para hacer videos en bucle).

    -Fondo transparente.

    -Posibilidad de abrir puertas para animación de videos o archivos ejecutables.

  • You like your own post?;) Can you please do the effort of translating it before posting on an international English based forum?

  • Here's the Release Notes for the latest Enscape v2.9 Preview - Version 6.

    Please refer to this article for instructions on how to download the Preview version.

    NOTE: This preview version is a 'Final Release Candidate' so, any issue reporting is now critical.

    What’s included:

    No new features or feature improvements in this preview release, which contains various bug fixes and stability improvements only.

    Known Issues:

    - Watchdog timeouts (Error Code 10) in GPU driver

    - ArchiCAD: "Override Wind Settings" checkbox in Material Editor is not saved to material Type 'Water' when switching back from another material Type.

    - Minimap is missing

    Bug Fixes:

    A list of bug fixes are to be found in the attached .pdf document.

    Please reference the bug ID number when contacting Customer Support in regards to any of the listed bug fixes.

  • The render panorama in 2.9 is extreme slow!

    beta 6 seams to be a bit faster than beta 4, but still much slower compared to previous versions

    We actually did look into this very recently and could not measure any notable performance loss compared to 2.8. Which version are you comparing the Preview with? Can you do a comparison run with both versions and send us feedback with log files afterwards? This will help us to get clear numbers and in case it's connected to a specific setting.

  • Hi,

    2.9+6 has a big impact on materials for me. Any materials that have a bump map of more than 499 seem to be multiplied by some factor.

    I've attached some images ; one with a bump of 499 and the other with a bump of 500.

    500 is indeed the threshold for Revit materials to switch to displacement mapping. However the result still shouldn't look like the posted above. Can you share a project file for us to reproduce?

  • I have also tried multiple sources for height maps (and tried to auto contrast them) but I get a very similar effect as posted above.

  • Auto-contrast should not be requried anyore, we're doing that now by default. I can't really reproduce those results:

    Especially irritating for me is, that in the above screenshots the heightmap seems to be completely inverted in the displacement shot, which is kind of curious.