Previous Release / Preview Threads Merged

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.
  • Of course this feature will work for some people. In fact, you'd be hard-pressed to find any feature where you can't find people advocating opposite sides. But both on this forum as in my office most people seem to come out against it.


    Also keep in mind that what I'm proposing is having the option to discard changes. The only thing it would change for your office is that you'd occasionally have to click 'save' (ENTER) on a popup dialog when you try to exit a settings window with unsaved changes. Is that really such an unreasonable compromise?

    • License Model Changes
      In this Preview version we have adjusted how license seats for Enscape are handled. A seat will now be occupied when any of the Enscape key features are in use, specifically: Enscape Renderer, Material Library, Material Editor, Asset Library, and Enscape Objects (SketchUp only). This change is to reflect the value these key features bring to the end user as well as the investment we are making to constantly improve and develop Enscape.

    OK... I am waiting to see how many people of the ones that initially complained about the now defunct trial and now this... How many will try and stay with Enscape and how many will start to look elsewhere...


    As a separate topic, but kinda related to the evolution of Enscape... I thought I saw "Unity" mentioned in the "about" (?) dialog or some other place where Enscape acknowledges what other software/libraries/etc are part of Enscape... I saw videos of Unity being able to adjust light sources way easier than it is done in Enscape.... I sorta stopped using Enscape other than for the occasional render... test videos being captured with OBS to use an Xbox Controller... Too may changes and not a lot of them to make things easier... adjusting light sources should be a priority... It is tiresome to see other programs implement that but not Enscape... you need to import the light properties files... I'm considering just waiting and let the subscription run out and then only go for a month at any given time if I at all find the need to use Enscape... well, I don't make a living out of it... just a hobby... but I do like the 360 panoramas and the web export... so we'll see... Plus the constant crashes at times with some versions... then you upgrade and there are other issues.... Getting tired of the same song........ hoping things get settled soon. Enscape is a good program... just kinda went downhill when it was getting better... Tough times. And the MP4 export problems that force people to use a separate program (VLC)... bleh...

    • Official Post

    ASxJ2099 , I'm sorry to hear about all of this - your Feedback and that of all the others in this thread has been forwarded but still, you should not experience constant crashes. When it comes to that behaviour please send us a Feedback Report if you haven't already. We always request those when crashes occur, and they are the best and quickest way to troubleshoot such issues. In case you're already in contact with support through a previously send in Feedback Report then you can of course ignore this message and gladly let me know instead what the current status is of your crashing issues, as in, with which versions you experience this problem and why.

  • Of course this feature will work for some people. In fact, you'd be hard-pressed to find any feature where you can't find people advocating opposite sides. But both on this forum as in my office most people seem to come out against it.


    Also keep in mind that what I'm proposing is having the option to discard changes. The only thing it would change for your office is that you'd occasionally have to click 'save' (ENTER) on a popup dialog when you try to exit a settings window with unsaved changes. Is that really such an unreasonable compromise?

    Your idea seems fair enough - as with the latest change, it doesn't seem a big deal so we can all crack on and go back to worrying about why our mirrors don't reflect properly :D

  • Here are the Release Notes for the latest Enscape v3.2 Preview - Version 2.

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

    Note: Preview versions are not production proven, so make sure to observe the Known Issues in the attached .pdf document and please report any other issues back to us either on this thread or via the normal support channels.


    What’s included:


    • Asset Library Access from the Enscape Viewport (WIP)
      As a first step towards supporting Asset placement and manipulation from within the Enscape Viewport itself we've added a new Mode. You can now enter the Asset Library Mode by pressing the [L] key or by clicking the corresponding icon located at the top left of the Enscape Viewport. Over the course of the 3.2 development cycle we'll be making more and more functionality available within that Mode as well as adding new additional ways of interacting with Assets inside Enscape.


    • Upload Management Overhaul & Replace Already Uploaded Panoramas
      The Upload Management User Interface has been thoroughly overhauled to facilitate the function of replacing Panoramas that have already been uploaded to the cloud and shared. This also means that QR codes can now remain fixed. Note that this function is only available when using the Enscape User Accounts (General Settings -> Licensing and Privacy). A similar functionality allowing replacement of already uploaded Web Standalone files will be made available at a later date.


    A full list of Bug Fixes and Known Issues can, as always, be found in the attached document. Please refer to the bug's / issue's associated ID number when contacting Enscape Support in relation to any of these listed items.


    If you run into any issues while using this Preview version, please do not hesitate to contact Enscape Support, ideally by submitting feedback with logs attached (via the Enscape Feedback button) which allows us to help and resolve issues or make adjustments to new features as quickly and effectively as we can.

  • Not sure yet of the benefit of moving assets into the window. We need to see the category list to be able to find things effectively. And once we enable that, the asset browser will be taking up most of the render window, unless you have one of those extra wide monitors.


    Overall I should note that the search is a very ineffective way to find assets. In my experience, browsing through the categories is far more effective.

  • What's the functionality of the asset window supposed to be? In Sketchup, I don't seem to have a way to add the assets into my model from the Enscape window asset browser.


    Is the goal to have everything in the Enscape window, or will we still be able to use the asset browser in the Enscape toolbar and load assets into our models without having to open the Enscape window? Would be nice to have visual settings available outside of the Enscape window.

  • What's the functionality of the asset window supposed to be? In Sketchup, I don't seem to have a way to add the assets into my model from the Enscape window asset browser.


    Is the goal to have everything in the Enscape window, or will we still be able to use the asset browser in the Enscape toolbar and load assets into our models without having to open the Enscape window? Would be nice to have visual settings available outside of the Enscape window.

    Agreed!

    What is the end goal here? If it's to consolidate everything into the Preview window this will be a major turn-off. Please provide more information on this. Having to launch Enscape for the asset will create a number of bottom necks especially for users that have poor hardware resources. If the plan to support both work methods then that is fine however having to launch Enscape to access the Asset library is not sustainable.


    I have more thoughts on this but would like to hear more about the plans.


    Please provide more information on this.

  • What is the end goal here? If it's to consolidate everything into the Preview window this will be a major turn-off. Please provide more information on this. Having to launch Enscape for the asset will create a number of bottom necks especially for users that have poor hardware resources. If the plan to support both work methods then that is fine however having to launch Enscape to access the Asset library is not sustainable.

    Both prospects would be pretty horrid - neither having to start up Enscape to even access the asset library nor only having Enscape to place said objects would be an appealing choice when it comes to workflow. The main selling point for Enscape (at least for us) is to be able to use everything inside SKP and have Enscape as renderer window, not having it morph into some half baked hybrid.


    If I wanted clunky placement procedures and horrid usability I'd be picking up TwinMotion. X/

  • I'm going to be quit blunt, none of this is personal, but it needs to be said. Whoever at Enscape is in charge of decision making since 2.9 needs to be let go. Who in gods green earth thought not allowing the user to even place assets while the rest of the floating licenses are taken would be a good idea? The asset is worth zero dollars without the ability to use the Enscape window for the actual render. I cant use Enscape unless I have a open license, so why are the assets locked behind another license wall???? Whats the point of having a floating license (and paying more for it mind you) if the entire program is locked up if all the licenses are taken. The only rational behind that decision is to require more licenses be purchased. Stop being greedy and the money will follow. If you keep pissing people off with bad road map decisions we will leave and you'll end up with no money. We the forum have been saying this for months now and nothing is changing.


    Your program is not lumion, its not vray, its not twinmotion, so stop following their path!


    ^ this is a stupid feature. Stop, take a good look, and revert it to pre-3.2

  • Here's an idea .... why don't you go after the users who've stolen/got pirated copies of Enscape instead of trying to cripple those of us who's paid you money.

    You'll get a round of applause from us instead of comments like the above.

    A 10-second search found sources for 2.8, 2.91, 3.0, 3.0.2 and 3.1.51316 all on the 1st page of results with more to be had.

    • Official Post

    Thank you, everyone, for the feedback so far - Just to make very sure this is completely clear after reading through the concerns here: The functionality of our Asset Library in the CAD solution itself will be retained, being able to place Assets directly into Enscape will just be an additional feature. So in other words: The existing Asset Library functionalities will completely remain in future versions.


    Also, Madiyorbek you should still be able to use the Asset Library window through SketchUp, as usual, to place Assets into your SketchUp scene - but, it's not yet possible to place Assets in the Enscape viewport through the viewport-asset-menu, that is of course the main function which is coming soon.

  • As long as this is optional it's fine. But I do hope having this new option is not going to compromise the ability to navigate the library. For example, I would hate to see the 'categories' take a backseat in future updates to the asset library UX, because it's hard to fit it inside the render window version.


    Also, another follow up question: if I make a modification to the asset in Revit (for example I placed the asset in Revit -> Edit Family -> Change category), and now I place the asset again in the same project but this time from within the Render window, will it use my edited asset Family, or create a fresh asset family without my previous changes?


    We modify the categories and appearance of many of the assets (critical to our drawing sets), so just trying to get an idea whether our existing workflows might break with this change :)

  • Demian Gutberlet Thank you for acknowledging the feedback.


    Why is this additional feature necessary? It is a redundancy that is not needed at all and just adds complexity to the program that we do not want or have ever requested. If Enscape was bringing cross compatibility between 3d modeling software I could maybe understand the decision but that is not the case.


    Here's a scenario I would like the answer too:


    A firm has one floating license and person A places human figure 1 in a model via the Enscape window. Person A then leaves that project and has a deadline still using the license on a different project. Person B is tasked with moving said human figure 1 placed in the model by person A because client didn't like the location of that person for marketing material. Now person B has to take away person A's license or pull person A off of their own deadline to fix the problem. The only other solution is to invest in more licenses which is the last thing any firm wants to do if they are running on a tight budget. So whats the solution?


    The resources Enscape is using on this feature should be placed towards one of the other hundred feature requests that have been on this forum for months and years in my opinion.

  • A firm has one floating license and person A places human figure 1 in a model via the Enscape window. Person A then leaves that project and has a deadline still using the license on a different project. Person B is tasked with moving said human figure 1 placed in the model by person A because client didn't like the location of that person for marketing material. Now person B has to take away person A's license or pull person A off of their own deadline to fix the problem. The only other solution is to invest in more licenses which is the last thing any firm wants to do if they are running on a tight budget. So whats the solution?

    Going out on a limb here, but whatever: If a firm has X persons potentially using the same software at the same time then the firm has to invest in at least X seats of floating licenses. And regarding 'tight budget': If you're not able to financially cover basic operating cost (what monthly licensing fees would count as) of your very own business via your 'normal' daily work then you should reevaluate your priorities, pricing and/or your financial structure.