For this purpose it has been a total game changer for my workflow. I keep Enscape open during initial modeling the plan and it's helped me create designs alongside typical AutoCAD drafting designs, etc.
But I also use it for final renders and our clients love it. Particularly during design meetings when they can fly through the model in realtime with rendered quality and not bare SketchUp. Our clients have no use for photo-realistic, time consuming renders. They also wouldn't notice half the things I see "wrong" in the final renders that the general Archviz community would. Though, I also would not not show them a view with a full length wall mirror. That's been troublesome for one job in particular, so I completely understand the frustration when it happens.
It's way over my head for details, but the way I understand it is that rasterization relies on what is in front of the camera viewport and is not accounting for the world around it (or much of it). You can visually see this as you view a mirror in Enscape. Objects in the corners of the render viewport disappear and/or become very distorted. Particularly if you view a mirror at a hard angle and not straight-on. The render engine is simply losing information to which it is calculating the scene with. FULL raytracing will solve this, but we are in early days still. There is a reason the tech demos have thus far been for converting OLD games like Quake or simple games like Minecraft into full RT demos, yet the performance is "poor"- even impossible on non GPU's without RT cores.
Enscape sales and support will only repeat the Enscape mantra to us, which is they built it for simplicity, It's definitely the quickest way for me to get a result, but I think there is plenty room for them to add complexity for users who require it. I'd certainly appreciate more granular fine tuning.
Totally agree with the development roadmap. And I think every user here has the same sentiment. They need to address the majority of the lingering little things first before releasing some feature for 1% of users (site context...). V3.3 was maybe the least excited I've been for an Enscape release, aside from them finally updating properly support SU2022, which was unusually slow.
Perhaps the recent partnership with Chaos (Vray) will prove to be quite fruitful. I can hope.
Unfortunately, our clients are VERY picky.
The 3d renderings are used to validate each detail...
And we can't do otherwise with a certain type of client.
No worries in the first phases of the project. Enscape allows you to present images and panoramas very quickly. Which is a big plus.
Unfortunately, going back to another renderer to make the final render realistic is very time consuming and impossible for our company.
It is easier to start directly on the most adapted software. Even if it means presenting less images, less quickly.
It would just be amazing to be able to switch from Enscape to Vray seamlessly without having to redefine all the materials, lights etc...
The best of both worlds.
Again, Enscape is an incredible program.
It's a shame that such a good program is tarnished by such annoying details.