Should I stay with Enscape?

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.
  • I'm not talking about material changes, only assets visibility. For material/model changes you would use the D5 livesync to Sketchup and change the visibility of the materials/door handles as you would similar to Enscape. The process isn't exactly 1:1 with Enscape, but all the features D5 has(plus cheaper) that Enscape is missing outweighs clicking a extra button once or twice.


    You can certainly hide unhide separate objects and tags in each individual scene in D5, all you need are some adjustments and additions to your existing Enscape pipeline.

  • I'm confused Tearch , why do you spend any of your valuable time here ... a forum dedicated to "a half-baked program that costs you an arm and leg"?

    Surely we're lost souls beyond saving and your time would be better spent on the enlightened ones in the D5/Twinmotion/Unreal forums?

  • I know it can be useful to complain here, the developers should be aware of problems with the software. I disagree with the "half-baked" insult though. As Paul points out, most of us have figured out a functional and efficient workflow with Enscape, and the developers seem reasonably responsive to issues that significantly effect usage. Whether Enscape has all the bells and whistles that some newer software heavily promotes doesn't detract from the work most of us are able to accomplish with Enscape.

  • Let me address these in order.

    why do you spend any of your valuable time here

    Because up until around a year ago I was a huge Enscape supporter. Then for no publicly known reason they decided to take a complete 180 and move from product development to increased client acquisition. Even though I am very critical of Enscape, I still want it to be a great program. If everyone displeased with this program jumps ship and nobody stays behind to hold a fire under their butts how do you expect there to be any change? Maybe you don't want change, that's fair, but a number of well established people on here have recently voiced their displeasure with the program and there's a reason behind that.

    enlightened ones in the D5/Twinmotion/Unreal forums?

    I am on their forums. Thus far, D5 has not made a misstep in my opinion to the caliber Enscape has, which is why there are no threads like this one over there. If they make a bad move in their developmental timeline I'll be just as harsh. You will find no rendering brand loyalty here and if a better program comes out tomorrow, I'll be on their waiting list to get it. That being said I'm no holds barred when it comes to pointing out companies shortsightedness.

    Paul Russam I have never and will never tell you not to use this program. If it works for you, it works for you and you should keep using it. I just don't take to kindly to someone bashing a program they haven't fully committed to adapting to.

    I disagree with the "half-baked" insult though.

    So in the current day, with the releases of 4.0.1 your telling me the video creator, site context, saved views/sun position, reflections, Rhino lighting, and custom asset libraries are all perfectly developed? I don't expect every new feature to be complete the second it comes out, but it's been years since many of those features have been touched and they are far from their desired usefulness. Enscape as of May 2024 is half-baked, sorry but it is.

    most of us have figured out a functional and efficient workflow with Enscape,

    As said above, if it works for you, it works for you. :thumbup:

    the developers seem reasonably responsive to issues that significantly effect usage.

    They are responsive to the copious amounts of bugs in their supposedly stable releases. Post anything critical of their developmental focus and all you get is crickets from official accounts. To be clear, they don't have to respond to any posts they don't want to respond to, that is well within their right. But that does say a lot about whats going on when pre-2020 a response would be made to threads with criticism addressing it.

    andybot Like I said to Paul, if you are happy with where the program is, keep using it.

    Some people aren't happy that they are locked into yearly subscriptions for double the price *cough* random price increases not aligning with any major updates *cough* of competitors; while Enscape is simultaneously putting very little visible effort into keeping up with said competitors. Most of them, like me, have switched to other options because holding multiple subscriptions for comparable products isn't viable. People with that kind of perspective still need to be heard.

  • Dude (?) I've been working with (against?) Revit for the best part of 15 years - should I have pivotted to another product when Autodesk dried up development MANY years ago? Almost certainly...

    ...but where would that leave me today? At the blunt-end of championing a tool (like.... Blender?) fighting the tide of commercial interest, or I dunno, somewhere approximating a level of mastery where the tool does not prohibit my work whatsover

    We can debate sunk-cost-fallacy vs investment all day long, but as Paul Russam asks, why bother?

    Companies (software ones especially) need to adjust/adapt at a-rate-of-change we, as customers, can seldom fathom.

    As customers we can only vote with our feet/wallets - so all the very best with your complaints/adventures/etc.

    (does it show that I watched the Blackberry movie last night?)

  • Maybe I'm jaded by observing many years of software development, but perhaps the question is "half-baked" for whom? I think Enscape is just fine for the majority of their target market and will likely never satisfy the rendering power-users. I've tried a number of other software packages over the years (including D5, though not recently) and it always comes back to a calculated balance of render speed/cost/user effort/output. I'd love to use V-Ray again, but cost and render time just can't match Enscape. Maybe I'll try D5 again and see if effort/output are improved since the last time I used it, as they are currently better on cost, equal on speed, and by the discussion here may potentially be better on output.

  • the question is "half-baked" for whom?

    That's is a valid question.

    Determining if something is half-baked, I break it into a 50/50 split between what the user base was asking for and/or whether the tool fundamentally works. For example, lighting Enscape from Rhino just doesn't work, therefore it's half-baked. On the other hand, changing Enscape assets colors does work, but wasn't to the extent people were asking for and is limited to a select few assets, therefore it too is half-baked for a different reason. On the other end of the split, if a user only needs to change one assets color and that asset allows it, it doesn't seem half-baked to them; but it's frustrating to the broader user base who saw "asset color changing" on the voting portal, which they had been asking(and outlining exactly what they want) for months, to have it implemented and only affect a limited number of assets and not the assets that need the function.

    I find that a number of features have long and fairly unanimous threads on how the user base would have liked to see said feature implemented but never reach that bar. In fact, when they are implemented initially they are rarely updated/fixed. Again, I need to reiterate that the company has no obligation to modify any features based on the forums wishes and it does take time to get it right. It gets frustrating when you see the competition nailing feature integration right off the bat and Enscape is dragging its feet to keep up.

    Enscape is just fine for the majority of their target market and will likely never satisfy the rendering power-users

    I've seen this sentence or a similar rephrasing of it be brought up a number of times on this forum. That sentiment would make complete sense if Enscape was a one time purchase, but it's not. In order to stay in business Enscape needs to keep at least a minimum number of subscribers to the program.

    If as soon as you reach "X" level of live rendering expertise you are looking elsewhere to spend your subscription money on another program, Enscape has failed. They shouldn't be catering to either extreme on the bell curve of the live rendering market, but right now the later half has very little to work with. There will always be less experienced people entering the market looking for a easy program to get into, but people gain experience at a faster rate then those entering the market.

    Just like how every MLM eventually fails because the rate of new users falls below the climb of people moving up the business chain. Let me be clear, Enscape is not a MLM, it offers a useful product to its users, but keeping a customer is better in the long run than acquiring a new one that's eventually going to leave. Writing off the latter X% of experienced users as a lost cause is not a smart approach by Enscape if that's their modus operandi .

    it always comes back to a calculated balance of render speed/cost/user effort/output.

    Again, if you like the program, use the program. This is not a personal attack against anyone using Enscape. It's a criticism of the publicly apparent priorities of the company.

    I am not the moral arbiter of what Enscape needs to be focusing on. I am just someone who saw potential for Enscape, but has since been burned by the lack of useful feature updates and the cost increases. Back in 2017 there was no competition to Enscape (yes, Lumion existed but was outrageously expensive). Since competition has arisen in the form of twinmotion, D5, ect.., Enscape can't just expect to sit back and stay in the lead if they don't keep advancing the way the market wants it to.

  • I have been battling Enscape for years. Here are my 2 cents.

    1) Enscape is only successful in large Architecture firms due to its capabilities to have multi users at once inside Revit. The day will soon come when a software like D5, or Twinmotion will have those capabilities and once that happens its game over for Enscape for Revit. Full stop. Everyone knows all other rendering software's are lightyears superior but Architecture firms cant afford to jump outside into a standalone rendering engine each time they need some visualizations. That to me is the only thing keeping Enscape alive.

    2) Cost. It is unbelievable that they charge $1000.00 USD per license for this software, PER YEAR!. Corona costs half that, Twinmotion is still free <$1million ($500 for revenue higher) and I cannot understand why. We are spending close to $50k a year on this software that feels underfunded, and underdeveloped. For the amount of money we spend, I expect some critically important updates at least once a year. Every other software that we spend less on have blown us away with their updates so the cost feels appropriate to us.

    3) Revit & Enscape is like a marriage going through counseling and its only getting worse. Revit is inherently a frustrating software when it comes to visualization. That's because it is a documentation software, not a visualization software. Throw Enscape in the mix and it cripples the workflow, and therefore productivity. Constant crashes, freezes, loss of settings and cameras, all without a proper error log. It takes user ages to do any task. Not because they do not know what they are doing, its just the tools feel so antiquated. Not everyone at our firm has a super fast computer, and watching them struggle is like nails on a chalkboard. I feel so bad knowing that any other visualization tool would be far more enjoyable. To be honest, Enscape makes creating visualizations frustrating and 1+1 never = 2 when using it. We've adopted a workflow to counter that. We let Enscape do about 40% of the work then we finish it off in PSD when we can. Its sad that at $1000.00 USD a year we wont even use it to its full capabilities.

    4) Nothing in the roadmap warrants the cost. Nothing. Check for yourself.…al/tabs/18-in-development

    5) If the game plan is to move everyone to Vray, please just tell us. We can prepare for, and move all 50 users to it sooner rather than later.

    6) To some other users posts, yes there are some power users who can create amazing results on a regular basis but when asked their process they still come back to saying how much they dislike Enscape because of the inefficiencies and time investment just to get a decent image. Again, 1+1 rarely = 2 when using Revit and Enscape.

    7) Please create "Enscape lights" Separate to Revit, Rhino, SU. Just Enscape unique lights that are use directly inside the Enscape window. That would be revolutionary for your software and keep many people from jumping ship.

    It might sound like I am anti-Enscape. I am to some degree, but its more frustration than anything. I see so many other software going full steam ahead and leaving Enscape in the dust and that gap is growing bigger and bigger to a point I don't think Enscape can ever recover if they don't make some serious changes. I've had to educate all of our architects and designers to only think of Enscape as a helpful little buddy that can give you a little nudge across the finish line. Never expect it to do anything else. Our clients, principals, owners, and day to day users are sick of the Enscape look and want something more. They are not stupid, they see what else is being created and the have every single right to expect it at $50,000 USD per year (and growing).

    So to end my rant, issue 1) Is the only thing keeping Enscape afloat here in our office. I feel within the next three years some other software will offer up up real-time collaboration visualization within Revit and when it does we will move without question.