Isn't it time for Revit to have an Enscape Material Editor & Substance PBR support?

Reminder: If you encounter any issues with Enscape (including installation problems) or your subscription please reach out to our dedicated support team directly through the Help Center or by using the Feedback button as detailed here. Thank you for your understanding.
  • I know there are discussions on this and feature requests, but I haven't seen any commitments to go in this direction.


    Enscape has beautiful interior lighting which still keeps me paying the subscription for interior renderings, but for exteriors, we need more flexibility and Twinmtion/Lumion are getting good enough to justify moving away. Is there enough control with the Revit SDK APIs to do something more powerful for setting up scenes? Like global commands to apply a texture to your selection and override Revit? How about native PBR support for the great architectural library that Substance Source has? It's really tedious to export to bitmaps and then go back to tweak them. I hope we see some development in this direction as working in native Revit for exteriors is really becoming untenable.

    • Official Post

    I know there are discussions on this and feature requests, but I haven't seen any commitments to go in this direction.


    Enscape has beautiful interior lighting which still keeps me paying the subscription for interior renderings, but for exteriors, we need more flexibility and Twinmtion/Lumion are getting good enough to justify moving away. Is there enough control with the Revit SDK APIs to do something more powerful for setting up scenes? Like global commands to apply a texture to your selection and override Revit? How about native PBR support for the great architectural library that Substance Source has? It's really tedious to export to bitmaps and then go back to tweak them. I hope we see some development in this direction as working in native Revit for exteriors is really becoming untenable.

    Thank you - you can be assured that I'll be gladly forwarding your feedback accordingly. At the moment there is no ETA when / or if we'll implement it, but thank you for your post so that we know that there is an increased demand for this. :)

  • I was just about to ask a similar question.

    Would it be possible to implement textures (cfr. Quixel Megascans) into a material editor (not like Revit) to show up in Enscape?

    This is the only feature that stands between 3D and supreme realism.

    The material settings in Revit are totally prehistoric and not even worth asking Autodesk to update this, but if you guys could create a material editor plugin which gives all the available settings like you have in the Quixel bridge: albedo map, displacement map, normal and bump maps, rougness, etc. I honestly think you will outsmart all your competition.

  • I was just about to ask a similar question.

    Would it be possible to implement textures (cfr. Quixel Megascans) into a material editor (not like Revit) to show up in Enscape?

    This is the only feature that stands between 3D and supreme realism.

    The material settings in Revit are totally prehistoric and not even worth asking Autodesk to update this, but if you guys could create a material editor plugin which gives all the available settings like you have in the Quixel bridge: albedo map, displacement map, normal and bump maps, rougness, etc. I honestly think you will outsmart all your competition.

    Yes a plugin that allows Enscape material application and editing direct to revit assets etc teamed with resources like Quixel is worth some extra Coin and thought

    • Official Post

    Thank you both Magimes , CLL123 , I have gladly forwarded your feedback accordingly of course.

  • I was just about to ask a similar question.

    Would it be possible to implement textures (cfr. Quixel Megascans) into a material editor (not like Revit) to show up in Enscape?

    This is the only feature that stands between 3D and supreme realism.

    The material settings in Revit are totally prehistoric and not even worth asking Autodesk to update this, but if you guys could create a material editor plugin which gives all the available settings like you have in the Quixel bridge: albedo map, displacement map, normal and bump maps, rougness, etc. I honestly think you will outsmart all your competition.

    Of all of the parameters listed above (bold) the only one that Revit doesn't handle natively is displacement maps. If there's enough contrast in a given material I would recommend not creating a grayscale albedo map. Rather, use the same material again for bump. Displacement maps would be very useful and present implementation is inelegant.


    Please illustrate / describe what you're trying to accomplish using Revit that can't be done.


    Overwhelmingly users do not want Enscape to override settings in Revit that can result in unintended coordination issues.

  • I thought I saw a Revit material editor in the 3.1 road map?


    I agree with Phil above---I get a bit nervous thinking about Enscape taking over the 'Asset' tab in the material editor. That said, the Revit asset tab is AWFUL. Just awful. No redeeming value. I'd be curious to see how an Enscape material work work in Revit---especially if we are sharing the model with somebody who does not have Enscape.

  • I thought I saw a Revit material editor in the 3.1 road map?


    I agree with Phil above---I get a bit nervous thinking about Enscape taking over the 'Asset' tab in the material editor. That said, the Revit asset tab is AWFUL. Just awful. No redeeming value. I'd be curious to see how an Enscape material work work in Revit---especially if we are sharing the model with somebody who does not have Enscape.

    I thought the materials in revit are just a short hand version of MEntal Ray if they are mental ray couldnt they be as complex as Max versions? Also if an Enscape material editor allows modifications of mental ray in ore complexity but the native revit dialogue only sees what they allow technically shouldnt that not affect the base use if shared?