Posts by knowhere0

It is a well known problem in Revit models that linked or imported CAD files with extents that exceed 20 miles, particularly common with geolocated Civil 3D files, will cause Revit to truncate the accuracy of all objects in the model, effectively corrupting the model. There is no way to undo the damage that is done to the Revit model once a CAD file like this has been imported. Linked cad files on the other hand will not do permanent damage and can be repaired simply by removing the link. The effects include but are not limited to inaccuracies when visually aligning objects, problems with the display and printing of hatches, errors in rotating linked files, etc. This is a common problem with large, inexperienced design teams because there is almost always someone working in the model who is unaware of the problems caused by importing CAD geometry, and when it happens, the project must suffer with the consequences for the remainder of the project which are rarely catastrophic, but constantly annoying, more so because they are completely avoidable, if inexperienced staff would simply ask questions when they don't know what they are doing.

In any case, I'm wondering if anyone knows whether this truncated accuracy has any appreciable effect on Enscape rendering. We've been dealing with a problem recently where an Enscape model has been repeatedly crashing. We suspect it is the usual suspects of out of date GPU drivers, rendering without a section box, and image maps that are too large, but this particular model was also corrupted by an imported CAD file and I'm wondering if this may play a role in these crashes.

We still have users experiencing the problem after installing the 2.8.2 update. Is anyone else experiencing the problem after updating?

This suggestion is really interesting though. One of the longstanding annoyances of RPG content is the representation in hidden line and shaded views. If only Revit would show just one of the outlines, it would be perfect. If there is any way of switching out these mesh views with a simple outline of the object, with maybe a 10% opaque fill inside the outline, that would make Enscape objects really useful in some of our 2D documentation.

I'm finally digging into the asset browser for the first time and we're super excited to finally have an alternative to the hot mess that is the ArchVision monopoly. I was surprised by using the "Planting" category. We won't discontinue using Revit's RPGs, so it would be really helpful to match the categories that Revit uses for non-schedulable content. "Planting" for plants, "Entourage" for people, desk clutter, ephemera. Furniture is a grey area. As others have mentioned above, we're very particular about the furniture we specify and use in our models. I would almost prefer not to have any Enscape furniture available to our users, except for the fact that mesh modeling for soft furniture is much better for visualization than most Revit furniture. Even so, if it is in a schedule, I probably want to use Revit-modeled furniture. Another issue, I would really like to have a way to turn off the Asset Library tool so we can manage that content at a firm-wide level. It would be important to us to ban certain content. It also appears that each time I load content from the Asset Library, it is downloading content from the web. That's a great idea, but we already see some important modifications we MUST make to these assets for them to be usable, but if we're overwriting that content with updates from Enscape, that's going to be a problem.

Here are some of the important changes we need to make to certain families and we would strongly plead that Enscape makes these changes to this content in the next update:

• For certain objects like desk clutter, it would be helpful if they were modeled as face-based families. As an alternative, if you just check "Work Plane-Based" one will have the option at placement to host them on surfaces. PLEASE MAKE THIS CHANGE!
• We would never schedule this sort of ephemera, but we might need to control it separately from plants so we would really prefer that this sort of content be saved in the "Entourage" category. (We don't need this sort of content to be scalable. Scaling is super useful for plants but we shouldn't need to scale people, or clutter if it is modeled accurately in the first place.

• Furniture is a grey area. Often we schedule furniture, in which case, Enscape furniture would be problematic. It would be nice to have a way to substitute certain Revit furniture families with Enscape furniture (categorized as "Furniture") when rendering in Enscape.
• We could really benefit from managing loading of the Asset Library tool for users. We really love the content, and the Asset Library tool works well, but we just want more control over whether and which content gets loaded into our projects.

What I'm looking for is something along the lines of this highly-detailed post by Thomas Schander: https://gpuopen.com/deferred-path-tracing-enscape/ with some indication about how Enscape will be leveraging these Turing technologies. I realize that doesn't materialize overnight, but I'm hoping that over the next few months, Enscape will be as transparent with it's plans as it has been in the past. Like many Enscape clients, we're slowly migrating from Vray to Enscape, which represents a major cultural shift with serious implications for hiring. Any insight you can provide about Enscape's approach that would help us plan for the expertise we should be looking for over the next few years, would be greatly appreciated.

I'm glad to hear that Enscape will be supporting the RTX generation of cards, but will Escape be able to take advantage of the new technologies?

Alex, you should be able to do this with design options.