Posts by Pieter

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 Support button as detailed here. Thank you for your understanding.

    What they need to do instead, is move the settings of "Rendering Style", "Camera Projection Mode", "Field of View", "Depth of Field" and "Skybox Rotation" to the same Camera Scene Properties, where you can adjust camera XYZ and Sun position. Those 5 properties have nothing to do in the general menus. They are very specific things that should be connected to Scenes, not presets.

    As far as I'm concerned, exposure should also be per camera/per view. Or at least be able to override it per scene.

    4. To get a bit more technical: With 3.4 we have rebuilt the Sketchup plugin to a large extent so that we have a uniform interface between Renderer+UI and all CAD plugins. In the past, the textures from the Sketchup materials were written to the disk using functions in the Sketchup SDK.

    From 3.4 and onward we do that ourselves for all CADs that use bitmap textures like Sketchup, e.g. Vectorworks. This in turn can contribute to that added delay.


    Does this also apply to Revit? Because we saw a noticeable performance decrease of the material editor since 3.4 in Revit as well. I filed a few bug reports about this but none of them went anywhere (supposedly not reproduceable). But I've read so many accounts of the same problem on this forum, that I'm pretty sure the issue was with whatever changed in 3.4 and not user error. We didn't suddenly start using all 4k textures since 3.4. In fact, if we open the same models in 3.3 or lower, the material editor is noticeable faster.

    I used the feedback button, described my problem. And the answer i got was that i had to downscale all my textures to 2K (i haven't done that). Theres must be an issue with the 3.5.1 because it works perfectly on 3.4.4...

    From my experience, the support people that you reach through the feedback button always assume it's user error. It must be either your driver, your setup, your hardware, your project, ... I have stopped submitted feedback through the feedback button because it's a complete waste of time.


    The support staff on the forum here (like Demian Gutberlet and others) are luckily much better :) . I wish there was a way to direct my logs directly to them and skip the feedback portal altogether.

    Issue 1) Design Options.

    Whenever I set up a 'saved view' in Enscape it somehow links it to whichever Design Option that are active at the moment. Meaning that when I choose a certain Saved View, not only does it change to the Saved View, but also change to whatever Design Option that were active when the view was saved. I can not find any solution to the problem I hope that somebody knows of a consistent work-around.

    This is a Revit thing. If you create a new view while inside a design option (regardless of whether that happens through Enscape or you doing it manually in the Revit interface), it will be assigned to that design option. You can re-assign the view back to the main model by doing the following steps:
    - open the view in Revit

    - in the Revit properties palette, find the "visible in option" parameter

    - set it back to 'none'


    Issue 2) Synchronization.

    Sometimes Enscape is 'understood' as an element by Revit - meaning that when we are two people working simultaneously in the same Revit file AND Enscape it is close to unworkable due to having to constantly having to synchronize. In other words; it is as if, we are two people trying to move the same element (EG. a wall) at the same time. The issue is not as frequent, BUT when it occurs it is a very insisting..

    This is due to a design fault in Enscape. They are aware of the issue (myself and countless other users have reported it), but unfortunately very little action has been taken to resolve it. You can make it a tiny bit better by using version 3.4.4 or later and making sure every user is signed into Enscape using their Enscape account, but it's not going to make a major difference.


    Hopefully your post here will remind the Enscape developers that this Revit worksharing issue thing is a huge pain, and it needs to be fixed ASAP.

    This is yet another demonstration that the current preset system is the opposite of discoverable and intuitive.


    The fact that I have to explain the system to every single new Enscape user we've ever had, tells you all you need to know.

    Does this mean we will or will not be able to change a wood to a marble? You say 'will have more assets with adjustable colors AND materials', but from your second paragraph, I understand it's really only color overrides that we will be able to do?

    Now that 3.5 is out, I guess I can answer my own question. It seems some assets have predefined materials that can be swapped out. For example this chair has a few different types of wood.


    This isn't going to be useful, and in my opinion does not address the root of the 'make asset materials adjustable' feature request. We need to be able to pick ourselves. For example, why can I not pick a different type of wood, like pine? Or why can I not stain it black? These are finishes that actually exist for this particular chair.


    Also, these predefined materials' thumbnails look almost identical. At first I thought I was looking at a bug. The red overlay also makes it impossible to see what the material modifications look like. You need to apply every time you make a change, evaluate, reselect the asset, click on 'edit asset' again and make another modification. Ugh.


    Completely and utterly missed the mark in my opinion.


    The advantage of Duplicate as Generic allows materials, etc. to remain. However, this creates a duplicate material - the user still has to manually move the material assignments to the new generic material. :( On the other hand, if you change the appearance type to generic, all the objects with the material assigment are maintained - but you'll still have to remap textures.

    Hey Phil,


    Not sure I understand. Duplicating the appearance asset as generic does not create a new material, nor does it require the users to reassign material assignments.


    All it does is make a new material asset and assign it to the active material. It's true that the old appearance asset stays behind in the model, but that's also the case for the 'replace asset' workflow you described in post #12.

    Maybe I am missing something, but it seems like in order to edit a material in the Enscape material editor you need to reset its appearance to be generic, then you would need to find the image previously assigned to it and add it back to the now generic material.

    Why not use the 'duplicate as generic' feature in Revit? That can convert a non-generic appareance tab to a generic appearance tab, while keeping most maps and settings intact.


    So far I haven't found any steps to reproduce it, but I have had multiple users report it on different types of models. It's happening for users using both a geforce 3070 and 3080. Some users have reported that it happened for them after syncing to the Revit central, so until now I was assuming this was a Revit-only bug, but I thought andybot is using Sketchup, so might be unrelated to the specific platform after all.

    You might remember the meeting that we had a few weeks back. We explained why the functionality will only be in a very late Preview and that there will not be a lot time to make adjustments for the release besides bug fixing.

    I have not forgotten, but I was under NDA ;)


    I am confused about this:

    So for the release we will have more assets with adjustable colors and materials. We are currently also planning to ship new (or reworked) assets every month for the rest of the year.


    We decided against doing detailed adjustments in the materials that are used in assets for now. So no, you will not be able to change maps individually.


    Does this mean we will or will not be able to change a wood to a marble? You say 'will have more assets with adjustable colors AND materials', but from your second paragraph, I understand it's really only color overrides that we will be able to do?


    If so, this custom asset functionality is almost completely useless for our use case. The only type of assets I have found myself wanting to tweak just the colors of are the vehicles. For every other types of assets where I need to modify the materials, it almost always involves swapping texture maps. Swap fabric to leather. Swap marble to wood. Swap oak to pine. Etc.


    For me, the 'asset types' is the least interesting feature in terms of asset customization because it doesn't really add anything that wasn't possible before. Rather then having asset types, these assets could have also been published as separate assets. Granted, it would make the library a bit more crowded, but that's it. The asset modifications (like material overrides) is where the real value is IMHO.


    Given this, the only 3.5 feature that am excited about is the hidden edges for assets in Revit, which in all honesty is almost entirely a Revit feature (plugins only needed to change a few lines of code to take advantage of this new Revit feature). I know because I made a plugin that does something similar to the Enscape assets, and it only took me two lines of code to turn my triangulated assets into non-triangulated assets.


    Brutally honest: if 3.5 didn't have those two lines of code for hidden triangulation of assets, I don't think I would consider upgrading. I realize reflections have improved significantly, but that's only relevant for a very small percentage of our shots (I guess we don't render mirrors often).


    PS: I submitted a bug report for preview 18 where some of my assets are rendering as black in the custom asset editor, which makes it impossible to adjust the materials. The same assets work fine in 3.4.4. I do hope this will get fixed before the release. Otherwise there's no way we can use this new version.

    Materials use a lot of memory too. Another method to temporarily ignore materials (without breaking links to the materials) is to overwrite the Proposed Phase with a solid color. Revit will ignore the real Appearance material and the model will appear solid. Now start Enscape.

    I tested two views, one with all materials overridden and one with regular materials, but the startup times are the same (the one with materials even loaded slightly faster).


    Check the materials in your custom material folder. What's the total folder size and are there any large textures (4k) that represent a small sample size? I once found myself troubleshooting a customers project with a lid and texture that would've been about 2" x 2" in the real world, and it was a 4K texture assigned throughout the project. Slowed everything down.

    I think we can safely rule out textures being the issue here. Originally we had 1gb of textures loaded into my test model but removing all of them barely made a dent in the project performance or stability.


    I appreciate the suggestions of users trying to rule out user error. I'm not ruling it out completely, but we have been working with Enscape for +5 years now and these problems have only appeared since version 3.4. Could still be user error, but I think we should also be open to the possibility of an issue with the newer versions of Enscape with specific setups, for example something specific to large Revit BIM360 projects.


    What would be most helpful for me now is other users' sharing their statistics: When working on large Revit workshared models (+1gb with loaded links), what has your experience been with 3.4 and the preview versions? And how does it compare to earlier versions (3.3 and even going back to 2.9)?


    I am using 3.5 preview 17 in REVIT 2024 .... and it is not showing yet the 'hidden triangulation edges on Enscape assets'

    The hidden triangulation is working for me with Revit 2024 and Enscape preview 17. But it only works for newly loaded assets in projects. It will not work for example when you upgrade a project that has assets in them that were placed with Enscape 3.4. That's not an Enscape limitation but a Revit one though.

    What Phil said, +, I know this is not always a fair question, but is your hardware the best your can afford, and or TOTL? Also, I do not model 12 story structures, but I do model very heavy models (15k s.f. highly detailed custom content rez with fully developed topographical sites in model (5 acre), and all elevational hardscape/landscape attached), and even when mine are drunk with a couple of hundred plants/trees, all on/rendering , my load times are never more than a minute or so. I have to believe part of that is now that I'm playing in the textured real-time 3d environ, I did decide to go nuts on the hardware, and it has made such a huge difference.

    We are using Razer laptops. Intel(R) Core(TM) i7-10875H CPU @ 2.30GHz 2.30 GHz with 64gb of ram and an rtx3070. I'm not sure if that qualifies as 'top of the line', but I think it's reasonable.


    It's interesting to hear that you are experiencing a different startup time. In what program are you working? I'm wondering if it could be that Enscape just got a lot slower in some programs but not in others. Or with specific setups, for example a Revit model with links in it. It would be great if others could also share the startup times they are experiencing.


    Thanks for the tip on HWInfo. I used a similar tool years ago but haven't tested it on Enscape. I will keep an eye on the temperatures.


    On the other hand, I think are laptops are reasonably powered and Enscape is a consumer tool for the broad market, so I think if our computers turn out to be underpowered, there's a good argument to be made that Enscape needs to do more optimizing so it runs better on reasonably spec'd hardware. I think that's a big part of our frustration: similarly sized and detailed models, used to run a LOT faster and smoother in Enscape, with fewer crashes, just a few years ago. Yes I appreciate more features and render quality, but not at the expense of crashes or rapidly escalating loading times.

    What's the file size (all combined models) and how many models? Try turning off the links and starting Enscape. Let's rule out something weird in one of the files.

    660mb + about 1gb in linked files. So 1.7gb in total. 800Mb of these links are optional and usually not loaded into Enscape. I have made a detached model to experiment and removed all unnecessary links, so the model is down to 660mb+200mb in links. But the loading times are still the same and seem to vary between 7min at the fastest and 16min at the slowest (loading the exact same view with the same worksets loaded).


    - Textures take up a lot of memory. Dropbox is fine. Your materials are stored on a locally sync'd folder right?

    I thought it might be related with that, but I broke all texture paths intentionally so no textures are loaded anymore, and the loading times seem to be the same.



    - Create a new default 3d View. Turn off everything that's not geometry (including linked files): Scope Boxes, Levels, 2D CAD files, etc. Start Enscape. How long does it take to open?

    None of this seems to be make a difference unfortunately.