We had the exact same issue with frosted glass.
Posts by Pieter
-
-
Great new Thomas!
Any insights on whether you might consider this as a good opportunity to decouple glossiness (roughness) from reflectivity? So we can have faint but sharp reflections?
-
I tried using the new physical based assets but they are rendering white in Enscape.
-
fyi: a few screenshots of the new material appearance system in attachment. There seem to be 3 different shaders:
- Physical based Opaque
- Physical based Transparent
- Physical based Metal
At first glance they seem to align more with the Enscape material system, although Enscape only has one setting for reflectivity (roughness) and Revit still offers two (reflectance + roughness). The method with having two options still makes more sense to me (some reflections are faint but sharp).
Another interesting thing: the "relief pattern" supports both "height maps" and "normal maps".
-
Revit 2019 came out today.
It has support for "physical based appearance assets". I wonder whether Enscape is planning to support this type of material? Seems like this is going to be the Revit standard going forward.
-
A basic formit implementation would be really nice. It has gotten a lot better in the last few years and they have an API in place.
-
It's not really doable right now, but you can vote for a roadmap ticket that would allow us to import .fbx or .obj models:
-
There may well be better images in Showcase of Sketchup projects but I think the big reason for that is due to the assets that are readily available from the warehouse and other areas and the ability for Sketchup to map textures. Revit just doesn't have that right now.
Absolutely true, but it sounds like Enscape might be able to offer a solution for that. If .fbx/.obj proxies become avaiable, we can tap into enormous reasonably priced libraries (evermotion, 3dsky, model+model and the likes). Objects that require precise mapping (beds etc) could then be proxied in rather than try to force it in Revit.
Quote from dsmith86We have created some great imagery for projects using Revit solely (a lot of which we cannot share).
We were able to put out some nice results as well and unfortunately can't share them as well. However, it really felt it took much longer compared to a test project we did in Sketchup. There was a lot of photoshopping involved for the Revit project (placing in all the plants and people in photoshop etc).
-
To sum it up: For Revit, we do not plan a material editor, as Clemens already said - because the Revit material editor itself is quite capable.
I see that the material editor could be useful for Rhino - we will search for a solution! Thank you all.
Hey Thomas,
Let me rephrase my concern: we're noticing that almost all top gallery projects were done in Sketchup. I'm not saying it's not doable at all in Revit but it seems to be a lot harder.
What do you guys think is the root cause for this? and do you see any opportunities where the enscape development team could remove some of the hurdles?
It sounds like better material access is off the table. But perhaps we can still hope for fbx or obj proxies so we can have some more detailed content in our renders?
-
just export the rhino model into sketchup and use it to colour in the model
I wish it was that simple
-
@clemens Jonathan
Thanks for your honesty
You're right that the Revit material editor is capable to define all the necessary parameters. However, it's not user friendly (Tomson is giving a great example).
I fear by not offering the same functionality on all platforms, some Enscape integrations are going to be superior to others. In the long run, we should be able to get the same results in Revit as others are doing in Revit. Almost all top projects in the gallery come from Sketchup. That's a testament to the quality of the Enscape integration, but also a testament that Revit and Rhino users will need some extra help to get to the same quality level.
Part of the challenge is being able to get good quality entourage (3d people), vegetation and props (cushions, books,...) in Revit or Rhino (proxies like .fbx or .obj would help with this).
But it's also about having easy access to the parameters that Enscape needs to produce a nice result. An enscape material editor would help with that.
I realize that these are problems caused by Revit or Rhino (because their material editors suck). I'm hoping you guys will find a fix, just like you fixed the lack of a native sketchup material editor
-
Our IT people have asked for this as well.
-
Hey Enscape team, any updates on whether this is being considered for the next cycle?
-
Display More
Hi Simon Weinberger ,
May I ask if there's any update on proxies for Rhino? Or if there's anything scheduled for them?
It's hard to do vegetation without them...
Thanks!
@Bodgan: consider adding your vote to the roadmap idea for proxies for Revit and Rhino: https://trello.com/c/c8sr4eaB/91-load-proxies-from-file
-
I would like to see this as well, as an additional option in the material editor. There's a trello ticket for it @https://trello.com/c/vzAk8Xds/…ge-materials-from-enscape
However, Enscape should really first make the Enscape material editor available for all applications so all users can benefit from these features.
-
Yeah we never really confirmed that was really the cause.
We had everyone on the same revit version, but the team was using different enscape versions sometime.
-
we've seen the same issue. We thought it might be because there were members of the team that were still on the old version.
-
Thanks Jonathan for adding this on the trello board.
Please vote this up if you'd like to render out lines! https://trello.com/c/lPCgpuP2/98-displaying-model-lines
-
There's a ticket on the trello board for this now so please vote it up! https://trello.com/c/lPCgpuP2/98-displaying-model-lines
-
Definitely a +1 on having (model)lines render on a per material basis + having the round edge feature.
Although both would probably require that the Enscape material editor be available in Revit and Rhino as well (the native material UI does not support these type of features).
