Posts by Pieter

REMINDER! If you encounter any issues with Enscape (e.g. crashes, 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.

    Yes


    In the first step, that might be the case. But I also think we should come up with a silhouette like preview of it.


    Thank you, we will take that into our consideration, I think it's similar to what Pieter suggested.


    Sounds great.


    If Enscape could have a button "show proxies in canvas" (which would check out a license) we would use Enscape even when we're not doing visualization, prompting us to up our license count :) It could be a way to increase revenue. We've been wanting for a decent way to show high poly objects like vegetation/people etc in our canvas for a long time.


    Also, it would be amazing if all Enscape implementations (sketchup/rhino/revit) could share one common Enscape proxy solution (library). We move projects from one platform to another all the time (unfortunately :/ ). Our teams have been very excited they could work in Sketchup and then move to Revit (or often the other way) and still produce the same style of visuals. Clients never know we switched design tools.

    Impressive stuff, also very good looking in the Revit window!


    How may faces does one tree have? What's the dynamo mode you're using to get it from dynamo to revit?


    What's the impact on performance?


    Thomas Willberger :


    We'd definitely be interested in a subscription style library for an added fee, but we wouldn't like being locked into a proxy system where we can't add our own content as well. Are you considering a system where we can have both shipped content + custom proxies?


    This is one of the reasons why Lumion and Twinmotion are not as attractive to us: you're paying a lot of money because it comes with these big libraries, but only a small percentage of the offered content is useful to us. As designers we want to be free to create our own visual style if you will. For trees and plants we'd probably turn to shipped content, but for people, furniture, props etc we would almost certainly want to have custom items selected from places like 3dsky etc.


    Another interesting question: have you guys found any way to draw proxy content inside the Revit canvas. I guess you could only draw the bouding box but that would make it really hard to place objects, especially when there are a lot of them. Perhaps an option where we see a lightweight collision mesh or even a lowpoly version drawn by using the directcontext3d api in Revit? (although that same trick won't work in Enscape or Rhino).

    The challenge with a bunch of advanced settings is that we still have to maintain them to make sure all possible combinations do not break Enscape.


    Perhaps you can get rid of Ambient Brightness with better tonemapping?


    For the record: we tried the .exr and it has helped. However, one of the major things that our designers love about Enscape is the real time feedback which speeds up their production a lot. With .exr that's lost. Also the .exr does not really work for video, 360's or real time walkthroughs.

    Thanks Thomas!


    I appreciate you have to keep a difficult balance between easy of use VS exposing max of parameters, and you guys have done a great job with that so far.


    That said, better tonemapping is on our top 2 priority list (together with a proxy/library system), so it's great to read you are thinking of ways to move forward on this :)

    Hey Simon,


    Perhaps it could make sense to create a list of changes that Enscape could safely ignore. It might be that the API does not allow for distinguishing these events from other events but you never know:


    - changes to the properties of a view (scale, ...) that is not the active view that Enscape is looking at

    - changes to legends can never have geometry consequences

    - changes to sheets can never have geometry consequences

    - all changes to annotations: dimensions, text, regions, tags, ...

    I wonder whether it's feasible to introduce highlight compressing.


    One of the problems we have with our interiors is that we really need to crank up the exposure and ambient brightness to get enough light inside (often we don't have time to set up interior lighting). That works great, BUT it really washes out the areas in and around the windows...


    Corona has a great feature called "highlight compression" and "filmic highlights". Both seem to fix the issue of the burned out areas incredibly well.


    Any chance we can get something similar in Enscape?


    See screenshot in attachment for examples.

    Awesome work! I did a (very quick) test of both the PBR support and the fix for the specular range.


    Exactly what we wanted!


    The new Revit material shaders are much more intuitive to work with than the old ones. One slider for reflection, one for roughness. Everyone can understand that :)


    We have filed a request with Autodesk to have the ability to easily switch between shaders in the Revit material window (right now the only way to switch between Opaque or Metal for example, it so change the material with one from the library and start over with your settings). I'd be great if you guys could also file a similar request with Autodesk (see example in attachment).

    Thanks for your reply Thomas!


    So it sounds like Scenario 1 is going to get resolved.


    However, what we are really more interested in creating scenario 2 in Enscape. How can we simulate what we see in Unreal in Enscape? Will fixing Scenario 1 also fix scenario 2?


    Perhaps a different way of explaining: It sounds like unreal and enscape both assume almost 1 for specular on F90, but we're getting very clear reflections on F45 with very low values of specular (3%), while we don't see the same in Unreal (see comparison here below, same albedo). It seems like Enscape and Unreal interpolate the values between F0 and F90 differently (if interpolating is even the right word).


    I don't know if any of this makes sense. We're obviously not PBR experts, we're just having trouble realizing some material effects that seem to be fairly simple in Unreal. Perhaps we're missing something here.



    There seems to be a difference between how we understood PBR and how Enscape handles it. I'm going to take the Unreal Engine as an example to compare Enscape to:


    Scenario 1

    • In Unreal, when you set Roughness, metallic and specular all to 0 = you get no reflections (expected)
    • In Enscape, when you set roughness, metallic and specular all to 0 = you still get reflections (not expected) see screenshots


    Scenario 2


    • In unreal, when you set roughness and metallic to 0 and specular to 0.1 = you get faint but sharp reflections (expected)
    • In Enscape faint but sharp reflections seems impossible to achieve?

    Hey Thomas,


    Quick question: I assume that the sketchup material editor is the best 1 to 1 match with how Enscape handles materials.


    In the reflection section, I see a slider for "roughness", "metallic" and "specular".


    1) I don't see a slider for "reflectance" like the new Revit PBR materials have. To what are you going to map this parameter?

    2) Is there some documentation on what each (sketchup) material parameter does so we can gain a better understanding of how Enscape interprets material values?


    Kind of confused by the whole PBR thing. Every engine seams to claim to be PBR, yet they all have slightly different parameters :)

    We will improve the reflection quality in an upcoming release but still some objects could be missing due to a performance tradeoff. It depends on the object size vs polycount.

    Interesting, Does that mean we will get better reflections if we section-box the model to only one room VS having the entire model on?