Posts by happymilk

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.

    Me too.
    An annoying problem

    Thanks a lot! If it's not adding too much extra effort could you share the scene (or any download links) with me via a direct message too? I'm just asking because Clemens is out-of-office for today and this way I can have a look directly myself as well. Otherwise if this actually takes too much of your time no worries at all.

    Hi Demian,

    no problem.

    I've just sent you a DM

    Thanks a lot


    Hi happymilk , thanks a lot for the report - Is there any chance you could share this scene with us (or just affected parts of it) so we can troubleshoot this right away? If possible (and the scene might be confidential) you can simply share any download link via a direct message as well after uploading.

    Feel free to use any upload provider of your choice or something like Thanks a lot in advance.

    Hi Demian,

    This issue appears on a scene that was already been a subject of a post in this forum

    In that occasion I've directly sent a SKP file to Clemens via direct message.

    Now I wrote a direct message to Clemens with the link of this new problem and I attend his reply


    I have an issue with the last preview 6.

    with Enscape version 3.5.6, the reflection of a metal in a mirror was correct.

    With version 4 preview 6 the reflection is much darker than it should appear.

    Note: The mirror surface has the normal inverted because version 3.5.6 suffered from an issue that did not eliminate some objects in the reflection with very heavy scenes.

    I tried to put the normal back on the right way but nothing changed. I always see the metal surface darker than in reality.

    Hi Demian, is very good to hear you about a new version after a long time.

    I just did a little test and it seems that the global illumination is more precise than before (very good) although I will have to set the power of the emissive materials again because now they shoot much more light.

    Little problem: i cannot do batch rendering because of this message.

    (i have already set the path for saving the images)

    Any idea?

    Update (after a few days):
    Uninstalled. Never seen a beta bugged like this. ?(

    In my opinion, Enscape gave up being a program for making "beautiful renderings to sell" when it was purchased by Chaos, becoming a good previsualizer for those who design and want to "tell" their idea to the client before passing the project to the graphic that will make it photorealistic with V-ray.

    This makes sense to me. If I were in Chaos I probably would have made the same decision. Unfortunately my work requires the speed (and flexibility) of Enscape and the quality of V-ray. Or, if it is not possible to have the quality of V-ray, I should at least be able to get close to that of D5 with its thousand features to have much more engaging videos.

    If it weren't for a disastrous workflow I would have already switched to D5, because I can't afford the Enscape + V-ray alternative in terms of cost and time to invest.

    If I'm honest, I miss the times when Enscape wasn't under the wing of Chaos and constantly improving from release to release. Now it seems like the updates are slow, modest, and mostly dedicated to making data transition from Esncape to V-ray seamless.

    At least you can live sync it so if you need to make a change then you just do it in sketchup, but yes, the tags issue is a bit of a problem.

    Hi Grizzier

    The tags issue is one of the issues I would have with the D5.

    Worse is the fact that Enscape saves material information within the .skp file and D5 does not.

    This means that I cannot fill my project with objects taken from my libraries within Sketchup, but I must necessarily convert everything for D5 assets and then add objects in that interface.

    A little nightmare for me who creates images of commercial shops with tons of custom objects.

    In my opinion D5 produces better images than Enscape, has more features and is cheaper.

    Unfortunately i don't like the workflow with Sketchup and some things are very annoying (D5 does not recognize the Sketchup tags and puts all the geometries in a one object).

    The D5 "strange" workflow is the only reason becouse i stay with Enscape, but i don't know in future.

    I know that Chaos doesn't want to fight with D5 in the quality and feautures arena, but in my opinion it is losing too much time and seems that it doesn't mind.

    Thanks a lot for your report. Looking at the images I think that's not a denoising problem, but probably the emissive(?) geometry not being visible anymore. This could be related to other changes behind the scenes that involve the data structures used for ray tracing.

    It'd be great if you can share the material setup of these objects (maybe try flipping front/backside?) or even share that section of the project with us, so we can investigate this further. Thanks!

    Hi Clemens,

    the project has not been changed from previous renderings. All the materials are the same.
    In my example there is a sphere light between the two metal panels, no emissive material.

    This is my material setting
    (and the normal orientation for the faces)

    If you want I can send you the SU file of the project. Please just keep it strictly private.


    Full of excitement I redid all the renderings of the project I posted before and I noticed a problem:

    In practice it seems that the renderings of the new version (this time on the right side compared to before) lose some light bounce on the metal surface which is now dimly lit compared to before.

    I will continue to investigate.


    If you fix this problem by tomorrow, ok ^^, otherwise (for this time) I will use this trick.

    Seriously... The only problem I see is that if you fix the problem in the future this workaround may no longer work and if I were to change the project I would have to change everything again.

    I fear that might be the same underlying issue, you can try the same trick, unfortunately not having that lit by the spot lights will look off compared to the surrounding geometry. Does it look correct when you reduce the metallic parameter?


    this seems to be working again.

    this is my scene with your updates. Now the lower band has the same metallic material of the vertical bars. The rendering seems correct even a half band has a reversed face.

    In the mirror the vertical bar circled of red has reversed face while the other (blu circled) has "correct" normal direction.

    I will do other tries but, it seem working fine.

    (only a bit annoying for a "correct face normal man" like me


    Thanks for confirming! I could reproduce the issue now also and will create a bug for it.

    Fortunately there's a workaround that should work well enough for 100% mirrors: Please reverse the face orientation, so the backside of it is facing the room and apply the mirror material to that. The backside won't receive the spot light's lighting and thus it should render correctly also for multiple bounces.


    This works pretty well! Thanks

    I didn't know this workaround. It should be inserted in the manual.

    By the way. There is still a problem. The vertical band circled in blue is 100% metallic but only the part non directly hit by the cone light (red circle) seem rendered correctly.

    Any tricks for that?! :saint:


    I have a problem with a scene where there are some mirrors looking at each other.

    In the first image you can see how the second bounce of the light does not work and the most portion of mirrors in the mirrors appears white.

    In the second image I only changed the opening the cone light of the spotlights at the top to ensure that the light hit a smaller portion of the mirror and the result is different.

    It seems that the mirror directly hit by light loses its ability to generate multiple reflections.

    I have the latest version of Enscape (3.5.5) and the latest nvidia drivers (546.01). I have a GeForce RTX 3080Ti with ray tracing hardware acceleration enabled.

    If I deactivate it (image 3) the reflections work a little better but, obviously, the scene is different.

    I'll play around and do some compositing, but it's a little frustrating

    It's on the public roadmap, but only for "feedback wanted" and not "in development" so probably some time off still. I would have thought this would be higher priority to get everything working more seamlessly and been a day 1 release along with the Enscape --> Vray functionality. As an Enscape user solely, I see a fairly large value in potentially having access to Cosmos assets.

    I don't know the quality and detail of the library items but they look very detailed.

    I believe that Enscape has to deal with often limited hardware resources and very detailed objects can run out of gpu ram very quickly.

    Furthermore, it doesn't seem to me that, at the moment, the library is so full-bodied especially when compared to the (already small) one of Enscape.

    Here you are. If I were in the Enscape team, I would look for a way to overcome the hardware limitations that, to date, limit some rendering possibilities.

    I don't know Why Enscape doesn't support cosmos models till now, Enscape is feeding V-ray to improve and we can't see any benefit from V-ray to Enscape till now

    I believe that the path that chaos wants to take is starting to be clear. To Create a bridge between fast and rough visualization (Enscape) and quality rendering (vray). I think we can abandon the idea that Enscape might try to compete with D5 or Twinmotion (or even the latest Lumion) because Chaos simply doesn't want to take away from Vray's appeal.

    I'm afraid those looking for a decent compromise between speed and quality need to start looking elsewhere. :rolleyes: