Posts by jure

    Thanks Pete Chamberlain . Based on first Vive Cosmos reviews it looks like it's not something I would be worth investing in.


    I'm actually leaning now more towards Rift Quest because of the new PC link option that they introduced recently. Is that something that is going to work out of the box with Enscape?

    Actually I'm using Sketchup... But anyways Rift S looks like a viable option. I'm just a bit worried of the lack of adjustment for interpupillary distance...

    I will definitely be using desktop for now since I'm not planning to upgrade laptop any time soon. I'm planning to have presentations in out conference room so portability is not important for now.


    Does it make sense waiting for Vive Cosmos since it should be out any time now?

    I work with laptop with builtin geforce 1050 gtx right now but am willing to invest in some more powerful solution since I know that will probably not be enough for good quality VR. I'm thinking of getting dedicated PC and VR set just for client presentations.


    I am willing to invest up to 2k for a solid solution.


    Thanks!

    It's true what you wrote. However I don't think pro users like you are Enscape's target market. I think they are more aiming for everyday users who want quickly render good enough images and really do not want to spend the time learning all the complexity of pro rendering. And besides pro market is pretty well covered with great and strong render engines so for Enscape trying to compete with them would likely be a suicide.

    Hey jure , the caustics of the glass in Thea you'd like to see in Enscape are rather difficult to render, even for offline renderers. Since Enscape is a real-time renderer, achieving the glass output possible with an offline rendering application like Thea is very hard to achieve, especially at 30-60 frames per second.

    I'm more concerned with proper refraction and shadows than caustics. Caustics are really the last thing on my mind when doing arch viz.


    Caustics and shadows are a different thing though. Caustics appear when light gets refracted or reflected and focused into a small area, and that area therefore appears brighter.


    Glass (or transparent material for that matter) should still cast shadows since opacity (or transparency) of transparent material can be anywhere from 1-99%. Hence the shadow can be stronger or weaker. This has nothing to do with caustics though.

    Glass is rendering quite poorly inside Enscape currently.


    Here's an example what I mean. The first image is rendered with Thea and shows proper refraction of light passing through glass.



    Here's a render with Enscape. The rays refract as if the object was not solid but made out of thin glass instead. The problem is obviously rays refracting twice, once passing through front face material and than again when passing through back face. There are also no shadows nor reflections on the floor.



    Here's the same render but with transparency turned off. You can clearly see reflections and shadows on the floor.




    Here's the scene if you want to play with it: glass test 3.zip

    Note: the scene crashes if you try to render it to 4k.

    That could work. But it's important to somehow hide advance controls for 'regular' users. You and me might know how to use this stuff but someone who just want's to get decent results quickly will be quickly intimidated if there are many controls...


    I have a strong background in 3d viz but most of my coworkers don't. And I already see them being confused even with current Enscape material editor, not too mention Enscape general settings.

    I haven't found a thread about this so I'm starting a new one.


    Would it be possible for you to add option to pick materials from render widow? So when a user clicks on a particular surface Enscape material properties panel would pop up?


    Thanks,

    You can. And any Enscape material settings will remain too.

    I know. However I tried to add Enscape linear light object to a LED strip light fixture which I have premade as dynamic component. Stretching the light fixture will unfortunately not stretch the Enscape light object. I know I can use just regular light emmiting material but that can give quite a lot of splotches if light is strong.

    No, please don't make it more complex. If you want to support advanced users create a separate material editor or additional advanced controls that experts can fiddle with but keep the main material editor as simple as it is.

    We do mostly interior design and for us the most useful thing would be stuff like plants in pots, trees, gadgets (phones, electronics), books, pillows, bed linen and similar stuff that you need to fill so that the space looks 'alive'. And this stuff is usually extremely heavy in polygon count so it's perfect candidate for proxies.


    We will probably never use furniture, lamps and other similar pieces because we are very picky about the design, colors and materials, of this objects and so we model 90% stuff by ourselves.

    What DC8Studio said. This is a must in our studio where we have a bunch of premade assets that we regularly reuse in Sketchup. The problem with loading models into sketchup is obvious - the filesize grows tremendeously once you add all the plants, decor and other 'entourage'. So we started creating library of Enscape proxies which would be perfect if we could include them into Asset Library.

    For us asset library is only of limited value unless we can add our own models into it. We have a bunch of already made objects that we regularly use in our projects and to be able to have them easily accessible from asset library would be just awesome.

    Interesting... :)


    Anyways I don't want you guys to complicate light placement furher, I would like you to simplify it. So like I said in conclusion of my post


    • snapping to axis, (so we can lock placing target to axis)
    • numeric input support (so we can define offset from start point exactly)
    • and native scaling for light placement (if possbile).

    For us it would be realy useful if we could save Enscape light object inside components we use again and again.


    On a related note, I do wonder why scaling and power is limited? The same question goes for all the other Enscape settings...

    Hi!


    I find it incredibility frustrating placing Enscape light objects. IMHO there is a lot of unnecessary clicking that needs to be done to place a single light.

    For example when placing spot light this is what seems to be happening (there is no help text in Sketchup window so this is my best guess):

    • first click is start point
    • second click is offset of light source from start point (I can understand how this can be useful so that light source does not penetrate source object)
    • third click is target point
    • fourth click seems to be offset of target point (why?)

    I'm used to placing lights with just 2 clicks - start and target point. But the things that are the most frustrating are:

    • one cannot use numeric input during placement
    • it's not possible to snap to axis

    So trying to place a simple spotlight that starts at ceiling and shoots directly down is almost impossible unless I create some kind of guided before hand.


    For area lights I miss support for regular scale tool. Why do we have to use Enscape light handles to scale the light source? If sketchup scale tools would be supported we could place light object inside the component of a light fixture, and scaling the light fixture would also scale Enscape light object. This can be particularly useful for linear light fixtures that can vary in length. Now we need to manually adjust length for each light fixture.


    So pretty please at least add snapping to axis, numeric input support and native scaling for light placement.