Posts by andybot

    This has definitely been requested before, and I would like this format available as well. I find that the regular panorama export still needs some work - I've been getting uneven exposure even with everything auto turned off, so I hope that panorama output gets improved before moving to video.


    (P.S. Hey devs - I've been away and haven't had a chance to post about my experiences with panos. I'm going to have time soon, and will share some tests with projects where I've had some difficulties getting even exposure.)

    +1 for enhanced color selection.

    Yes, I've gotten frustrated with the palette as well, I end up sometimes copying the RGB code from Photoshop instead of trying to fiddle with the color in Enscape.

    it may still be possible that a user uses Enscape in a way that we have not encountered so far

    Thomas, of course I understand sometimes you all run into technical issues, but I'm speaking of things like mp4 textures - i.e. items that imo are basic to "client presentation for architecture." There have been a number of things I've seen that are well within an expected use of 3D rendering software that are not working as expected, and worse are then dismissed as peripheral usage. Just because other software packages also have issues like that doesn't mean we will give up asking. :)

    Micha -- of course, shouting is sometime necessary when something basic is not functioning, and especially when it's something that brings your workflow to a screeching halt. I don't know that this distinguishes Enscape from any other product, unfortunately every rendering software seems to have its share of development catastrophes.

    it doesn't fit into a graphical production process of an architects workflow.

    Not sure I agree with you on this. This product has been the easiest one to add to my workflow by far. The ease of use and integration is head and shoulders above other software, imo.

    I'm guessing the RTX features are only available to Windows 10 users?

    (I've got an RTX 2070, but I still haven't upgraded Win 7 to Win 10....)

    [Upon further reflection, my question is dumb. I *know* the raytracing features are part of Windows 10 only. Mods: feel free to delete this post or leave it up as an "answer" for others. :P]

    I'm glad you posted, I wasn't even thinking OS would be an issue. It's good information to know that it's not just a hardware upgrade, I would need to plan for an OS upgrade as well (I'm using Win 7 as well.) Where can I find details on the hardware and software requirements?

    +1

    That would be helpful, I just encountered a need for this in a walk-through video. I have a door that's open coming into the unit, but walking back near the door later in the video I'd like to have it closed. I ended up rendering 2 videos and editing them back together in a video editor. If I could set up 2 layers, door open, and door closed, and be able to toggle them in Enscape, that would solve some really basic issues!

    It sometimes happens that improvements are better in 80% of the cases but worse in 20%. For 2.6, we're currently working on a major improvement on the sun shadow quality, it will be in one of the next public previews.

    Just a quick question for clarification - will this be for all graphic cards or will it be different on RTX cards? I was looking at the 2.6 list of proposed improvements, and I was concerned how far will we fall behind with GTX cards only.

    Pete, I hear your frustrations! It seems like every software avenue we turn down, there's some critical piece missing. I know Ted is coming from an experience of having been on the developer side, so I hear how he's trying to temper the frustration. However, it does seem to me that there's been some communication breakdown here about the roadmap. I'm a bothered that workflow related to video generation seems to very low on the list of priorities. I agree with Pete that the developers here should have been more clear about this part of the software lacking in priority. I don't know what it's coming from, but it does limit what I will be able to do with this software, and how likely it is that I will be able to rely on it for my work over other competing software.

    ...and...
    more WALKING people!!!
    most of them are standing or doing something WITHOUT moving... (moving legs, walking...). it is not easy to make simple "street"...

    Honestly, I am happy with only still people. Especially when you are doing video, someone frozen mid-stride looks more out of place than a figure just standing or sitting.

    Well, at least we currently have time stamps so we can adjust manually, so my complaint isn't that fundamental. It's just an additional control I'd like to have, especially as it would aid in generating smoother speeds in a walk-through video. It takes a lot of tweaking of the timestamps currently to get smooth motion.

    Is anyone else bothered by the discrepancies in the movement speed interpolation?

    Anyone have suggestions for how to get even speed videos, or do you all just not rotate the view much in the videos?

    What would be ideal, once this is fixed, would be some way to tweak the time proportion of turning versus straight-line speed. I find the turn interpolation is too slow relative to distance interpolation. It's tricky to have to set time-stamps for the keyframes, when I'd rather the interpolation do the work for me more accurately.

    So I'm having some frustrating when setting up videos, where it's hard to get the speed right when I have to turn direction.


    If I stay in one spot and just turn my view, the interpolated time is very lengthy and slows the video way down. But if I move just a short distance away and turn the view the same amount, it speeds the video way up - like if it was only using straight-line interpolation. Can you somehow take into account the degree of rotation even when you're moving short distances?


    Thanks!


    Andy