There is currently ruby being used by Enscape for Sketchup which a skilled scripter could make use of. It would be great if we could at least get a rough list of current methods, etc. In some cases what is currently exposed would be useful.
I will also add... I have continued to evaulate other rendering options mainly because of the lack of interest in user customization, community development, scripting, etc. There is no way for the Enscape team to anticipate or respond to all needs. The Sketchup scripting community is a perfect example of that process. They are what make Sketchup a great tool to use and would greatly improve usability for Enscape if encouraged.
heinrich.boldt Good idea, but consider that it should be applicable to all host applications. If Enscape does allow animation, I hope it is more generic in nature. That way, the same steps that we use to rotate a door on its z axis x degrees starting at frame 10 to y degrees at frame 40 could be applied to any object. This would a) make it more universal for host packages, and b) make it flexible to be capable of rotating any object in the scene.
While I hope Enscape will eventually allow for this type of animation I won't hold my breath. It will take significant effort, and this type of functionality exists nowhere else which indicates it may not be feasible.
As a workable, interim approach I suggest the following.....
.... there are already free animation packages out there (ie blender) and export formats that allow animation to be included (ie. fbx). Why not simply allow us to import that animation data? This same process could also be used for animated cameras.
If we wanted to make it easy to access for less experienced users an imported animated asset could be controlled within Enscape to start its "animation" at frame X. This would make it possible for either Enscape, or others, to offer "animated" library items, such as doors, which could be "controlled" inside of Enscape with minimal UI requirements.
Demian Gutberlet Have you guys put out images of the same scene rendered with / without RTX? I remember one comparison ( reflective columns ) when RTX support was announced, but have not seen anything since.
AFAIK Its a law of perspective, not a shortcoming in the program. No renderer that I know of allows for a scaling factor for a 360 panorama (skybox).
...but I have been wrong at least once before
Not possible to just scale it automatically... Its like asking to scale a photo to make it look like you were standing further away.
However you can hack it in some cases (when background is essentially flat amyway) by editing your skybox in photoshop and tiling/repeating the background mulitple times (to make background smaller)
mattendler Most of the properties above are foreign to me as I do not use Revit. It would be significant UI clutter if those were included in my UI when using Sketchup. If the team provided separate UI's, I would be fine with all these being duplicated within the Enscape UI.
I like the back curved wall and the curved ramping walkway. I want to see more of the element to the right.
The curved ramp seems to want to be more detailed / or contribute more to the space.
The relationship of the tables / seating to the ramp seem arbitrary. Shouldn't they be influenced by the curved ramp?
That handrail is not code compliant (sorry couldn't help it)
If you are choosing viewpoints... this one is a bit awkward.... possibly wider angle will allow the curve to read better? What happens off to the right?
Need a better texture for the ground. Definitely needs to be scaled down if brick.
It would be nice if Enscape could save time of day and camera position in the render settings. That way it would be much easier to make reproduceable rendering. However, I don't think this is likely to happen.
I believe it is inevitable that Enscape will mimic what Lumion, Unreal, D5, etc do with "Scenes" that save all render settings, and a "Timeline" that allows one to arrange the "Scenes". It seems very popular and has strong advantages. It also fits right within Enscape's "ease of use" philosophy. I am not really a fan of "quasi-video editing" within a rendering package, but I suspect that I am in the minority with that opinion.
However, just one more question for me better understanding this issue: Why do you remove the material from being applied to the face, and then apply it to the component again? Where's the benefit in that?
Kaj Burival I can provide some insight on this for sketchup. In sketchup the preferred way to apply materials is at the group/component level, and leave faces with a "default" material. The reason is that sketchup automatically propagates the top level materials to any sub-groups/sub-components, and then to faces, which have a "default" material applied. This is a very powerful feature in sketchup. One can apply different materials to the top level of a component and create different looks for the same component. It is also just a quick way to change materials of a group without having to drill down to the faces, make a selection, etc..
If we could have separate brightness for visible hdr vs lighting/gi hdr we would have a way to fix this when using hdr as well.
There is even a photographic technique that produces a similar effect... using a polarizing filter. So it would still be considered a "photographic" phenomenon for the purists out there.
On making comparisons with Vray.... Realtime rendering is simply different than nonrealtime, it seems illogical that we can expect similar results. The only logical comparisons right now seem to be realtime technologies such as Lumion, Unreal, Twinmotion, eevee, etc. Feel free to ask, to match non realtime but its not a "bug" or "problem" that Enscapes output doesnt look like Vrays.
My hotkey does not work often and I have to reset it.
The input box will include the word "Inactive" after the currently assigned hotkey binding.
Is this normal?
Have you tried rendering one of your old projects with the new version of Enscape?
The image posted on march 25th is very different than the other examples... grass not textured, viewpoint angle and lighting are much different.
When showing a comparison, it is important to use the same project, viewpoint angle, lighting, etc.
If you do not offer clear evidence something has changed, it is less likely your comments will be taken seriously.
That would be great, thank you!
In the meantime, it would seem prudent to add the following to the FAQ.
Q: Will my files render properly if moved from their original folder(s) on my computer?
A: Not yet, soon this will be added as a feature. For now please leave your project files including all referenced textures and proxies in their original location. If you want to attempt to move them, see the following link for instructions. <Best Practices for Moving Enscape Files - As of 2.8 Preview 4>
Thanks... I checked with support. Here is their advice.
"At the moment, you'd have to always use the same directory on any of the machines on which you would like to have everything linked already... if you move projects, make sure to always use the same folder/folder structure so that everything is linked accordingly from the get go."
So you can't move proxy files and/or texture files. If you do, you will have to relink stuff.
I am much more concerned with materials being broken because of textures not being found. There will likely be many more materials that could be affected each with multiple textures that could require being rebuilt manually.
Proxies seem to be possible to update relatively easily as each proxy is a single entry, but when textures are lost much more work is required in my experience.
In Sketchup this can mean not only having to relink multiple textures but also reapply UV mapping.
What is the desired/expected behavior?
Transparency textures should not be linked to a hard coded path when Enscape automatically pulls them from textures embedded in Sketchup. I should be able to delete/rename/move , etc the original texture and the material in Enscape should be unaffected.
Which Enscape version do you use?
Which host application do you use and which version? (Revit, Rhino or SketchUp)
What are the steps to reproduce the issue?
I used a png in sketchup with alpha information. Enscape automatically created a material with Transparency Texture pulled the embedded sketchup texture (png). As a Sketchup user, I know that sketchup keeps these textures as a part of the file, and since Enscape pulled it automatically, and I did not have to choose a path / location on my hard drive, I expect the Transparency mask would remain a part of the file even if I delete/rename the original png file that was selected for the Sketchup materials. This is how Sketchup works, and because Enscape automatically created the material, this is how I expect Enscape would work.
Could we have an option to randomize noise in reflections?
I like to use a technique of stacking renderings to remove noise. However currently every frame has exactly the same noise pattern.
I AM NOT SUGGESTING a new default without a choice. I am suggesting an option for the user to choose.
How about if the files currently exist on E: drive. Can I move them without losing links to textures? How about proxies?
If I move my file, do I have to relink every texture that is not a diffuse texture in sketchup? ie. transparency????
I have to agree at least for the following point.
For whatever reason my General Settings tab take a while to open.
... AND the only time I need to open it is when,
1) the Capture Hotkey link gets broken (why does this happen btw?)
2) I need to turn grass rendering On / Off (why is this not ALSO controllable in Materials, ideally on a per material basis?)
So, I only need to go there for 2 rare occurrences, both of which seem unnecessary to me, which makes the lag in opening seem to take FOREVER...