Posts by renderwiz

    Those results may actually be normal for "high" setting.


    There may be some throttling going on under the hood but only the Enscape team can inform on that. Enscape tends to use automatic algorithms to keep it simple but that can make it difficult to assess what is going on.


    Also, in my experience the difference between "high" and "ultra" for most scenes is not noticeable.

    The old default (only) function was to not update geometry between scenes.


    The new default (only) function is to update geometry between scenes.


    This seems like a no brainer request from users simply pointing out that we would like the option to choose :-)


    If this will speed up batch rendering for cases that do not need to update geometry (which is almost always for me) why not?


    I have already suggested you do not even need to add to the UI. There is a button for enabling / disabling scene updates for interactive rendering. You could simply make that toggle control batch rendering as well.


    Thanks!

    Some of the survey responses do not fit my answer to the question. Ie.

    How do you feel about the usability of the video editor in Enscape?

    Complicated is not the word I would use. It is un-intuitive and overly simplified.


    The timeline editor would be easier to use if the UI were more "complicated looking" because we would then have direct access to more variables, rather than having to repeat specific steps in sequence in order to achieve something like change the relative time that a keyframe should be set to.


    Try studying existing packages like 3dsmax or Cinema 4d, their timeline / keyframe editors may "look" more complicated, but are actually simpler to use when attempting to achieve a specific type of movement.


    Even better than attempting to write a perfect video editor that can be both simple and capable, would be to allow import of camera animation from another package. This way you could keep a simple UI for Enscape's native "video editor" AND allow complex animation by those who likely already own and use 3dsmax, Cinema4d, Blender, etc.

    It is a different rendering engine. You will experience different results.


    I assume the Revit engine is not realtime?


    Enscape is realtime... you can expect to see some compromises in image quality for that speed increase.

    Unless I am missing something, no.


    An image stack requires selecting multiple images, and is specific to Photoshop. That is a workaround, with limited flexibility.


    Are you able to export a png from Enscape (not a seperate MatID pass) and then open just the color png file with alpha information included? That is the request.


    This is a type of output that is very common among rendering software.... a png, tga, etc which includes alpha information in the file itself. This type of file can be opened by itself and composited cleanly.


    If you are opening one file it may seem trivial to use a MatID pass, magic wand, mask, etc...... but consider doing that for a sequence / animation.

    Several requests here related to backgrounds and improvements for compositing workflow.


    1) the current white background is great (but ;-) I can never get it completely white. Can we just have an option for pure white as background?


    2) can we have an option for a black background (or user selected color) AND allow it to be PURE black, or PURE <insert color here>


    3) this has been requested before but just gonna do it here as well because its related. Transparent png, or even just tga with an alpha channel included, would be VERY useful for compositing workflows.


    Thank you

    Comment about assets in general.


    Since your assets are not editable, it would be wise to consider the most flexible way to release them.


    For example, in your first image (plan view) there is a table with blood pressure cuff. Ideally that would be 2 assets, not 1. One may want to use that table without the blood pressure cuff.


    Another example mentioned before in the forum. Plants with pots. Its very easy to put two assets together, but since they are not editable, not easy to separate.


    If the goal is to provide a simple way to populate without care, you could certainly provide both... a version that is combined and one that is not combined. (ie. Plants with pots, and same plants without pots)

    I can confirm this is an ongoing issue even without RTX.


    Can we *please* disable "cast shadows" selectively?


    How about a "Decal" material that will not cast shadows?

    why are you not simply making use of the material editor to define your colors etc. in the first place?

    For decals... floating geometry with alpha channel causes artifacts. I need to bake the decal into the same color as the remainder of the geometry.


    To elaborate on the steps....


    1. Make a material in Enscape. Default Type, RGB 25, 67, 90 50% Roughness, 50% Specular (It really doesn't have to be only these values, I see the effect for a range of Roughness and Specular)

    2. Make a texture in photoshop RGB 25, 67, 90. Save to jpg.

    3. Creat new Default Type material, load texture, adjust Roughness and Specular to 50% (again, the effect is not specific to this Roughness and Specular setting, just make sure the two material settings match)

    4. Place each material on geometry side by side, I was using two cylinders but could be anything.

    5. Launch Render and view from multiple angles.


    If the rgb values from the texture were read by Enscape as exactly the RGB values used to create the texture, logically the two materials would look exactly alike. I find the one with the texture to be significantly darker and less saturated.


    Perhaps it is a gamma issue. I am asking because I assume you have observed this and would have some insight.


    Are you able to use a texture with the same RGB color as defined in Enscape and make them match?


    If so, please let me know what process you recommend for doing this and I will try that.


    Thanks!

    Thanks but that is not the problem. All setting between the materials are identical.


    This is not urgent as I was able to *manually* (rolls eyes) adjust the input texture to match the color picker in Enscape. Which is what made me write the question... there has to be a better way.


    I will wait for the Enscape team, if this is not unique to me they certainly already know about it.

    Obviously need to be able to control this. If it is Revit only, then they are the ones who need this control.


    How about use the existing button currently used to "disable scene updates" in interactive mode?


    If that is enabled when batch rendering, the same scene is used for all views.


    Thanks!

    mariah ...I meant that it looks like an artifact that has no fix.


    I responded to hopefully help AhmedAkader avoid wasted time testing and retesting.


    We also now know that Enscape team is not going to fix this anytime soon.


    Thanks Demian Gutberlet This type of feedback is important. The limitations and goals for a renderer are something that should be known, accepted, and worked around. Uncertainty and inconsistent results lead to much wasted time.


    One problem with this particular artifact is that often does not show up on small test renderings... then when doing larger renderings for the final we end up with artifacts to deal with. I now render at full resolution for tests every time.