Posts by skhayward

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.

    Hey skhayward - thanks for reporting the issue. An hour for a panorama? That's indeed an incredible increase in time. I spoke with the devs and we haven't been able to reproduce the issue. Is there any chance you could share the project with us this occurs in?
    (I assume that when you render a panorama in a simple, almost empty scene, it's a lot quicker?)
    Although there might be some slightly longer rendering times with this feature enabled, an hour sounds like there's something wrong. Especially if it takes a minute otherwise. We'd love to explore this further.


    Model complexity certainly adds to it but not as much as you think . Even if I turn off all light sources in the model it still goes at the same glacial pace. Color rendering makes it take much longer (perhaps not literally an hour as mentioned but certainly getting up there). White mode is faster but still dramatically slower than before.


    Still images also take awhile but it's really the panoramas that seem to drag.


    I can't share a project with you but I just performed a test in the sample project "Snowdon Towers" that comes with Revit 2024 using the "Residential Lobby" 3D view. The results here mirror the results in my own projects.


    Ultra quality, color, normal panorama resolution selected.


    With ray tracing for artificial light sources:

    118sec to complete the first capture


    With this setting disabled:

    38sec to complete the first capture


    So a little more than 3X longer render times in actuality.


    Performance in real time is identical to before, or at least imperceptible in difference. It really is only when a rendering is done does the render time dramatically shoot up.


    Specs:

    i7 11800H 11th Gen Intel

    16GB RAM

    Samsung 1tb NVME SSD

    Laptop RTX 3060


    EDIT: So some inconclusive testing, I noticed when doing the renders after opening up Enscape fresh things were faster. Not by much but shaved off 10 seconds from the raytrace render time above.

    I had the same problem and the issue was with my families. The ray tracing feature works great but your light source position matters a lot more - if your family has the light source placed incorrectly it's going to amplify the error.


    If you notice in your first picture, you have the same issue with hard edge lighting as well caused by incorrectly made families (and/or you are not using IES light source). The same "harsh edge" is there that shouldn't be there. If you correct your families you'll notice that the ray tracing works a lot better.


    That said the feature still has some issues for me... namely in that in make the render export time impossibly long, especially when doing panoramas. A panorama that would previously take me 1 minute to export now takes almost an hour with this option on. Which is a shame because I get good results from it, but it's unusably bad render times currently. I don't fully understand why it takes so long as it runs and looks perfectly smooth in real time.

    Managed to figure out a good method for lighting with the above, just took some trial and error to figure out the best place to put the light source with the new ray tracing.


    However new issue....


    Exports seem to take an extremely long time to do now. Especially panorama. Before I could do a pano and it be done rendering in under a minute. Now it takes almost 5 minutes per panorama, an insane loss in time efficiency.


    EDIT: turning off artificial light ray tracing was the issue. I guess I'll just have to be strategic on how I enable it, as it just takes way too long to export panos otherwise.

    Alright, I'll try to update the families. It explains why one of my light families looked fine with ray tracing on, while most did not.


    Previously I'd always "embed" the light source within the family geometry as Enscape would ignore any revolve/extrusion piece that the light was sitting in. With ray tracing on, it seems to be that I can't do that anymore and will need to actually have the light source exist outside of geometry.


    The issue is a lot of our lights we use aren't simple down lights... how would you recommend I place the light source for something like the below image? in the past I'd place it in the center of the part that attaches the fixture of the wall, therefore telling enscape too ignore the wall attachment point for shadows. If I can't place the light source within geometry anymore, it'd have to be placed above or below it, but that would throw off the symmetry and introduce shadows from the center piece that attaches to the wall (unless the ray tracing will eliminate the shadows?)

    I know it's only a beta, but I'm failing to see the ray trace artificial light feature work at all. If anything, it dramatically reduces the quality of my lighting as it appears to ignore IES data built into my can light family and sharpens the shadows. Turning the feature off seems to fix things.


    As well, it appears to not work for emissive materials, which I use for light strips. I couldn't notice a difference at all for areas where I use lots of emissive light strips, like undercounter lighting or accent lighting in general.


    Image 1 is with the feature turned off, image 2 turned on.


    Revit 2024

    Along with what other people have said, make sure you use the enscape material editor to change the classification of the material from "generic" to "foliage".


    On the foliage setting, the curtain will show light on both sides of the object, making it look cloth like. If you also have a very fine mesh cutout applied then it'll cast dappled light through the curtains into the room too.

    This is a neat gimmick but has nothing to do with what enscape is used for and isn't even a good output to tweak renders with... It's purely a tool to do iterative/brainstorm design, and even then I'd argue it's more like a toy.


    The only purpose AI could have in the near term in making actual renders would maybe be taking over the "polish in photoshop" stage, which these days I almost never have to do anyways. Would hate for the team to waste time doing a gimmick feature like this.


    Call me in 2-3 years when this stuff is good enough to have some true precision. Prompting is such a huge waste of time, the latest buzzword fueld by marketing departments and grifter techbros. This kind of tech needs real tools, real power and real precision so stuff can be accurately dialed in by the hands of an actual designer/artist, especially for our industry. Only then will AI's true productivity for real world work be seen. To me, this stuff stop being a time wasting toy when I can do something like being able to give it a picture of a stone slab I'm specing for a client and have it automatically generate a PBR texture to apply to a countertop that looks photo accurate in the output. And on top of that, have it still work in real time.

    For switching of materials/lighting between things like furniture and objects, design options is definitely the way to go. Then make sure the 3D view you are using in enscape is set to "automatic" mode for design options. Then all you do is switch to which option is active and the scene should live update.


    Keep in mind live updating isn't fool proof for me, sometimes I need to restart enscape to get it to reload the scene fully. Its an annoying bug, and I don't think I've ever ran into it when switching design options, but if it seems like something isn't working the solution might be to just restart enscape.

    So in revit using hide is always view specific. So if you are hiding by element or temp hiding, it only applies to the current view you are on.


    If you want to hide something globally (i.e. equivalent to turning a layer off) you need to have those items on a workset or you need to set up some kind of view filter that is applied to a view template that your 3D views use. Such as, I have an "accessories" selection group that only has small Enscape asset accessories added to it, then all my 3D views use a view template that filters everything in that group to be visible or invisible depending on my needs for a render.


    Alternatively if you want to just switch between "scenes" just duplicate the 3D view and then hide different items on that view vs the the original. If you want to switch between materials or layouts instead of just toggling visibility of certain items, you'll have to use design options to do this and each view assigned to a different design option in the visibility graphics dialog. If you're not familiar with how design options work I recommend going through a tutorial as its a bit too much to cover in a forum post.

    Agreed. I'd love to be able to do batch rendering but because it creates totally unique file names every time its a big pain to update existing renders to be the new ones without having to do a lot of manual renaming, or by just manually doing the renders one by one.

    Draft mode looks the same as the second picture above as far as lighting is concerned with site context on or off. The lighting is equally flattened in both cases.


    On medium, where the lighting is more detailed, turning off site context has it looking closer to the first image and when enabled dramatically reduces the quality of lighting to look like draft mode, which looks similar to the second image. The same follows through on high and ultra settings.

    Been having the strangest issue with my model lately in that during the daytime, it appears as if all artificial lights just stop working and the shadow/lighting depth of the image is flattened. This was strange as a few weeks ago when I last worked on the model I wasn't having this issue at all. The only thing I had changed since then was I added site context. I then discovered that if I have site context showing at all, all lighting in the model gets bizarrely flattened (night time works fine however).


    This issue happens even if my model is set to color mode - though the model at the moment doesn't have materials assigned.


    It also happens to rooms without any windows or views to the outside which shouldn't be affected by anything going on outside. Its as if the entire model takes on the "polystyrol" setting with light bleeding through everywhere, flattening the whole image.


    Needless to say, this feature can't be used at all with how it destroys lighting in the model. Which is a shame since for some of our projects like this one, showing "the view" is helpful information. I don't remember having this issue at all with site context in past versions.

    I've found the lenovo legion i7's to run revit+enscape perfectly fine. Make sure you upgrade to at least 32gb RAM though. Mine was below $2000 but above $1500.


    You can also look for AMD offerings by Eluktronics, a small laptop manufacturer in the US. I find they tend to be a cheaper, more general laptop manufacturer than some of the name brands like Razer, but still just as good (even if the styling isn't as premium). AMD tends to be cheaper overall - but I would still stick with an nvidia graphics card to take advantage of RTX.


    A 3060 runs Enscape just fine (my laptop) but you'll want beefier if you're doing VR at all or presenting in 4K (doesn't sound like you are) though). However for my use case, which is just explorting still renders/panos, I've not needed more than the 3060 in power. It runs Ultra settings with RTX perfectly fine at the windowed resolution I run enscape at (somewhere just shy of 1080p).

    Go into your revit options then to the hardware tab. What does it list as the graphics processor for hardware acceleration?


    The only time I've run into this problem has been if despite having a dedicated GPU, revit has loaded using the CPU graphics which enscape isn't compatible with (it'll say its using an intel graphics processor on that page). If you have a laptop, sometimes revit will load only using the CPU graphics instead of using your graphics card if you load revit while you're on battery or running an energy save mode. The solution is to close revit, plug in and/or run in "prefer maximum performance" mode for your PC, then restart revit. It should load with the correct video card now. Try also turning off any "hybrid mode" or "optimus" features on your laptop if you have any, as they can force programs to use the wrong video card for power saving reasons.

    Have to say.... site context for our area is unusable. The roads all sink below the terrain and as such aren't visible at all. The terrain isn't too accurate. This isn't even getting into the fact that all buildings are just set to be generic 3 story shapes that are = to the footprint making a low density area look high density.


    I'm fine with it not being perfect, but this isn't even 50% close to good. Where are all the nice looking buildings in the video example?


    Also, reflections seem to have no improvement for my use case. One of my biggest issues with Enscape is the fact that when you're exporting a render mirrors will darken the reflection it is mirroring. We use mirrors a lot and have resorted to just using "glass" to get around this, but would much rather not. What's even worse is that the reflection looks flawless when moving around or before the scene has "settled". I'd much rather just use whatever enscape is doing when you're moving around the model (even if its lower fidelity) for our mirrors when exporting.


    As a matter of fact mirrors are even WORSE than before this update since now if there is smoked glass visible in the mirror reflection, it just completely blacks that glass out on our project.

    Just use filter in your vg with typename contains “enacape”, and turn it off.

    Alternatively, if there are Enscape assets you want to show up (i.e. furniture/planting that you've edited to have 2D symbolic elements in plan) you can use a selection filter instead. I just make sure to add things like incidentals and accessories to my "accessories" selection filter as I go, then set the 2D views to not display that selection filter.

    I can still see me using the site context feature as someone who does a lot of projects in rural-urban interface areas, especially since a lot of our work often overlooks a view. In this case individual building accuracy from context isn't critical. If a project is in a more urban area it doesn't seem like too much of an stretch to just use the site context as a guide for me to trace model in place something that is a bit closer to correct in terms of levels/structure, assuming things like roads/terrain are correct for all the above.


    In either case, I can see the feature saving time or adding value.