Posts by Tim

Reminder: If you encounter any issues with Enscape (including installation problems) or your subscription please reach out to our dedicated support team directly through the Help Center or by using the Feedback button as detailed here. Thank you for your understanding.

    Testing this AM quickly. Absolutely night and day faster native SketchUp navigation- huge improvement.

    *Enscape was already available without a new install. That was a nice surprise.

    A quick glance at HWMonitor for GPU memory usage. Testing a larger recent model I'm working on for a client.

    GPU: 3080 12GB

    SketchUp '24:

    25% GPU memory consumed without Enscape open- native SketchUp. Can see it clearly using GPU resources when navigating.

    50% with Enscape loaded up and navigating.

    93% exporting an image.

    70% exporting a video (unexpectedly lower than an image?).

    SketchUp '23:

    18% GPU memory consumed without Enscape open- native SketchUp.

    45% with Enscape loaded up and navigating.

    90% exporting an image.

    63% exporting a video.

    Conclusion: Although VERY informal and not scientific, I'd say it's not making an impact that's going to make or break a GPU in terms of memory.

    EDIT: Support responded to my ticket and this feature has been temporarily removed until further notice...

    The option to "save as external model" in the right click menu seems to be missing?

    From the support article:

    What I see (test cube shown):

    Thank you for the additional feedback as always Paul Russam and Ondrej42.

    This won't be much of a satisfying reply I'm afraid from my side but there is actually a technical reason as to why the previously selected material is not automatically re-selected after re-opening the Material Editor.

    That in turns means that isn't a bug currently, but expected behavior. I will still make sure to get together with product management regarding this to see if we could perhaps adjust this in the future eventually. For now I'm afraid there isn't much more I can say other than that, though I'd definitely update you in case of any further specific news soon.

    ...but it used to work as expected, yes? At least I think I can remember a time when it did. This one is an ongoing annoyance for me as well.

    Already free with revit.

    Yes. But there's still a sizable market for other 3D modeling software. And a TON of freelancers and even small businesses that fall under the $1M revenue stipulation. At this point, I can see it becoming the de facto rendering software with SketchUp and plenty of other modeling software.

    Maybe the largest draw will be students & the education sector. Get them started and trained in TM and it's going to be much easier for Epic to keep those users for longer.

    Did anyone else see Epic's announcement regarding TwinMotion pricing? FREE for commercial users under $1M annual revenue. Certainly not asking Enscape to give away the software (surely as a loss leader, in Epic's case), but let's hope is keep pricing pressure on the crowded market for visualization software.

    New Twinmotion pricing is coming soon!
    Starting late April, there is a new pricing and licensing model coming to Twinmotion. Find out ALL the details of what it means for you.

    I like D5 but...there's a lot to unpack here in this example:

    Quite a bit of distracting pop-in on some reflections throughout. It is struggling with reflections behind/through transparent objects (glass building behind the trees). And some general reflection pop-in/out throughout.

    Your vegetation is floating when the biker rides by in the beginning.

    I also agree with jwal485 - Not all animated characters are good. Particularly the swimmers, which bring down the quality of the work as a whole (and I know this is a lot of hard work). The postured swimmers look terrible.

    Why are there caustics blanketing nearly everything on the patio grounds?

    Pool water is too smooth, is there an option to increase waves/wind on the water?

    The sun shadows are coming from behind the camera but the background has it facing the camera.

    This is an outdoor aqua center, why would it be anything but beautiful weather in the marketing?

    I believe the issue of not having an alpha channel where there's no transparent geometry in the scene is already fixed in 3.5.6.

    The similar issue with orthographic rendering will be resolved for the 4.0 release.

    Correct, Orthographic projection requires a transparent material to be somewhere in the model for alpha channel to correctly render. Is there an ETA on V4.0 release or perhaps will this be added to a beta release...soon?

    You can turn turn on Outlines in the Visual Settings, but it won't show dividing lines inside a face, only the outside perimeter of each face. You should be modeling the geometry as it would be in real life with appropriate gaps and spacing between objects.

    Alternatively, you spend even more time by rendering a scene in Enscape and exporting a "Hidden Line" style from SketchUp natively and blend them in Photoshop. But at at point you'd be better served changing he way you are modeling.

    I have a lot of scene's as well but nothing like that. I never deal with changing FOV or DOF in scene's for this reason. Managing multiple presets with these micro variations is tedious and gets messy real quick.

    You could create three different visual presets, and assign those presets to your scenes, then any time you chose a scene with your prefered projection mode

    Gotcha. I'll try duplicating Presets with varying Projection Modes. That's problematic though, having to now update all presets every time I need to adjust a setting.

    Just make sure that if you are in link view with your 3D client, that the projection view matches in that software per scene.

    Can't use Camera Sync with SketchUp and use Enscape's View Management at the same time. They conflict. I used to manage scene's from SketchUp but Enscape's allows more control of the sun per scene. Feel like I traded one problem for another.

    A box with projection mode in the Create Scene 'Camera' setting would be super simple.

    If you prioritize ease of use and a simple UI, awesome, Enscape is definitely the program to use. I'm willing to adapt to a slightly rougher program that offers features that Enscape refuses to add. I believe its undeniable that Enscape's development has been slacking in the recent years, and D5 is on track to overtaking Enscape. I am limited to one rendering software a year and since Enscape locks me into a year long contract (if I don't want to spend more for a monthly license) then I'm going to put my money into program that adapting better to its users, has a quicker and more rubust updates, and is cheaper.

    I don't think the goal of this thread is to specifically debate the pros and cons of D5. That can totally be done, but that's probably a different thread entirely. This thread was started to try and get someone from Enscape to address the lack of response to user feedback and prove that their client base is leaving due to bad decision making on Enscape's part. A trend I've been noticing is as soon as someone gets critical of Enscape the responses from official Enscape accounts stops or never comes. Pre Choas acquisition Demian, Kaj, Thomas, or someone else would response accordingly. Now days it feels like a AI could copy and paste the responses if there even is one. Enscape was a great program, now its just feels neutered.

    I'm of the opinion that the "merger / NOT merger" with Chaos was the catalyst. I expect Enscape to replace Vantage and be Vray's solution to realtime GPU. Particularly since Enscape is actively developing "easy" exporting directly to Vray. There's a grocery list of other higher priority features and UI nitpicks that forum users have clamored for, but we are likely just a... vocal...subset of the larger user base.

    This all reminds me of when I tried Thea after using V-Ray for Sketchup and getting annoyed at all the little hindrances in the workflow. It sounds like D5 is still quite a work-in-progress and isn't likely to be on equal footing with Enscape in the near future. Again, I would still like to see someone post successful artificially lit interiors, because in the few tests I tried it came out awful. It's one thing to light everything with a single sky model, quite another to account for many point lights.

    My work involves large supermarkets and is heavily interior focused. I use a TON of artificial light & rely on it vs an exterior skybox, as you mentioned. My models are as accurate as possible, according to the lighting plan (that I also design). Using native SketchUp tools to place lights & manage components is huge for my Enscape workflow. I even use Enscape as a tool to help guide lighting design decisions on our CAD plans. BUT, Enscape starts to fall apart with a high light count - though what that number actually is, Ensacape won't say. All I know is that at some point, light pop-in and some geometry skipping becomes a major issue for quality in Enscape (particularity in video walk-through's). D5's GI is excellent and handles a high number of light sources better, but managing them inside D5 is a pain and can get really messy really quickly if you get sloppy with organization.

    I suspect having Enscape run within SketchUp (or whatever other program) has some limitations to resource allocation and sets some artificial limits that wouldn't otherwise be present via running it in an external application.

    Spot on. Using native SketchUp tools is a lot easier for many seemingly "small" things, until you realize how often you do them. If D5 would rely on SketchUp placing the material position, that would solve the issue.

    I also found that it is best to do all material changes inside SketchUp as opposed to swapping out material types with the D5 material picker. If you are trying to dial in a Brick or tile material, for example, and want to cycle through a bunch of different looks/patterns/etc, if you do that via the D5 material picker you will lose the name functionality from SketchUp and can't quickly swap materials without creating new names. You also also the ability to Transform from within SketchUp. It was a deal breaker for me.

    A better explanation if what I am describing is here:…o-original-material/13302

    "The current logic for synchronising materials via direct read [update model] is that:

    1. Once imported, all materials are no longer modified by the material parameters in the modelling software.

    2. Only the material with the new material name will be re-synced as a new material, the updated model will only recognise the new material name.

    The most efficient way to revert to a material in the modelling software is to rename your material in the modelling software and then update/re-sync the model."

    LOL - thinking that it's screen mirroring and basically the same as a Quest 2 or Quest 3, but just more expensive.

    I'm saying, as it currently stands, what we have works- and works well enough for anyone not in a fortune 500 company with deep pockets. Until we have mass market adoption of any VR headset I don't see things changing. Why would most businesses pay the absurd premium for this when what they have gets them what they need already. M3 or not, there are compromises to mobile computing. Tethering (wirelessly or wired) to a full-fledged PC is hands down the performance and quality winner. Leaving the unit to do the hand tracking computing. Great...

    The eye/hand controls are the way it should work, not with some dorky hoop controllers in each hand.

    Quest has hand tracking. Will Apple's be better? Probably.

    My point about HoloLens is simply that it had the hype too. Maybe that AR is being pushed hard now instead of VR, will see a resurgence? I hope so. AR is pretty cool.

    It was the first iPhone.

    There were already thousands of "smart" phones, blackberries, WAP (?) cell phones with internet access

    on the market. Apple just made one that was easy to use and fun.

    - With an app market, making the "smart phone" as we know and use it today. It was decidedly different from the Blackberry (and Palm) devices we had at the time.

    My point is the iPhone began the mobile app market which really didn't exist back then. Right now, the VR and mixed reality (AR) market already exists and the upcoming Vision Pro isn't adding anything we haven't see before, as was the case with the iPhone app market. Likely a better hardware build quality, sure - at the exponential $$ premium. I'm happy to see them add some marketing hype to the market so more companies further development of the tech besides Meta.

    Enscape only recently released Mac compatibility. It's lower priority simply because of the smaller user base- not an uncommon development cycle for any software, tbh. Apple-specific VR/AR (yes, I'm sure it'll be a locked down Apple ecosystem) will be even smaller. There's no much more the team can focus on developing within Enscape at the moment.

    We can have this same conversation with "why not support HoloLens?".

    The difference being that there are plenty of other VR and mixed reality devices already in the market, whereas iPhone was the first. Very different.

    It looked like a device that might become quite popular and owned by a lot of people-- including clients.

    Highly doubtful. It's 100% a niche, early adopter device at $3,500 and running its own hardware and OS (visionOS). Runs on the M2 chip, which is no slouch but still limited by mobile battery & thermals, so outright rendering performance won't be like a traditional workstation. It'll likely boil down to being some sort of basic wireless link app- screen mirroring. In which case, you'd be wildly overpaying for something a Quest 2 could do for $250 (or Quest 3 for $500) which Enscape doesn't officially support either and is definitely the larger market. It's definitely going to be an early adopter tech demo until they can prove concept and release the "SE" consumer version or whatever they'll call it.

    If you do find a texture you like but it's not seamless then you can try this:

    It'll do a reasonable job of making it seamless/tileable

    Nice find. I've had decent success with Materialize (see below). Usually when I find a tile or laminate pattern a client wants and I want to (try to...) make a better PBR out of it. Most of the time, I find the seamless stretching feature the most useful. It's basically blurring between the seams to varying success. But in a pinch it'll get the job done.

    I use: