Posts by Clemens Musterle

    Hello. I am having problems with IES lighting profile. When the spotlight is shining down, the IES looks good. When I invert it upside down, it looks weird and not illuminating fully. Same goes when I rotate it sideways. Can anyone help? Thanks :)

    Hey Timots_Wang & welcome to our forums!


    This was actually a known issue we've only fixed recently for the upcoming 2.8 release. However you can already check out the latest Preview version of 2.8 if you like to: Releasenotes: Current Version 2.7.x + Preview Version 2.8

    Hi evanstravers


    welcome to our forums. Sorry to hear that you're having issues rendering higher resolutions. Usually this is due to a lack of graphics card memory, which graphics card did you upgrade to? You can send us log files via the feedback button so we can verify that assumption for you.


    You might want to try the Preview version of the upcoming 2.8 release. You can find a link at the bottom of the download page for it. Version 2.8 will have a feature called temporal upsampling that allows you to render higher output resolutions with less memory required to essentially the same quality. It automatically kicks in if your graphics card won't be able to handle the selected output resolution.


    Please let us know if this helps!

    Hi eliotbnz


    if the resolution changes based on the scene complexity this indicates that you're probably out of graphics card memory and therefore Enscape is trying to compensate for that by downsampling textures. To make sure that's really the case you're welcome to send over your log files via Feedback button.


    To avoid this you'd essentially need to reduce the amount of required texture memory. Maybe you're able to reduce the number of assets or materials in the scene?

    Could you try it against a wall, I have my fish 1mm away from the wall and I'm wondering if its a shadow of the rectangual fish geometry we're seeing

    Yes that's whats happening most likely. There's a limitation for the diffuse indirect lighting calculation that does currently not consider the actual alpha mask texture. One workaround that could work: Have you tried making the fish material the backside and apply a transparent material on the frontside? Backside materials aren't considered for those rays, so that could help.

    Very nice results Herbo !


    I do agree that it looks definitely more natural/realistic than the previously shipped texture, especially up close. We'll definitely see what we can do to improve it along those lines!


    I must admit that i was hoping for a total revamp of the grass look, but for now it seems like it is only an added animation to the old billboard style.

    While the appearance right now is similar to before (however it's actually not billboard grass, but actual three dimensional models for the close range), we've done a little more than just adding the animation. The added carpet material type is based on the same system (and will probably also get a visual overhaul until the final release) and we'll be able to extend that in the future for a larger variety of customizable grass types! :)

    Hey,


    regarding 1) real-time update speed shouldn't be related to RTX. How fast we get the updated geometry from Sketchup depends mostly on SU itself and is computed on the CPU so a different graphics card shouldn't affect that.


    2) Based on the images the reflections do look fine to me? Most of the geometry is visible. Please bear in mind that trees may have a really high polygon count and may therefore not be selected (even with RTX), especially if there're further away. One more noticeable difference in the reflection is that the ground material doesn't match I suppose. This is most likely because what you're looking at are the backsides of the environment mesh's faces. Only the material of the front face is visible in off-screen reflections. That's a general limitation (not related to RTX specifically). Easy to fix though: Either swap fron/back face or make sure the same material is applied to both :thumbup:

    Things have been quiet enough the past few months now, I wonder how far away Enscape 3.0 is? (though I suppose we'd probably see a preview version first, unless they want it to be a surprise this time...)

    We've released 5 Preview versions of the upcoming 2.8 version of Enscape - you can see the updates in the 2nd post in this thread here:

    Releasenotes: Current Version 2.7.x + Preview Version 2.8


    A version 3.0 release is still a little further down the road in the future I'm afraid, no announcements to make in that regard yet.

    Gadget  Herbo  Purebeaux  joeykeys  benjaminriendeau


    You guys might be interested in testing our latest Enscape 2.8 Preview 5:
    Releasenotes: Current Version 2.7.x + Preview Version 2.8


    This version now includes a dedicated normal intensity slider, that correctly rescales existing normal maps between 1% and 200% :) So no need to re-export normal maps for visual tweaks anymore or use 3rd party software to do so. Please let us know what you think about the results!

    Hi DeKoetsier


    the animated vegetation in 2.8 will only work on assets from our asset library as there are some preparation steps required to be done. In simple terms: you'll need to mark which vertices are branches, which are leafs etc so we can generate a believable animation out of it. That beeing said, there're custom/user generated assets on our agenda for upcoming versions of Enscape and in that case - provided you did the required model preparation in your 3d modelling application beforehand - it should also work for your own assets.


    Material based, procedural grass is of course always animated :)

    Sorry to hear that you're still having issues with the latest Enscape releases. I'm not sure what exactly could be the issue on your particular configuration (as the hardware is obviously quite capable), but did you try to disable RTX support in the 2.7.1 version and see if that helps? RTX support is the main difference from 2.6.0 and later versions.


    Other than that we're of course quite interested to get a hold of projects where you notice such performance regressions, if that's possible for you.

    Hey mattendler, normal maps work fine when using the Enscape Material Editor (Sketchup, Rhino, etc) without any suffix. That quote is from 2018 and was aimed at Revit users, when there was no native support for normalmaps in Revit materials - in that case you could workaround the Revit limitation by using this suffix in your filename.