Posts by Nuge

    What's the point of new the feedback portal if nothing suggested (or Not) is going to make it past the enscapes internal team, they have shown over the last few releases that they don't listen to their customers and have become so bloated that they can't respond quickly to issues like the mess that is the video editor.


    I support the notion that fixing the outstanding issues (as listed by Tim) should be enscapes total focus BEFORE tackling anything listed on the 3.4 roadmap.


    Seriously looking at other options, any comments/suggestions welcome (Twinmotion, D5, Unreal engine 5, Lumion)

    The issue with the current system is that Demian is telling users to make their suggestions/wishes using the enscape portal. that's great but those suggestions/wishes are NOT being shown on the portal therefore users are not getting a chance to vote. Only suggestions from users that are still making them on the forum are getting upvoted, so users who have transitioned to the portal are being disadvantaged as there is no mechanism for those suggestions to be seen or voted upon. We can comment on "features" that enscape has deemed suitable of development but cannot access other users suggestions. This system is fundamentally flawed and needs to be re thought


    Also there needs to be an option other than "Nice to Have" or "Important" or "Critical" it needs to be "NOT REQUIRED" so that features deemed under consideration can be removed and replaced with features that users actually want.


    My feedback would be that of the 29 features listed in the under consideration tab


    NOT REQUIRED - 12

    NICE TO HAVE - 4

    IMPORTANT - 4

    CRITICAL - 9


    Everyone will have a different view of whats important to them but without a clearly designed and transparent voting/suggestion system we will be at the mercy of enscape's already established internal roadmap.

    Where is the rational behind which features are being added? It makes no sense.

    I think that this is the wider question that needs to be answered, I have questioned/challenged enscape's development policy/process for some time. The site context "feature" while being useful for some users, to the majority it seems like a complete waste of resources when there are so many other things that could be worked on that would add real value to the existing user base. I am sure many of us have made several submissions to the roadmap that would be of far greater use than some of the features "In development" or "under consideration". But without the ability to view and vote on other users (or even enscapes) suggestions we will once again be at the mercy of Enscape's internal roadmap. The Enscape portal was a real opportunity for them to be more transparent and user focused, but alas i can dream!!!

    I couldn't have put it better myself

    Assuming that everyone at Enscape already has a job to do, what would you like them to stop working on to do the above

    Paul,


    Below is a list of things i believe shouldn't be "in development" or "under consideration" so should leave plenty of resource available to curate user wishes and get a more user focused roadmap moving forward. The things i have listed below are more nice to have AFTER they have worked on the workflow and quality issues to turn enscape into a professional rendering solution.


    Import site context

    Export Nvidia MDL

    Educational Assets & Materials

    Bim Data Filter

    Customized Controls

    Add Text and paint to image

    Export Issues as report

    Show Libraries on website

    For this very reason I don't use the batch feature. Having no control or overwrite over the file naming convention makes the batch feature unproductive.
    I do Post Process on every render and I use Photoshop's link feature to make the process somewhat nondestructive. Due to a auto generated file naming convention Enscape uses I find zero value in it as I would have to manually edit the file names to maintain the established links. This is fine for one or two renders but not 10-15

    A perfect and very simple solution is adopt the camera/scene name. This is what also every professional dds/render engine software does. Do this and the Batch function will have far more value to users.

    +1000

    It has something to do with assets already loaded in the archicad library (IE GDL objects in the embedded library), it appears that enscape needs the assets to be placed (and therefore a new GDL object created) to be able to use this functionally, Its very frustrating if you have large amounts of these already placed in your template.


    Enscape assumes you will be placing assets directly from the asset browser each time and doesnt take into account the use of a template where objects (from the embedded library) are already placed within archicad. I have edited the 2D & 3D code of my objects to get the look that i want so having to redo all that work will be a nightmare. Enscape can you provide what additional code is required within the GDL objects to bring them up to speed with the new version.

    Creating fly-throughs are a big aspect of my daily job and with all the comments regarding the 3.0 video editor - what is the roadmap for having it completely reworked?
    I installed 3.2 yesterday, tested out the new content tried the video editor for some time and went right back to 2.9. The new features just don't carry enough weight to upgrade. I'm not going to rehash all the same comments but, I now firmly believe that the video editor should have the highest priority over all upcoming updates, even the render viewport on top?....still blown away that isn't done X/


    Cheers!

    +1