Posts by Gadget

    If you rotate the native texture (using native tools) then the bump, transparency and reflection textures imported in the materials editor will use the same axis of rotation.

    (In SU, filling groups that have surfaces set to "Default" will ignore any rotation and use the groups orientation to place the textures: You have to fill native geometry to be able to rotate a fill on the surface, but once you have done one the pipette tool will copy the rotation information too.)

    BTW Enscape does not handle skewed textures very well - you have to "convert to unique texture" to get them to show properly.


    Open an e-mail or word document, then use the <Print Screen> key on the keyboard when in Enscape. Use <alt>+<Tab> to bring up the open document and <ctrl>+V to paste from clipboard into the doc. (<alt>+<tab> to get back to Enscape)

    The main problem I find is lack of control at closer distances: I want a coffee cup to be in focus and it start to drop off at the edge of the table, but still make out some detail in a picture opposite - this involves a lot of trial and error back and forth - placing the focal point & adjusting the DOF. If there was a way to keep a single plane and say "I want this, this and this in focus" and it worked out the focal point & DOF for you: this would be an excellent solution.

    It would also be nice to fix a focal point to geometry rather than the camera. (Similar to how the 'auto DOF' works, but user controlled.)

    And I still think that having a numerical distance rather than a percentage would be an improvement.

    The "drop-off" between sharp and blurred follows the same 'curve' as the DOF amount:

    - The more you have in focus, the slower the drop-off to blurred.

    - The less you have in focus, the quicker the drop-off to blurred.

    What I (we?) would like to be able to have is a 'near' and 'far' DOF (with a measurable "distance from camera" setting): everything between these is sharp and the drop-off follows the same "amount" curve as we have just now.

    You can also increase the cloud cover so that it blocks most of the sunlight. (And decrease the sunlight strength - which will in turn increase the amount of light you see in the shadows)

    3. And ceiling - light leaks like that are normally caused by making a wall and ceiling from a surface skin rather than from a solid section: give them about 300 thickness and you shouldn't have a problem... unless it's caused by something else.

    (I have had more problems with accuracy in Archicad than I have ever had with SU - and I have also seen highly complex and precise technical drawings produced from SU.

    People tend to gravitate towards what they learned/were taught - and since most places that grant qualifications tend to be bias towards (& against) certain software you will find that the industry as a whole has the same bias.)

    But yes, you would be better asking this in the sketchup forums.

    :) that's Sketchup. You can set the units you work with and the accuracy, but if you are working on high-rise buildings then you are not going to be interested in modeling the thread of a screw.

    Personally I work in mm and only have to 'blow things up' on a rare occasion when modeling custom decorative assets, but most architectural work I do is in m. When walking around in Enscape, most detail modeled to such a tiny scale is lost so it becomes futile to actually model it accurately - as long as it looks right.

    for deforming effect (glasses is not plane at 100%) i use à noise texture in png format into BUMP

    I would recommend using a JPG rather than PNG

    Using a PNG also stores an alpha channel transparency map that is loaded as part of reading the graphic information from within the image (even if it is blank and even if the program doesn't use that bit.) For one texture it probably won't make too much of a difference, but unless you really need to have a transparency mask, I would recommend always using a JPG.

    The other thing to do for frosted glass is to have the glazing colour towards the 'white' end of grey rather than the normal 'black' end that you would use for clear glass... There are many different obscure glass patterns you can get - depending on how you want it to look will determine how you approach the material. (…olders/decorative-glazing)

    The "problem" is that Enscape is a live preview program that has a side-effect of being able to generate really cool stills. When you ask for a still image, it basically ups the resolution of the 'monitor' to a print quality and takes a screen-shot. (*)

    If you want extra ray-tracing bounces for reflections or other stuff for still images, you are either asking for an additional processing layer on-top of the existing program or upping the quality of the existing program. So far the focus has been on the second option, because it helps everyone. The other option is a lot of work and becomes a second program wrapped within the first.

    (* I'm only a user making wild leaps of logic - I may be completely wrong)