Posts by Tearch

    renderwiz, Your comparison between Enscape and Lumions output I think is completely spot on. Everyone's list of features they'd to see is obviously different and even though I don't find a need for it, there has a been a huge push to get pano batch renderings lately. Enscape seems to have taken note but nothing concrete has happened as of yet regarding it. From my observations it seems a lot of people haven't even upgraded to 3.0 because of the issues and productivity changes that came along with it. That being said there are other alternatives coming to the market that pose a threat to Enscapes market share and if the overall lack features and updates doesn't justify the price increases/subscription method there is no need to stick with this program. Brand loyalty is nonexistent in the visualization world. As soon as a new program with better tools, higher quality outputs, and/or smoother workflow pops up everyone is going to switch, even if there is a learning curve.

    Tim I think you made some great points in your last post and completely agree with overall sentiment that you are bringing to this conversation. I worry that enscape is on its path to becoming a "adobe or auto-desk corporation" by hiring suits and not programmers, content creators, or forum moderators(Damien you do a great job even if I don't agree sometimes). Switching to these kinds of subscription models has a huge adobe/autodesk vibe to them. I don't understand why(probably $$$$) after all the push back and negative press other programs get, more developers/suits decide go down the same path.


    I hadn't thought about the v3.0the way you did until you brought it up. Overall v3.0 has brought many more hiccups and hindrances than positives in my opinion. Enscape is still a super useful tool and I prefer it over other extremely expensive rendering programs like Lumion. That being said, even though they are expensive, I do see the value in other comparable programs because of the tools and content they bring to the table. From the last release and the current dev agenda for the next release, which I see as kind of lackluster, I hope these price increases aren't more frequent. If they are to become more frequent I have the expectation that comparable upgrades to features/content come with them, not just rebranding and UI changes.

    Luca Troian I understand what you are wanting but enscape has the capability to custom pixel ratios, not just what your screens resolution is. If you are creating output renders based off your screens resolution and hoping them to come out ready for print, that is just not going to work. If you are printing a 10"x13" sheet and you want 300 dpi you need to set your output resolution to 3000x3900 and render that. Use that kind of calculation to create whatever size of print you want. The calculation is:


    _____(Single dimension of sheet) X ______(Desired DPI) = ______(output resolution)


    You put the output resolution here:














    Again, a DPI setting is not necessary.

    Alpha maps for .mp4 or any other time of video are not supported. There are a few forum posts on here about that, so hopefully they will integrate it soon.

    I was playing around with 2 surfaces very close together to try to achieve the enscape 3d grass effect in dirt and not on top of the grass texture. I think the best solution would be to add a slot in the material editor that changes the color of the grass to whatever texture someone wants while at the same time keeping the surface a different texture. But in the mean time, I think this effect would work better if there was a slider that allowed the user to change the density of the 3d grass particles on the surface. Right now it looks like this grass hasn't been taken care of in a year because of some large patches of dirt show through the grass. Is this something that could be added in a future update? Also, when looking straight down the grass effect disappears because all the 2d grass surfaces are perfectly vertical. A possible solution to this would be to angle them very slightly so they still read looking down.

    Demian Gutberlet Does that mean animated assets, such as vertical water, fire, walking people, doors, ect... are not being added even on your end, or are you talking about the ability for users to animate their own objects?

    This feature might be very complicated to implement, but is there any way to have the light that passes through colored glass change to reflected the color of the panel. Right now if light goes through a red glass panel the light that projects onto the ground is still white. It takes a user away from their experience when going through a space that is suppose to have a atmosphere based on the color of the windows.

    Luca Troian, While I think Paul comes off a little aggressive, he is correct. DPI is meaningless when creating a computer generated image. What does matter is the output resolution and your field of view. The math is fairly simple as long as you know what you are setting up in advance.


    I'm going to use small numbers for simplicity's sake, but the math is still the same for larger numbers. If you want to render a image of a box in 300 dpi and you want a image size to be 2x1 you must make the output resolution 600 pixels x 300 pixels and using your position in frame and the field of view slider you can create a image that fits your parameters. There might be some image size scaling in Photoshop that will be required but that's one step at most. A DPI selector will only be necessary from Enscapes point of view if they add a new output option that lets you base the image size on a in/cm width and height.


    The only reason the blue box exists in Photoshop is because of the information in red box. Enscape doe not have image parameters based in real world dimensions(red box) so the blue box is not necessary.

    I've noticed some of the same issues with a medium sized residential model I am working on. In enscape 2.9 as long as the model was opened with say a brick enscape texture in it, any object I changed to that material would change when the enscape window was open. Now it wont change unless the file is reopened in enscape. Rendering itself is taking longer with no noticeable change to the output of the rendering. Hopefully a future preview version will fix some of these issues.

    Until a material editor is added to enscape that allows the user to see the materials without running enscape the enscape window is the only way to fine tune said materials. Restricted mode needs to be added back in until then.