Rafafreyr You bring up valid points that have been brought up multiple time over the last few years. See this post
RE: Secondary Channel for Optional Textures (Bump, Roughness)
and my comment linking to even more threads about just the material part of your comment. The best you'll get out of anyone directly from Enscape is please submit a feature request to the Enscape aether... sorry I mean portal.
You have to make the glass material of the bottle itself a self illuminated material. The way a majority of rendering engines work (simplified) is the camera shoots out a invisible beam that bounces off a all the surfaces in its path collects all the data and then determines what the color of the pixel should be. If the beam never hits the light placed under the bottles it will never glow in the way you want it too. There are ways that engines work around or attempt to get the correct effect but those are typically more complex engines like 3dsmax and Vray, not Enscape which is more focused on speed than accuracy.
Demian Gutberlet When are the previews going to include the asset color variation and lighting addition? I saw 3.5 is supposed to come out next month, yet arguably the two most important features of this update have yet to be tested.
Use the Elk plug in for grasshopper and that eliminates the need for the site context feature in Enscape as they pull from the same data set.
Paul Russam I have found some really good modern car models on the warehouse, so I completely support your tip. The issue I run into is A) the amount of older (pre 2000) cars are limited and B) I model in more than just Sketchup and sadly warehouse cars do not look as good in Rhino or Revit without major reconstruction.
L.S Ive had this issue on scenes without any lights, sadly
Can we get Sketchup 22 and 23 added to our profile options?
(and Revit 20223)
Any chance of adding some classic cars? 60's mustang, 70's corvette, Cadillac, Ect...
Retracted Comment
Will the XR Elite headset just announced by HTC be compatible with Enscape's VR feature?
Tim Based on the recent features introduced, I.E. site context feature, placing assets in Enscape(not the model), and movement of setting into the plug-in rather than the modeling software, I wouldn't be surprised if Enscape takes the route of D5, Lumion, and Twin motion by becoming a stand-alone real soon. Unfortunately, current software limits the ability of plugins to add certain advanced features like a terrain editor and multi-asset brush placement. Just my two cents.
This has been brought up multiple times since 2018, see threads below.
RE: normal and displacement maps?
RE: 3.1 is here, why are these features/ fixes still missing?
JMarsh4087 Alpha channels (what you are describing) are not supported for video textures. See:
RE: Transparent Video Texture in Enscape Version 2.9 and 3.2
I run a 3060 on my work-from-home pc and a 3070 at my office. I feel like the 3060 runs better than the 3070 90% of the time. I have no concrete proof but that's just my opinion.
manishpaulsimon It's not currently possible. Its on the development agenda for the spring time release.
See:
RE: vray compatibility is exciting but can we have a decent video editor?
And second to last paragraph of:
rifkin Speaking broadly, I know of a few companies (think along the lines of Starbucks, Top Golf, ect...) that use only Sketchup for their entire design process. I agree that not many architecture/engineering firms use Macs but Enscape has a board user base. There definitely was a large group of vocal users on here that were pushing for a Mac version, so the decision to include it isn't unreasonable. Like you mentioned though, does it justify the resources and/or the choice to include it right now? 
Also, I completely agree with your second point. BUT, like I've mentioned before in other comments, for instance, there is no native way to get a water feature to look good in Enscape. If my clients wants a home built around a fountain or cascading waterfall and also want to fly around it during a meeting, I'm forced to use another program regardless of how the rendering software integrates with the modeling software. Its features like that and ones others have posted about that are key to the "live rendering" user base but get skipped over for reasons that make people question the decision to continue with the program.
Mac support for Enscape has always been a much-demanded topic throughout the past years - We did not start development until recently of course, but it did not boil down to a single firm using for Mac, that much I can tell.
I want to clarify that I am aware there was support for Mac in the forums and that it was probably in development for a while. What I was trying to point out is that a certain amount of developmental resources (even if on a separate team or however you want to phrase it) was devoted to making a Mac side of the program when the fundamentals of the program are not working. Out of the four things that Enscape is used for: images, video, VR, and fly throughs, 25% is in a unusable state. Regardless of the platform or operating system, I would think priority would be focused on the second most used tool (my estimation) the program offers over breaking into new markets with a sub par video editor. That is where my frustration lies.
andybot I agree with you fully on the speed for quality aspect of Enscape, which is a huge plus. But the development of Enscape is stagnant.
I'd be willing to bet some big firm that primarily uses MAC told them they'd buy X amount of licenses and that's whats caused this huge shift in focus to MAC recently. Same thing happened that caused the half baked site analysis feature (which mind you hasn't been touched since it was implemented) to be added over truly impactful features.
It's a shame, but a lesson to future devs to keep suits out of the boardroom.
andybot Check out this post, You aren't going to like it.
