Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

234 Spectacular

1 Follower

About grant_PD

  • Rank
    1000 Club

Personal Information

  • Occupation
  • Homepage
  • Location
    United States

Recent Profile Visitors

2,416 profile views
  1. It seems you are encountering a few issues when you speak of "quality." Your first one seems to be the output resolution, which is what a lot of this thread is about currently. 300dpi across the board will help with that. You should notice then less jaggy lines at the edges of things, if you anti-aliasing is set very high. You seem to have some noise appearing along some of your textures surfaces, which can be caused by the "blurriness" setting. Low settings or bad scaling of the textures will cause that. Higher settings will give you that fantastic brushed metal look, or multicolored blurry reflections on plastic surfaces, but the render times will go up a lot. Your mention of greyscale covering everything is an effect of your lighting. That your carpet shows the edges of your light beams is an indication that your lighting solution is probably not ideal. In workspaces such as the one you are rendering, the layout of the fixtures in the drop ceiling is very specific to give an even distribution of light for work purposes. Either there is not enough light bouncing around (GI solution) or there is not enough ambient light (either in ambient light settings or through careful placement of fill lights) to give the lighting look you are after.
  2. @Mark Aceto Have you tried going deep into the symbol structure of those S4's and making sure that all of the geometry is set up to show the correct fill color and texture? I often find that lighting symbols are a mess of nested geometry. If you want, send me the file and I'll take a look and see what I can do.
  3. @Mark Aceto I think you will find that adding more lights in a grid helps for less spotiness. And you might try building an area light, which I have had some success with in VW. I am also a fan of ambient light+ ambient occlusion, which some people say is heresy in this age. But these are just all tools in your toolkit in my opinion. I certainly would at least try turning it on before I switched on maximum bounces in a GI solution (I would never turn on maximum bounces in a GI solution 😎).
  4. Yes, your soft lights are spheres of light, and since you can't control the falloff (in VW) you can only play with the intensity/distance to get them to read less. I have worked with files were there was literally hundreds of omni lights all at 15% all throughout the room. Here's a quick test of showing 4 surfaces illuminated only by 1 point light at their intersection. Clockwise from 9 oclock each quadrant's rgb values are: 0,0,0/10,10,10/20,20,20/30,30,30. I started the point light at 12' above, then moved down by 3' each time. While it's true that the true black never turned grey, in real life that would never happen. So you must choose where your black point is and adjust. An array of lights would give a more even look, hence the use of area lights. I'm not sure if panoramas support those lights.
  5. Are you sure that GI is what you want for this type of presentation? You have a lot of negative space and most of those bounces are so low energy there is no real need for them. I usually like to start off with a little bit of ambient light and ambient occlusion, to get the feel of the shots. If GI really seems necessary, add it back in and remove the former. But it is not the magic wand that most people think it is. There might be more reward in setting up your cameras with different exposures. Black textures should never be completely black, and all textures should be "rich" in that they should contain at least some measure of all three pixel colors. While it is true that all surfaces are reflective to some degree, I often question the merits of adding in reflectivity to everything. Again, I would start off with reflectivity disabled, then add it back in and see if the increased render times are worth it. Overall I think your panorama is quite nicely rendered. But it is important to ask at what point in time you are trying to make this rendering come from. To me it looks like what you would see the first 10 seconds you walked into this room from another, lit room. But after a few more seconds of being in the room your eye would adjust to the low levels of lighting and you would see more. A photographer might capture this by opening up the lens and gathering more information (hence my note above about exposures).
  6. My trial of Enscape has expired. But I was hoping that you could use the clip cube tool that is native to vectorworks and have Enscape render that. It does not seem to update with my version however. Cutting sections as described in the Enscape help is pretty old school. I would hope that in the future they could recognize viewports.
  7. How does Enscape deal with the clip cube? That might be a possible avenue to try.
  8. Can you post a file to look at? It's hard to say what is bogging down render times without seeing it. I think "final quality" is way overkill for almost all projects, and the solution is indeed to set the custom renderworks options to optimize your rendering. That said, dropping everything to "low" is also not the answer.
  9. This doesn't have to be so complicated. VW just needs to list the cameras in the dropdown of the OIP of the viewport where you pick your projection. I see no value in "linking" the camera to the viewport at all.
  10. I'm no museum designer, but when I've tackled problems such as this in my own work, I've used the extract surface tool and unfold surface tool to create flat elevations of the walls needing such treatments. I then create the graphics in 2d, and save them as an image file for reimporting as a texture. Since they are 1 to 1 with the walls I pulled from, scaling and tiling is usually not too big of an issue. I would suspect that a lot of that type of rendering is done in a separate rendering program :3ds Max/C4D etc.
  11. It is worth doing a few tests (when you have the time) to find out what renders quickly and what does not in a sheet layer. For my purposes, drapery objects (especially in fullness) render quite slow in section. So I need to be aware of that when cutting a section and avoid arbitrarily cutting through them. Some times it is unavoidable, and then I might set the drape object to render in simple 3d. I also discovered some time ago that planar objects (notes, dimensions, callouts, etc) do not like to be cut in section, so when I cut my sections I make sure to turn them off (since they are all in one layer anyway). I cannot comment on Kevin C's issue that somehow the rendering model is not enough to make a working set of drawings from. My working model is what everything is generated from: renderings, sections, elevations, etc. But I am not using most of the architectural package (walls, windows, etc) so maybe they contribute to the issue? It would be good to see an example....
  12. Perhaps make the EAP longer and see if that stops the compression, then clip it to your desired length.
  13. Have you tried searching for figures on a site like TurboSquid? You can get quite a variety of poses and people, and most are downloadable as an .obj file. They will import pretty nicely into VW.
  14. Exporting large EAP objects to other programs (c4d) really highlights how faceted these objects are. Even with all of the 3d conversion settings set to "very high" the faceting is still an issue. I'd like to be able to manually set the number of vertices in an EAP.
  15. I'd love to have material override and exclusion ability as a rendering option. So I set all materials to say a grey, but leave the LED screens and other things still rendering with their textures.


7150 Riverwood Drive, Columbia, Maryland 21046, USA   |   Contact Us:   410-290-5114


© 2018 Vectorworks, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Vectorworks, Inc. is part of the Nemetschek Group.

  • Create New...