Jump to content

Hans Jakob M?ller

Member
  • Content Count

    27
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Hans Jakob M?ller


  1. Congratualtions folks, it seems as if we've been heard.

    Only one question: The Prime version of Cinema 4d does not have global illumination. Could we expect more than this, like the advanced rendering capabilties of Cinema 4D Visualize, in RenderWorks 2011? If not, it means that in RW 2010 we had global illumination (radiosity, final gather and HDRI lighting, even if Radiosity hardly works at all) and in RW 2011 we have not. Global illumination is absolutely necessary to create a realistic interior rendering. If we have to buy an additional C4D Visualize lisence to get it, which is maybe 5 times the prize of RenderWorks, we'll have a very expensive solution which is still not integrated in Vectorworks.

    Exporting to other renderers is nothing new, Artlantis has been there for decades.


  2. I wrote about this topic to the wish list forum months ago but didn't receive a single reply. Maybe it's the wrong forum, so I try again:

    I think it's about time for a major overhaul of RenderWorks including:

    ' Faster and more user friendly global illumination

    ' Ambient occlusion, screen space (SSAO) and model space

    ' Baking of global illumination, with this you could make

    high quality realtime walkthroughs directly in VW.

    ' Realtime/ GPU-rendered global illumination

    ' Object animation (for people, cars, sky etc.)Why doesn't

    Nemetschek buy the Animationworks solution from

    www.ozcad.com.au

    ' Daylight system with sun and sky lighting

    ' Sky generator with clouds

    ' Physically accurate materials, caustics, subsurface

    scattering etc.

    ' A lot of this is already there in www.lightworkdesign.com so why is

    it not integrated in RW.

    ' Add more yourself....

    There are some good reasons for this:

    Stop customers escaping to standalone redering solutions.

    There are some great advantages with integrated rendering.

    ' The trend is towards interactiveness and it's a good trend. With BIM you make canges to the model hundreds of time during the design prosess and you want both to see and communicate the results fast and without delays. Exporting to another applicatin, maybe texturing and mapping over again each time is delay and it's counter-interactive. The time when we completed all design phases in 2D and made some glossy visualizations in the end to sell the finished flats are over.

    . There is no reason why VectorWorks should have a renderer inferior to Revit (Mental ray), Artlantis, Sketchup (with integrated V-ray) etc. Renderworks is based on Lightwork and LW has realtime global illumination so lets get all the good suff we can get out of LW. Maybe LW can't keep up with giants like Mental ray or V-ray, but an up to date integrated renderer would be an important competitive edge against Revit, Autocad, Archicad and the rest


  3. Could not agree more. The attributes mapping tool has some qualities if you get used to it, some trial and error is required. It has been stripped to the bone and thereby a lot of flexibility has gone. For example a mesh is mapped quite randomly by default. In the previous version you could click on a surface to use that as a mapping plane. Now you can't. There should be some preset mapping choises like "from top" (good for aerial photography) and "from front", "starting from lower left corner" etc. Texture mapping is not the only problem though. I wrote a post to the wish list forum but didn't receive a single reply!

    "I think it's about time for a major overhaul of RenderWorks including:

    ' Faster and more user friendly global illumination

    ' Ambient occlusion, screen space (SSAO) and model space

    ' Baking of global illumination

    ' Realtime/ GPU-rendered global illumination

    ' Object animation (for people, cars, sky etc.)

    ' Daylight system with sun and sky lighting

    ' Sky generator with clouds

    ' Physically accurate materials

    ' Add more yourself....

    There are some good reasons for this:

    Stop customers escaping to standalone redering solutions.

    There are some great advantages with integrated rendering.

    ' The trend is towards interactiveness and it's a good trend. With BIM you make canges to the model hundreds of time during the design prosess and you want both to see and communicate the results fast and without delays. Exporting to another applicatin, maybe texturing and mapping over again each time is delay and it's counter-interactive. The time when we completed all design phases in 2D and made some glossy visualizations in the end to sell the finished flats are over.

    . There is no reason why VectorWorks should have a renderer inferior to Revit (Mental ray), Artlantis, Sketchup (with integrated V-ray) etc. Renderworks is based on Lightwork and LW has realtime global illumination so lets get all the good suff we can get out of LW. Maybe LW can't keep up with giants like Mental ray or V-ray, but an up to date integrated renderer would be an important competitive edge against Revit, Autocad, Archicad and the rest."


  4. The texturebed tool is interesting. I've played around with it a bit, the class texture maps from the top by default which is great for aerial photographs. But in the end it seems to be yet another example of tools that almost works/ could have worked. I can't find any way to edit the mapping like move, scale or rotate the texture to fit the terrain, so what use is it then?


  5. I posted this under the RenderWorks tab a couple of weeks ago. It seems that this was possible in 2008, but not anymore. Sounds like downgrading to me:

    "Is there a smart way to map a texture like an aerial photography or a map image to a terrain model. It was quite difficult and very time consuming up to VW 2008. With improvements like Parasolid and attributes mapping tool I would expect it to be both easier and faster. I find it almost impossible, but I'm sure there are some tips'n tricks I've been missing out. In VW2008 you could not texture a DTM directly, but by converting it to a mesh you could map a texture by clicking on a horisontal part of the terrain and then rotating, moving and scaling manually you could achieve an approximate fit. The biggest problem then was: 1) If you did changes to the DTM or the mesh you would have to do all the fitting over again. 2) The terrain would not receive light in Renderworks with mesh smoothing turned on resulting in either a black or a coarse, edgy looking terrain.

    Are any of theese problems fixed in VW2010? Mapping a texture to a terrain mesh should be quite simple as both the scaling, rotation and placement should be set by the image, from top, north/south and reference to global coordinates (like it actually works when importing 2D bitmaps). If you don't use global coordinates there should be a local coordinate, let's say the lower left corner (or center) of the image linked to the corresponding point of the terrain. If the extent of the image doesn't match the terrain exactly all you'd have to do is move the texture horisontally. What I've seen in VW2010 so far seems quite random and not very intuitive.

    One thing I've noticed is that mesh smoothin now works on very small meshes (like a tree trunk from a VBvisual plant). As an architect I need a more or less photorealistic representation of the site, a couple of hundred meters of surroundings in all directions to show neighbouring bulidings, roads, vegetation etc."


  6. I think it's about time for a major overhaul of RenderWorks including:

    ' Faster and more user friendly global illumination

    ' Ambient occlusion, screen space (SSAO) and model space

    ' Baking of global illumination

    ' Realtime/ GPU-rendered global illumination

    ' Object animation (for people, cars, sky etc.)

    ' Daylight system with sun and sky lighting

    ' Sky generator with clouds

    ' Physically accurate materials

    ' Add more yourself....

    There are some good reasons for this:

    Stop customers escaping to standalone redering solutions.

    There are some great advantages with integrated rendering.

    ' The trend is towards interactiveness and it's a good trend. With BIM you make canges to the model hundreds of time during the design prosess and you want both to see and communicate the results fast and without delays. Exporting to another applicatin, maybe texturing and mapping over again each time is delay and it's counter-interactive. The time when we completed all design phases in 2D and made some glossy visualizations in the end to sell the finished flats are over.

    . There is no reason why VectorWorks should have a renderer inferior to Revit (Mental ray), Artlantis, Sketchup (with integrated V-ray) etc. Renderworks is based on Lightwork and LW has realtime global illumination so lets get all the good suff we can get out of LW. Maybe LW can't keep up with giants like Mental ray or V-ray, but an up to date integrated renderer would be an important competitive edge against Revit, Autocad, Archicad and the rest.


  7. VectorWorks could make realtime walkthroughs if RenderWorks could bake global illumination into the textures of the model. You would only have to render once and OpenGL would do the rest, exept reflections. Something for the wish list?


  8. Is there a smart way to map a texture like an aerial photography or a map image to a terrain model. It was quite difficult and very time consuming up to VW 2008. With improvements like Parasolid and attributes mapping tool I would expect it to be both easier and faster. I find it almost impossible, but I'm sure there are some tips'n tricks I've been missing out. In VW2008 you could not texture a DTM directly, but by converting it to a mesh you could map a texture by clicking on a horisontal part of the terrain and then rotating, moving and scaling manually you could achieve an approximate fit. The biggest problem then was: 1) If you did changes to the DTM or the mesh you would have to do all the fitting over again. 2) The terrain would not receive light in Renderworks with mesh smoothing turned on resulting in either a black or a coarse, edgy looking terrain.

    Are any of theese problems fixed in VW2010? Mapping a texture to a terrain mesh should be quite simple as both the scaling, rotation and placement should be set by the image, from top, north/south and reference to global coordinates (like it actually works when importing 2D bitmaps). If you don't use global coordinates there should be a local coordinate, let's say the lower left corner (or center) of the image linked to the corresponding point of the terrain. If the extent of the image doesn't match the terrain exactly all you'd have to do is move the texture horisontally. What I've seen in VW2010 so far seems quite random and not very intuitive.

    One thing I've noticed is that mesh smoothin now works on very small meshes (like a tree trunk from a VBvisual plant). As an architect I need a more or less photorealistic representation of the site, a couple of hundred meters of surroundings in all directions to show neighbouring bulidings, roads, vegetation etc.


  9. Is there a smart way to map a texture like an aerial photography or a map image to a terrain model. It was quite difficult and very time consuming up to VW 2008. With improvements like Parasolid and attributes mapping tool I would expect it to be both easier and faster. I find it almost impossible, but I'm sure there are some tips'n tricks I've been missing out. In VW2008 you could not texture a DTM directly, but by converting it to a mesh you could map a texture by clicking on a horisontal part of the terrain and then rotating, moving and scaling manually you could achieve an approximate fit. The biggest problem then was: 1) If you did changes to the DTM or the mesh you would have to do all the fitting over again. 2) The terrain would not receive light in Renderworks with mesh smoothing turned on resulting in either a black or a coarse, edgy looking terrain.

    Are any of theese problems fixed in VW2010? Mapping a texture to a terrain mesh should be quite simple as both the scaling, rotation and placement should be set by the image, from top, north/south and reference to global coordinates (like it actually works when importing 2D bitmaps). If you don't use global coordinates there should be a local coordinate, let's say the lower left corner (or center) of the image linked to the corresponding point of the terrain. If the extent of the image doesn't match the terrain exactly all you'd have to do is move the texture horisontally. What I've seen in VW2010 so far seems quite random and not very intuitive.

    One thing I've noticed is that mesh smoothin now works on very small meshes (like a tree trunk from a VBvisual plant). As an architect I need a more or less photorealistic representation of the site, a couple of hundred meters of surroundings in all directions to show neighbouring bulidings, roads, vegetation etc.


  10. My graphics card is Quadro FX 1700 with 512 MB video ram.

    My processor is 2 x quad core Xeon E5410 2.33GHz which should be reasonably up to date. I'll look for newer drivers for the graphics card. Nemetschek recommends the older version of QuickTime that comes with the instalation disk rather than the newest. I have never had any problems with this in earlier versions of VW.


  11. I'm failing to see any improvements to rendering, 3D accuracy or stability in VW2009. A smoothed mesh will still not receive light other than ambient, all highligting must be turned off when working with meshes, else annoying fuzzy, flashing black and orange lines are drawn at all edges, making OpenGL exremely slow and uninteractive. Meshes can not be made larger than in previous versions and large meshes still causes blank renders(all white screen in OpenGL,checkerboard in Renderworks and all black in render bitmap)frequent crashes when rendering and crashes every time when trying to perform a boolean operation between a mesh and a solid. I see no reason to update to VW2009 before this is fixed. It's a bit of a dilemma, because I'v built many large terrain models in previous versions and with satisfied customers. Now it seems as if VW is no longer the right tool for the job. Are there other progams within the Nemetschek system that are better suited for large terrain models?


  12. Are there any improvements to RenderWorks in version 2009? I could not find any in the .PDF brochure. Since there is a new and improved 3D engine I would expect this to open up new possibilities for rendering. At least I would expect faster and more accurate global illumination and some sort of fast or nearly interactive preview. After all it's already there in LightWorks and RenderWorks is based on this. There is no reason to give up RenderWorks yet. I do not fully support the views raised in the previous post from carpalmer. I get reasonable results with many point lights on quite complex models in minutes on a multiprosessor PC. I get a fairly nice Cornell box render with Final Gather in ten seconds and with radiosity in about two minutes. But I still haven't managed to make one decent interior perspective!


  13. I built a simple model about 6x5 meters with four white walls, a white ceiling, a floor with wooden texture, one big window, a table with four simple chairs and a directional light. With the proposed object size and first detail at about 1 m rendering time is acceptable but creates ugly atifacts, especally at the top and bottom of walls. If I reduce object size and first detail to about 300 mm the artifacts are still there, just smaller scale. To get a reasonable result it seems I have too use the smallest possible values for object size which results in rendering times amounting to days. Then it?s very hard to evaluate by trial and error. Is it really worth spending time on? Is there an optimal setting for a room of this size with details the size of window frames, table legs etc. or is there some trick that I`m missing?


  14. Geomerics claim that their tecnology can render a scene with radiosity in 1/100 of a second, that is realtime with any up to date video card from ATI or nVidia. http://www.geomerics.com/enlighten-why.htm

    Why is it that renderworks takes two days to calculate a radiosity solution for a simple scene with four walls, a floor and a roof and some windows? And when finished you discover that the image is far too dark, far too light or full of artifacts. Even a simple scene with an area light outside the windows to simulate daylight takes a day to render even without radiosity!

    Why doesn?t renderworks use a similar technology as Geomerics if it?s actually 10 million times faster? Maybe more realistic, when will we see a radical increase in render speed on realistic lighting in renderworks?


  15. Hei,

    I have some problems when i am making renders. Materials of building walls are changing. And there is no diference what kind of rendering i am doing. After rendering some of walls lost their textures.

    I am looking forward for help!


  16. Good question! Especially considering that radiosity in RenderWorks still isn?t that great. The ability to increase object and first detail size may reduce render time, but it also reduces accuracy and gives bad artifacts especially round corners and edges. It has been there since version 12.0, but I still have seen very few examples of realistic renderings made with radiosity in RW. By the way, why have you received no answers?


  17. I tried to render a quite complex mesh, converted from a terrain model to be able to apply an image texture to it. Everything worked fine until I turned mesh smoothing on in the document settings. Then the mesh turned black. So I did some experimenting and found out that a smoothed mesh with an image texture will not receive light other than ambient light. If I use a procedural texture it will render fine and smooth. There also seems to be a connection between the size of the mesh and the result you get. You never get a smooth mesh with image texture, it?s alway edgy and full of artifacts, when the size of the mesh (number of triangles) increases, larger parts gets black. This looks like a bug to me, but is there a way around it in the current version? I really see a potential for higher realism in rendering architectural models with this feature!

    Hans Jakob


  18. Blurred reflections: Do they have that already? There?s an image in the ligtworks gallery http://www.lightworkdesign.com/gallery.php?bigimg=indtbx_lucchetti_640

    that doesn?t look so bad. Is this the same "LightWorks" that is used in RenderWorks? They write on their Industrial toolbox page that "Over 20 shaders like decal, draft angle evaluation, knurl, multi-layer paint, translucent plastic, and anisotropic metals give users access to the 300+ materials contained in the 'Industrial Materials' pre-defined LWA archives." http://www.lightworkdesign.com/products/indtbx.htm


  19. There are two materials I?d like to make:

    1. Brushed steel: I?ve tried the anisotrpic, brushed setting under reflection in the edit texture dialog, but this seems to be just a variety of specular reflection which works only on the light sources, (maybe I haven?t got the settings right but I?ve got better results with phong, then at least you get a highlight spot for each light source) What I need is real blurred reflection so I tried to use mirror for reflection and add a noise image to the bump channel. This certainly gives an irregular reflection but when I tried to reduce the scale of the bump to imitate the microscopic patterns that makes blurry reflections in the real world it didn?t have any effect. Down to a certain level the scale can?t be reduced anymore and the results get coarse and grainy. Is the an other way?

    2. White glass: I would like to make a lamp shade made of white glass so that when I put a point light inside the glass will glow, more close to the light and less furter away. I had not thougt it would be possible (it seems to involve both subsurface scattering, which is not supported as far as I know, and an area light to pass the light on to the surroundings) had I not seen it on the VW 12 feature demos: Radiosity movie. On the first render the room is almost black, but yuo can see the glow of the bulb through the blue glass shade. What?s the trick?

    Hans Jakob


  20. Gideon

    I really agree, Nemetschek shold supply a tutorial and a an explanation of how HDRI works. What I?ve found out so far is:

    1. How an environment is correctly mapped onto either a sphere or a cardboard box (which seems to be the case with vertcal cross) seems quite complcated.

    2. What I did was simply creating a light dome where the lower part is black (since architectural models normally stand on a ground that blocks light from below). The upper part is mainly light blue with an orange spot. This is a very apporximate solution but I think it gives a very nice "moody" sunset look.

    2. It?s the lit surfaces that show up on the HDRI background, not the light sources. I think it would be a bit tricky to "syncronise" a directional light to the spot on the background accurately.

    3. HDRI seems to work best with exteriors. With interiors where light only comes in through the windows the major part of the light is blocked by roof and walls and the result gets too dark and grainy.

    Hans Jakob


  21. I posted a message with a very similar question the same day but it didn?t show up in the tech forum, neither did you receive any reply so I thought i had to find out for my self. There are sure other, maybe better ways to do this, but it works. To create an even skylight is quite easy.

    1. Create a hemishphere

    2. Place a point light in the center with shadows turned off

    3. Use emitter and turn up the light to 2000 lumens, give the light a color other than white, for example light blue to simulate the sky.

    4. Place a camera right above the center point facing upward on the screen in plan view. Go to camera view

    5. Render using Best quality RenderWorks

    6. Export as HDRI with a low number of pixels, let?s say 128x128 and give the file a name.

    Thats about it. Now you can make a background with this HDRI file and get nice smooth shadows fast.

    If you want a sky that is not evenly colored it`s a bit more complicated, but mainly the same. For a sunset sky make the point light a bit darker blu, then aim an orange spotlight towards the horizon and continue as the previous example. You may have to experiment more on this to get the right colors, brightness and light angles.

 

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...