More photo realistic renders

[mikeakar]

On 12/17/2024 at 8:29 PM, Matt Overton said:

Agree and would start with lighting options.

if the OP gets that right then how much set dressing required will reduce a lot. 

 

I think the image would have a big win with the right global illumination to get a proper dynamic range and logical shadows.

 

your eyes always want a proper white point and a black point. No white point and your brain reads it as gloomy or fake. Glare can be your friend to push the eye to what you want to them to see.

 

what is "global illumination"? Is this a setting? I cannot find this in the lighting settings.

[grant_PD]

@mikeakar it's called indirect lighting in VW

[scottmoore]

On 12/17/2024 at 6:18 PM, Jeff Prince said:

 

If you don’t have time to model details, how will you dedicate the time necessary to learn and maintain another software package?

 If you are only doing a 1-6 renderings a year, I would recommend getting very good at VWX or outsource your renderings.

 

 If you are doing 1 or more high quality renderings per month, it probably makes sense to get a specialized rendering solution and maintain the libraries of assets to make things look good.  At that point, you aren’t an architect anymore and have become more of a visual artist.

 

i think people convince themselves they can just buy software and hit an easy button to make beautiful renderings.  It doesn’t work that way.  The last 10% of efforts to make a rendering look great takes excellent lighting design, materials, and entourage.  It also takes an eye for what looks good in terms of framing a shot and taking artistic license to make it work.  Most of us have to stop at 80% to use renderings as a design “explainer”, not having the budget to get to 95% or beyond.  Then, you need the photoshop, etc skills to polish things off.  It’s a full time job with specialized knowledge with a limited shelf life.

I agree with Jeff. Renderworks can output really great renderings but it all comes down to accurate modeling, detailed textures, and great lighting. All are artworks in their own right.
 

Spend some decent time experimenting with textures. Understanding reflectivity, transparencies and bumps and how they interact with their environment is crucial. Keep in mind that reflectivity doesn’t exist in a vacuum; it requires something to reflect. Then how do those textures respond to lighting and rendering options?  Angle and type of lighting make a difference. Selecting the right number of max reflections, and appropriate number of light bounces all matter. Then the rendering settings all matter. The various quality levels will have a significant impact on overall results. 
 

There is no magic button to press for great renderings. It is an art form and skill that has to be developed. 

[Gaius]

What a great thread!

 

I share your frustration Mike. The past year I have used the improved shaded rendering options almost exclusively. The ceiling is wide open for better rendering within Vectorworks, but it is so time consuming. I'm not really experienced in photorealistic renders, but if that's the bar you are after it appears that work is (apparently quickly) done elsewhere. I appreciate that Vectorworks lighting is based on practical physics. Andrew Price (Blender) is a great educator, discussing how to pursue photorealism. Twinmotion has been a great complement to Vectorworks, and in head-to-head competitions performs very well. But as everyone has been saying, lighting & rendering is its own skill and art form.

 

What I would like to share is last night I jumped back into AI Visualization, which utilizes Stable Diffusion. You do need to learn some basic ABC's on how to structure a prompt for desired results. But whoah, this is blowing my mind. Clearly I will be abandoning typical rendering for perspective viewports and concept work, instead using AI Visualization when I want to make a viewport emotive. Also using AI for creating particular textures, or quickly stylizing project specific details. This is a total Power Tool !!

 

Image attached: Top Left is my shaded viewport which was referenced. Everything below is AI stylization. This are done with simple 4-12 word prompts.

Next step for me, will be assembling a collection of my "go to" prompts. These are done in seconds! Faster than a simple shaded viewport, with 100x the impact.

 

[VIRTUALENVIRONS]

Rendering is a funny thing, but also complex.  It takes work, no way around it.  Having said that, the image below modelled and rendered in Vectorworks has only two textures that have a colour of sorts.  The tires and the trim.  The body is simply a reflective surface that pulls in the colours from the background and the HDRI lighting.  Same with the floor.

This model was made with 2018 render settings.  Nothing seems to have changed in 2025.

 

[Jeff Prince]

1 hour ago, VIRTUALENVIRONS said:

The body is simply a reflective surface that pulls in the colours from the background and the HDRI lighting.  Same with the floor.

Seems like there is something wrong with that lighting setup, looks pure white when it should be warm with reds and oranges.

[VIRTUALENVIRONS]

The reddish background you see is a plane with a texture on it, so it only reflects on the backside and part of the top.  The rim I considered trim and has a texture.  The body is reflecting and picks up everything.  

 

I used  the same settings and HDRI background in the C4D image below, except that C4D allow for environmental reflections which produce a superior image.

 

Environmental rendering.  This is something that did not make it across that I know of when Maxon transferred its rendering engine to VW's.  

 

 

 

 

Edited January 5 by VIRTUALENVIRONS

[Jeff Prince]

2 hours ago, VIRTUALENVIRONS said:

Environmental rendering.  This is something that did not make it across that I know of when Maxon transferred its rendering engine to VW's.  

 

VWX has environmental lighting and will pick up properly set up backgrounds.  What I'm getting at with the rendering you posted is the lighting is not set up to depict or reflect the environment, which makes it look very strange.  The lighting should be warm and filled with color.

 

So here's one light throwing 6500K, no environmental or ambient lighting

The figure on the left is a twisted rectangle with chrome texture, sphere on the right with 'Howdens Universal Gloss White' texture

The ground is 'wet asphalt', which has reflectivity too.

Here's the same setup + a simple background environmental light.  The textures are the same.  Note how the chrome, paint, and ground all pick up both the background environmental lighting regardless of their orientation AND they pick up the single spot light I set up at the corner of the twisted rectangle.  It is casting blue due to 6500K + background influence on the color.  

[VIRTUALENVIRONS]

In C4d there is a setting called environment.  So think of it as the ability to reflect a different HDRI background to separates parts of a model.  For example, if you have ten objects, you could reflect ten different backgrounds.  See below

 

[Jeff Prince]

2 hours ago, VIRTUALENVIRONS said:

In C4d there is a setting called environment.  So think of it as the ability to reflect a different HDRI background to separates parts of a model.  For example, if you have ten objects, you could reflect ten different backgrounds.  See below

 

 

That doesn't make it look realistic or accurate though, which is the topic of conversation.

[VIRTUALENVIRONS]

I suppose, although when I have shown that to anyone else, they love it, but perhaps it is the modelling and not the rendering.

 

To be clear, I have had great success with modelling in VW's and rendering/animating in C4D in my career, but I have been using the same rendering methodology for over 25 years.  This is basically what all VW's users use today,  but it is ancient history compared to the tools now available in C4D, Maya, and the like.  Node textures, multiple layer textures, and it goes on.  I only barely understand some of them.

 

C4D considers the colour/bitmap channel legacy rendering and I only have V20, don't know what V25 holds.  

 

But, although I have worked in all the engineering disciplines, the end result is an animation and not a still rendering.  This is different.  Let's assume the image below would qualify as realistic.  It took 2 1/2 hours to render on a pretty fast machine.  So for one second on animation (30 frames) that would be 75 hours.  The movies I have made are often over 30 minutes.

 

So you have to lower your expectations.

 

 

 

 

 

[EAlexander]

1 hour ago, VIRTUALENVIRONS said:

I suppose, although when I have shown that to anyone else, they love it, but perhaps it is the modelling and not the rendering.

 

To be clear, I have had great success with modelling in VW's and rendering/animating in C4D in my career, but I have been using the same rendering methodology for over 25 years.  This is basically what all VW's users use today,  but it is ancient history compared to the tools now available in C4D, Maya, and the like.  Node textures, multiple layer textures, and it goes on.  I only barely understand some of them.

 

C4D considers the colour/bitmap channel legacy rendering and I only have V20, don't know what V25 holds.  

 

But, although I have worked in all the engineering disciplines, the end result is an animation and not a still rendering.  This is different.  Let's assume the image below would qualify as realistic.  It took 2 1/2 hours to render on a pretty fast machine.  So for one second on animation (30 frames) that would be 75 hours.  The movies I have made are often over 30 minutes.

 

So you have to lower your expectations.

 

 

 

 

 

 

I couldn't disagree with this statement more! 

 

Now is the time to raise your expectations - we are in a golden age of render engines.  Look at the possibilities out there - multiple GPU/CPU render engines, node based systems, AOV pass systems, AI denoising, Game engine integration, a plethora of post processing composition software options, hardware advances and development, etc.  Leaps and bounds have been made on render times - I haven't waited two and half hours on a still in a decade with most complex scenes taking a few minutes to clarify.  This is the greatest time in history to do renderings and it's still expanding rapidly.

 

Vectorworks and Cinema4d/Maya/3D Max/etc are different animals - apples to oranges and all of these advancements in rendering are happing outside the inner workings of CAD.  It's great that programs like VW can continue to develop and advance their internal render systems as other technologies mature.  The OP is working within the Renderworks system and is looking for help improving within that system.

Edited January 6 by EAlexander

[grant_PD]

LOL the rendering threads devolve as quickly as Mac vs PC!

[Steve S.]

@mikeakar

 

TWINMOTION

 

Make sure you bump up the QUALITY to the highest setting for all of the below videos.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KBtneJif1KA&list=PL6jXt5vX3A7Ph-ckrGBB4IVWDFDPMXQA3&index=2

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ebdoW9xBKcY

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7pihNxzLfos

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C_9E4V6CzTw

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=32banPwKTnI

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gx7uQAX55uI

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YyaT7jga9Jk

Edited January 6 by Steve S.

[Gaius]

3 hours ago, EAlexander said:

Now is the time to raise your expectations - we are in a golden age of render engines.

Hi Evan,

I'm glad you showed up to this thread! You're the most demonstratively qualified person I know of, to speak to how to make CAD models render more realistically. 🤷‍♂️

This provokes the question, do you have any training materials or offer workshop sessions? And I see you do to an extent https://www.evanalexander.com/training

 

Can you concisely answer the core question of this thread. "How realistic can/should one make Vectorworks renders? How far is it reasonable to go within the software? And at what point do you think it's most efficient to move the drafted CAD into another software for rendering?

[VIRTUALENVIRONS]

4 hours ago, EAlexander said:

I haven't waited two and half hours on a still in a decade with most complex scenes taking a few minutes to clarify

In and out today.....contractors.  I guess each of us may have a different definition of complexity.  Animation is a completely different workflow and mindset.

[EAlexander]

1 hour ago, Gaius said:

Hi Evan,

I'm glad you showed up to this thread! You're the most demonstratively qualified person I know of, to speak to how to make CAD models render more realistically. 🤷‍♂️

This provokes the question, do you have any training materials or offer workshop sessions? And I see you do to an extent https://www.evanalexander.com/training

 

Can you concisely answer the core question of this thread. "How realistic can/should one make Vectorworks renders? How far is it reasonable to go within the software? And at what point do you think it's most efficient to move the drafted CAD into another software for rendering?

Thanks much for your kind words!  My training is on my Youtube Channel.

 

It's impossible to answer the core question, because everyone's needs and interests are so different.  As Jeff said earlier - if you need one or two renders a year, think about outsourcing.  If you need a small handful - get as good as you can with Renderworks and if you need a lot, then look to outside software to work in conjunction with Vectorworks.

 

For me, personally, I only use VW for modeling and laying out drafting plates.  I do all the materials, lighting, cameras, and rendering in Cinema4d (Corona or Redshift) or Blender (Cycles) or Unreal Engine.  I've found these paths more robust to me then working directly inside of Renderworks, but that is a very personal view and not right for everyone.  For many, what Renderworks offers is enough and for others, plugging in Enscape or Twinmotion does the trick.

 

No matter what the software delivery system, the things that matter most are: good Modeling with details, well structured Materials from good source material, and motivated indirect Lighting.  Pick your workflow and than focus on getting good at those things: the best way to improve is to spend as much time inside the software as possible and make as many images as you can.

[Ross Harris]

On 1/7/2025 at 10:03 AM, EAlexander said:

No matter what the software delivery system, the things that matter most are: good Modeling with details, well structured Materials from good source material, and motivated indirect Lighting.

Truer words cannot be said. So many people expect a rendering package to be a magic wand of some kind...

[Matt Overton]

On 1/4/2025 at 5:32 AM, grant_PD said:

@mikeakar it's called indirect lighting in VW

Sorry yes I’ve been out of Vw for my daily driver (and missing it)* and couldn’t think of the right term.
Also remember in VW you can use a different background for lighting as you are using as a background image.  Great for camera matching or indoors where the scene behind the camera is often very different to in front of the camera.

 

loving all the tips and tricks here.

[Elite Exhibits]

One rendering faux pas we have seen with VectorWorks / RenderWorks ...

       People draw, then they say, now I need to render.

 

            @Jeff Prince comment above hits it ...

 

The reality, with VectorWorks / RenderWorks,

       How you render is How you draw  ©

                        or at least

              How you render is How you should draw

 

Some geometry in VectorWorks behaves differently (¿badly?) when Textured.

So people struggle with it. Some Textures are only good in etherial situations. Example: Gravel on a road. No definition, no critical detail  ie: random looks real. 

 

Also, too many concatenate settings to get some things to work. (Or to work as expected.) ... as @Jesse Cogswell so eloquently points out above.

 

I have posted a similar file before - see attached - no functioning Lights and no existing RenderWorks Textures in this Rendering. Except, it took time and self experimentation to easily achieve and repeat this look in VectorWorks / RenderWorks. Not an example of great realism but an example of realistic efficiency achievable in VW / RW.

 

Peter

No Lights Rendering.pdf

[scottmoore]

On 1/8/2025 at 8:45 AM, Elite Exhibits said:

One rendering faux pas we have seen with VectorWorks / RenderWorks ...

       People draw, then they say, now I need to render.

 

            @Jeff Prince comment above hits it ...

 

The reality, with VectorWorks / RenderWorks,

       How you render is How you draw  ©

                        or at least

              How you render is How you should draw

 

Some geometry in VectorWorks behaves differently (¿badly?) when Textured.

So people struggle with it. Some Textures are only good in etherial situations. Example: Gravel on a road. No definition, no critical detail  ie: random looks real. 

 

Also, too many concatenate settings to get some things to work. (Or to work as expected.) ... as @Jesse Cogswell so eloquently points out above.

 

I have posted a similar file before - see attached - no functioning Lights and no existing RenderWorks Textures in this Rendering. Except, it took time and self experimentation to easily achieve and repeat this look in VectorWorks / RenderWorks. Not an example of great realism but an example of realistic efficiency achievable in VW / RW.

 

Peter

No Lights Rendering.pdf 623.22 kB · 24 downloads

I assume you included the scenic “downlight lighting” in your textures. I do that a lot as well.   Nice work. 
 

I think you are right in that one needs to consider rendering and how you will accomplish it when modeling. 

[VIRTUALENVIRONS]

@EAlexander  When we were discussing rendering and complexity, etc. last Sunday, I was starting to work on this project.   A young Rhinoceros was in desperate need of a 66 Corvette Sting Ray.   Thinking this was a sign that I should see how it looks in Vectorworks, I rendered/animated it in Vectorworks.  

 

Surprisingly, it turned out very nice.

 

Each of these frames took about 50 seconds with my Mac Pro M3 Chip.  Acceptable for animation.  

 

 

[Jeff Prince]

1 hour ago, VIRTUALENVIRONS said:

@EAlexander  When we were discussing rendering and complexity, etc. last Sunday, I was starting to work on this project.   A young Rhinoceros was in desperate need of a 66 Corvette Sting Ray.   Thinking this was a sign that I should see how it looks in Vectorworks, I rendered/animated it in Vectorworks.  

 

Surprisingly, it turned out very nice.

 

Each of these frames took about 50 seconds with my Mac Pro M3 Chip.  Acceptable for animation.  

 

 

Your lighting looks a bit better in this one, but the model isn’t quite right.   There is something off about the proportions and the wheel wells at the rear end aren’t correct.  Gotta spend the time getting the details right to make it believable, then render.

Edited January 12 by Jeff Prince

[VIRTUALENVIRONS]

Well you see Jeff, when she sent me the schematics, they were from an online version that was not the final design.  You can see below that this early design has a different side inlet, but the curvature of the back is correct.

 

I guess that is why they were online.  When I finally figured out they were not anatomically correct, it was too late.

 

If you notice, the rear wheels are actually larger than the front.

 

Regardless, she was ecstatic to get the model.

 

[grant_PD]

So to take it back to the original poster's questions...

One thing that VW renderworks will not do is a layering of material reflections.  This was a common complaint about render engines some time back, but mostly is fixed these days in decent render engines.  If you look at the photo below of a 1966 stingray, you can see that the paint finish actually has multiple reflections.  The base coat is more diffuse and providing color and wide specular highlights (diffuse reflections of the sun) and the top clear coat is providing very sharp reflections ( the very bright sun spots on the side facing the camera and the mirror like reflections on the hood).  

So while you could model this car accurately in vectorworks, and you could give it a glossy blue paint finish, you could not (AFAIK) get the multiple reflections from renderworks.