Artlantis for Rendering

[JKaster]

Hi there,

 

I want to know what people's experience with Artlantis has been.  My studio uses Vectorworks for all the 2D drawing, and most of the 3D renders, but the boss is considering investing in Artlantis to export our models and render.  I've never used the software, but I personally don't see anything in Artlantis that can't be done in Vectoworks.  I am the resident Vectorworks expert, so I do have some say.  

 

So here are my questions:

 

1.  What is the overall quality in terms of photorealism of the renders when comparing Artlantis and Vectorworks?

 

2.  Assuming hardware is equal, which is faster at high quality renders?

 

3.  What is the learning curve for Artlantis when compared to Vectorworks?

 

Let me know your thoughts.

 

Thanks.

 

 

[Boh]

I don’t know anything about Atlantis however I’ve been trialling Twinmotion and have been very impressed with its ease of use and quality of output. The best bit is it is currently free and also vw have just announced they are talking with the twinmotion people with a view to having an auto sync plugin so you can edit and update your twinmotion model as your edit your vw model.

 

There are various threads on TM on this forum. Definitely at least worth considering before investing elsewhere. 

[Claes Lundstrom]

On 4/25/2020 at 1:06 AM, JKaster said:

Hi there,

 

I want to know what people's experience with Artlantis has been.  My studio uses Vectorworks for all the 2D drawing, and most of the 3D renders, but the boss is considering investing in Artlantis to export our models and render.  I've never used the software, but I personally don't see anything in Artlantis that can't be done in Vectoworks.  I am the resident Vectorworks expert, so I do have some say.  

 

So here are my questions:

 

1.  What is the overall quality in terms of photorealism of the renders when comparing Artlantis and Vectorworks?

 

2.  Assuming hardware is equal, which is faster at high quality renders?

 

3.  What is the learning curve for Artlantis when compared to Vectorworks?

 

Let me know your thoughts.

 

Thanks.

 

 

I have used it a lot over the years, though perhaps not so much lately, as I nowadays mostly do product renderings. 

 

On the plus side, it's easier to use and learn than Renderworks. You get pre-view renderings in realtime, which you don't get in Renderworks. The effect of moving lights can be seen in realtime, which is time consuming in Renderworks. Reasonably priced compared to more high end rendering programs. 

 

On the minus side, you have to organise the model in textures to get a reasonable workflow. Having to export also takes time compared to using the internal rendering features. The rendering quality is not quite top notch compared to the very best, but generating results quickly on a decent level can also be a virtue. Renderworks typically needs quite a lot of work to get really good. 

 

Here are couple of examples by Artlantis. 

 

[herbieherb]

Realtime renderers are great when it comes to fast light setups, render time and learning curve. In exchange, you have to deal with exports, change textures and objects, etc. Of course, the render quality is never as realistic as it is possible with Renderworks. But well done renderings come very close. Although you can often see on the reflections of glass that there are not really light beams calculated. I would say that a beginner in Renderworks and a real-time renderer will get better results faster with the real-time renderer. For an experienced user it is the other way around.

I tried Twinmotion when it was free for a while. It was great for rendering videos and for live presentations to clients. That's also the purpose for which I would still use live renderers today. For rendering single images I am faster with Renderworks and have the better quality.

[Claes Lundstrom]

Quote

 

It's almost impossible to say which delivers the quickest result, doing it internally or exporting.  It very much depends of what type of models you are working with. Personally, I prefer using realtime renderers, as I have a super efficient communication path for what I do. 

 

The key to fast delivery is how quickly you can exchange data, and how much extra work required to prepare the model for export. It's not easy to create a seamless export from VW, even if you have a dedicated export filter. 

 

As for output quality of realtime renders, there is nothing that says that they deliver inferior final quality renderings. There are several products on the market that also delivers superb result. Artlantis is comparatively inexpensive and it delivers good results relative to it's price. My other, and more expensive realtime renderer, does however deliver top notch results.

[herbieherb]

5 hours ago, Claes Lundstrom said:

As for output quality of realtime renders, there is nothing that says that they deliver inferior final quality renderings.

Of course there are differences in the render quality. Realtime renderers work with the tricks of game engines. They come close to reality, but show weaknesses in some points. These are mainly indirect lighting, reflections and above all refractions and shadowing. Especially when rendering glass, all realtime renderers show weaknesses. The most accurate results are still provided by path tracing engines. So they have a right to exist beside the realtime renderers. Which software you use depends on the result you want to achieve, the media type, your own skills, your budget, the time you want to invest, the software and OS you use etc.

 

Here are some examples of pathtracing (left) and realtime (right) in blender:

 

 

 

 

Edited April 28, 2020 by herbieherb

[MogTheSmilingCat]

I've used Artlantis for many years - it used to be really clunky but is now pretty slick. It gives very photorealistic images - I've heard specialists describe them as less "game-y" than Twinmotion/Enscape etc. But... ...it costs more than Twinmotion and the pace of development has been, and is, very slow. You need to set up your workflow in order to be able to export to it - I use Classes and export them to Artlantis Shaders. So if you're thorough about ensuring all elements of your VW model have the appropriate class, then all you need to do in Artlantis is drop the right textures etc onto each Shader type and the whole thing snaps into high-quality loveliness. Export is one-way, so if you then update the WV model, you need to re-export to update the ATL model (but if you've already assigned textures to shaders it'll immediately look right). Artlantis allows use of "Reference Files" too - like a template, so if you regularly use particular textures/materials, you can quickly apply them to a newly-imported project. Artlantis isn't quick - it doesn't use the GPU much - so typical simple renders like the one attached take a minute or so for me.

 

I've just bought and am playing with Twinmotion. It looks *much* quicker, and is much easier to use animation, and is likely to soon have a simple VW plug-in to allow flipping between the two (I'm currently exporting via C4D). It looks much better for landscape / externals, probably more fun for internals although maybe not quite so photorealistic. Navigation - in all senses of the word - feels clunkier than in Artlantis but maybe that's just what I'm used to.

 

Phil B 

 

[Boh]

8 hours ago, MogTheSmilingCat said:

Navigation - in all senses of the word - feels clunkier than in Artlantis but maybe that's just what I'm used to.

I agree with @MogTheSmilingCat’s comments Re Twinmotion. With navigation, once the vw live sync plugin is available then ther shld also be an option to use the same navigation controls for vw as it does for archicad live sync.

[Phil hunt]

 

Been  using artlantis for 20 years the biggest advantage is real time changes to the model inside artlantis when you add a texture or a light you see the effect without having to render the scene, it's also easier to bring in external 3d models, cars and the like come in perfectly in a variety of cad files and the trees are fantastic, batch rendering is a breeze 

 

 

 

1.  What is the overall quality in terms of photorealism of the renders when comparing Artlantis and Vectorworks?     I WOULD SAY THE SAME BUT EASIER TO ACHIEVE IN ARTLANTIS

 

2.  Assuming hardware is equal, which is faster at high quality renders? VARIES

 

3.  What is the learning curve for Artlantis when compared to Vectorworks? EASY

 

Hope this helps feel free to contact if you require any further information