Accurender Agreement

[studio3p]

Does anyone have a good idea of how much longer the Revit | Accurender relationship is under contract? I'm curious because the single biggest issue I hear from architects around me is that they are underimpressed with the built-in rendering capabilities of Revit.

I think this lack of "power" is evident when visiting the Revit page at Autodesk.com and taking a look through the images in the Gallery. Not very convincing. I am rather surprised that Autodesk doesn't hire an expert to generate a few top quality renderings with the Revit/Accurender combo to demonstrate the capabilities, even if those results were well out of reach of the more pedestrian user.

[gregcashen]

This was discussed at AU a bit. My impression is that Accurender is the tool for now and there are currently no public plans to migrate to VIZ. The reasoning behind the AR decision was descibed as being based on the notion of Revit, not as an all-in-one, best of all worlds, tool, but rather as a visualiztion tool within Revit's core functionality, which is building design and documentation. I believe that Revit is being made to work better with VIZ et al, but that there is no plan to integrate a different tool into it.

In short, if you need better rendering, do what everyone else has to do...buy VIZ, etc. :roll:

[beegee]

Steve Burri wrote
VIZ will not be embedded into Revit early 2004.

You can read into that what you will.

[Chad Smith]

We want VIZ in Revit, we want VIZ, we want VIZ..... sorry, as not to offend Accurender users..... I want VIZ in Revit, I want VIZ, I want VIZ, I want VIZ, I want VIZ..... :D :D 8) 8)

[funkman]

Excuse my utter ignorance in most things computer - but what is VIZ and in your opinion how is it better than accurender?

In other words, what can VIZ do that accurender cannot?

[beegee]

Excuse my utter ignorance in most things computer - but what is VIZ and in your opinion how is it better than accurender?

In other words, what can VIZ do that accurender cannot?

From the 'orses mouth -
Autodesk VIZ incorporates a new generation of global illumination technology and real-world lighting for richer, more compelling renderings and a more intuitive design process. Now you can capture subtle lighting effects such as indirect illumination, soft shadowing, and color bounce. The richness of light as it fills and defines space gives your images a depth and realism other visualization tools can’t match. And to get these brilliant results you don’t have to be a computer graphics specialist. Just design and set up lighting as you would in the real world.

[GuyR]

You can define materials/camera paths etc within revit now. On top of this I'd like to choose the renderer I use. It may be VIZ, but could well be Universe,lightwave or Radiance.

At the very least .3DS or some other format that retains camera and material information would be nice.

If you'e interested to see what other rendering software is capable of check out this:

http://hdri.cgtechniques.com/~sibenik2/

Guy

[Kroke]

We want VIZ in Revit, we want VIZ, we want VIZ..... sorry, as not to offend Accurender users..... I want VIZ in Revit, I want VIZ, I want VIZ, I want VIZ, I want VIZ..... :D :D 8) 8)

I agree.

[Les Therrien]

This whole VIZ thing puts me in a dilemna.

I know that some time in the future, Revit will have Viz. Whether it is a separate platform or in the form of a Viz-render, nobody knows.

My problem is that I have a seat of Viz R3 which I've used once, maybe twice. Not a good investment. The question remains, should I keep up the upgrade as to not fall behind and have to re-purchase the entire software or assume it will be an entirely different platform?? That is the problem. :?

[beegee]

If I had it, I'd keep it, upgrade it and learn to use it. :wink:

[Kroke]

Excuse my utter ignorance in most things computer - but what is VIZ and in your opinion how is it better than accurender?

In other words, what can VIZ do that accurender cannot?

Check this link and see for yourself:
http://www.cgarchitect.com/gallery/galleryList.asp


I have seen some very quality images produced by AccuRender, don't get me wrong... But these...well, take a look and see for yourself. :D

[Scott Hopkins]

Wow! There is some amazing stuff being done with 3D Studio Max. I think it is fair to say that Accurender can’t even come close to this quality. I am having a hard time believing this is not actually a photograph.
http://www.cgarchitect.com/user_artwork/CasadeCampo.jpg

[Roger Evans]

Ummm...

Isn't that because it is a photo??

[beegee]

I agree. Very clever ... its a photograph, reworked in photoshop to appear very slightly unreal, then called a render.

Like The Who said... we won't get fooled again. :)

[Scott Hopkins]

Hey, it was off of the Rendering site posted above. Claims to be done in Max.

[beegee]

Just my attempt at subtle humour, Scott. ( refer emoticon )

[Scott Hopkins]

No problem Beegee. 8) I realized the "rendering" was of dubious ancestry when I posted it.

[beegee]

I think the rain water stains on the eaves adds a nice touch of realism.

I'm going to add that to my future renderings. :shock:

[Simon.Whitbread]

I can just see your clients reaction...

:o

[Steve_Stafford]

My first thought was, "it's a model of a picnic bench pshop'd..." :D

[Scott D Davis]

Something else to look forward to if Revit gets Viz:

January 2004 - Piranesi® plug-in for Autodesk® Architectural Desktop 2004
announced

Architectural Desktop users can now develop their building model with
Architectural Desktop 2004, and use Piranesi's patented "3D Painting"
technology to rapidly paint in extra detail or use artistic, hand-drawn
effects.

This has been made possible by a new plug-in, developed jointly by
Informatix and Autodesk using the VIZ Render technology incorporated into
Architectural Desktop 2004. With the plug-in, an Architectural Desktop 2004
user can save a 3D view in Piranesi's EPix format. The same technology can
also produce hand-rendered panoramas - ideal for presenting 3D content in a
web page. The plug-in can be downloaded from the Informatix web site at
http://www.informatix.co.uk/piranesi/adt2004.shtml.

"Piranesi offers Architectural Desktop 2004 users a new approach to concept
design studies", says Chris Russon of Informatix. "Piranesi can very quickly
paint in textures and details such as people, furniture, or plants that are
difficult to model. Piranesi can also create a wide range of hand-rendered
effects, that are visually appealing and promote discussion by drawing
attention to what is important".

For more information on Piranesi visit the Informatix web site at
http://www.informatix.co.uk/piranesi/ or email info@informatix.co.uk

[beegee]

I looked into Piranesi a while back .. and its a very nice program !

With viz-revit ( even lite) and piranesi, most of us would have no need of any other rendering solution.

[PeterJ]

How does Piranesi compare with that other favourite Ketchup?

I know neither can exchange model information directly with Revit or ADT but which is the easier to use? They are pretty price competitive, with Piranesi being 50% more expensive but in a sector of the market where that equates to around £150.

I suppose if Autodesk is somehow aligning itself with Piranesi then that's the one to watch. Certainly Informatix ios a developer of the size that I imagine Aurodesk would feel more comfortable with.

[Scott D Davis]

I think (someone correct me if I'm wrong) that Sketchup and Piranesi work differently. Sketchup uses 3D models, and allows the creation of 3D objects. Piranesi uses 2D views of 3D models, but the 2D views have some type of x-data that makes them intelligent. The 2D views know the difference between materials, and perspective and depth are recognized. As you 'paint' on the materials, they stay constrained to the object, perspective, etc. You can use really large 'brushes' and swipe over the whole model to apply a material to all walls, for instance, and only the walls will get the material. I have heard Piranesi described as "Photoshop on steriods for Architects."

[hand471037]

Piranesi is a painting program pretending to be a 3D application, and Skechup! is a 3D application pretending to be a painting program. ;)

Accurender is a lot easyer to use and less complex (esp. when dealing with Radiosity) whereas Viz is harder to use and (much) more complex. However, Viz/Max can produce much better images than Accurender.

So I'm torn, for I've worked with Viz in the past, and really don't like certain things about it (complex Radiosity that feels like a last-minute add-on, strange legacy interface, ect) and the only things I don't like about Accurender is the fact that the materials don't save into my Revit models, the limited ability in making complex materials, and the fact that the material & plant editor like to crash. :)

So if they swap out Accurender for Viz, while rendering in Revit will be much stronger it will also be less accessible IMHO. I'm with Guy on this one, simply add to Revit the ability for us to use whatever Render engine we want or add 3DS export/linking. Heck, Radiance is open source, they could add that into Revit and make Viz Rendering look like a toy if it weren't for the fact that AutoDesk would never do that. :)

Well, and the fact that rendering in Radiance is more complex (in some ways) than Viz. :twisted:

[bclarch]

Jeffrey,

Have you used the full blown version of Accurender or just the reduced version built into Revit? If the former, what are the differences? Are they valuable enough for us to lobby Autodesk to include the full blown Accurender in Revit? From a programming point of view, adding additional Accurender functionality to the existing package seems more likely to happen then incorporating a new piece of software.

[Kroke]

I used to use full blown AR. The biggest problem I have with Revit's version of it is that we have no control over our materials. Such as...if you assign a texture to a fascia for instance, with a slope (pitch) to it, in the full blown version, you could select an object (the fascia) and assign an angle of that texture on that object (rotate the material per object). So you wouldn't have to create a fascia texture for every roof pitch in existence. Know what I'm sayin?

Basically there aren't many things left out from the Revit side of AR, just a few.

[hand471037]

I've used the full version of AR3 in the past. There isn't much difference, really, other than the lack of decent UV control and the more limited lighting options.

AR4 looks pretty keen tho, but it's still a beta and there is no word as to if it will get into Revit or not.

But see, I'm torn, because for simple renderings I love how efficent and easy Accurender is; and for complex renderings that need to look photo-real I love Radiance for it's complexity and ability. :) So I'll be sad to see Accurender go for a more complex, even if better, solution built into Revit, simply because I worry about what will happen when they try to add Viz to Revit- if it's as easy to use as Accurender in Revit than I'm game. Just give people the ability to dump their model 'by material' or to a 3DS file, so that they can then use whatever rendering program they want!

[bclarch]

3DS export seems like it should have been easy enough to implement that it should already be part of the package. I guess that I'm just cynical by nature but it almost makes me suspect that the Accurender licensing agreement restricts Revit from providing this option.

[gregcashen]

nope. they're working on it, from what i gathered at AU.

[Tucker]

I'm not surprised that Viz would be the choice for architectural rendering, but what about Modeling? I'm completely sold on the modeling capability of Revit, (especially since my last trial of ADT4) but what are the other choices for Modeling, Viz, ADT?

[Bill McLees]

Based on ease of use, Accurender is much easier to learn and use than VIZ. Based on ease of use, REVIT is generally easier to use than most ways of entering 3D data.

However, I have seen few REVIT renderings that did not appear to be student projects or amateur efforts. Good work is out there -- but not much.

I can do a much better job in plain vanilla AutoCAD with Accurender 3.1. It takes a long time to laboriously enter 3dfaces, regions, etc. Then assign materials, do the lights, find the best camera locations, and on and on. Even so, the result is usually worth the effort.

REVIT is great for quick 3D visualization. This is usually all a client needs to understand how a space works or how a project will look. But the last time I looked at the Accurender gallery, there were no REVIT projects exhibited. Obviously, REVIT will get there, but for now, I don't think the lack of VIZ is the problem.

Finally, I have used AutoCAD since 1986. I've had REVIT since version 3 or so. I know most of the AutoCAD tricks available, and I usually know seven or eight ways to do a given task or model a given shape. With REVIT, I'm lucky to know one. I'm afraid often there is only one. Regardless, I think we should wish for a Sketchup clone to be part of REVIT and forget about VIZ for a while.

[beegee]

However, I have seen few REVIT renderings that did not appear to be student projects or amateur efforts. Good work is out there -- but not much.

Haven't looked through the gallery here then Bill ? :wink:

[Chad Smith]

I've done 1 project in Revit that has been rendered in VIZ and it just isn't worth the stuffing around. If I have to do a rendering I go back to trusty old ADT, and I will keep using ADT for presentation renderings for as long as Revit isn't usable with VIZ.

I'm hoping that the next VIZ is taking so long to be released because they are working on being able to link a RVT file straight into it, in the same fashion as you can a DWG file, hence the reason for using ADT.

[hand471037]

Heard a rumor today (from some random guy, NOT AN AUTODESK REP) at the AutoCAD 2005 'boot camp' training that Viz 5, due in April, will have some kind of ability to talk with Revit files. No details, and hoping to find out mkore tomorrow!

[gregcashen]

My understanding, based on misinformation, misunderstandings and missspellings (see) is that Revit 6.1 (and I think Revit 6) can already "talk" to VIZ via the xdata that is exported with Revit now. Could this be what he is referring to?

[Roger Evans]

No doubt there are better programs than Accurender

But the way it works in Revit & the stuff I can produce in the time suits me fine ~ I put up with the apparent limitations
The ideas are communicated very well.

I only have one life & I'd rather get on with the biz of producing something
& not having to keep on learning how to do something.
Don't get me wrong learning is fun, but there's always a bottom line when you just have to produce and do it quickly with the minimum of effort.

I'd vote to keep Accurender with options for others to use whatever program is or can be made compatible.

Cheers

Roger

[jwilhelm]

I suggest that you take a look at the mcneel.com web site if you want to see what accurender is capable of. I think accurender is about as good a ray tracer as you will find out there, the main problem I see with it is its render speed and lack of interactivity. if you have to wait an hour to get a final render you are not likely to explore changing render settings to fine an image. Having said that I think it is possble to get great images out of accurender if you are willing to spend the time to understand how it works, mcneel has some good manuals for the autocad version of accurender. I know they are working on Accurender 4, hopefully that will get integrated into Revit. One thing I would like to see is the ability for accurender to utilize "ray tracing" hardware. There is a card available that viz can write to, perhaps we will see that one day. I will attempt to attach an image of one of my projects, not the greatest but not too bad...