Hi
I just had an eMail from IMSI offerring me a very good deal on TFP, this usually happens before a new release.
I no longer use Envisioneer/TFP for modelling as I need 2D plans which they are not good at.
However I am interested in rendering and am trialling Landscape and deck with my 3DS house models.
Peter
Hi Peter,
I do not know anything about a new version but there is an update to the existing one recently announced - maybe this promptred the email. It has addressed some of the rendering issues that existed with the original release of TFP but some remain. (see http://forum.turbofloorplan.com/index.php/topic,522.0.html (http://forum.turbofloorplan.com/index.php/topic,522.0.html) for details). If you are only interested in outside renders (since you are using Landscape and Deck) you should be OK, as these external renderings seems to be best using Basic render anyway. It is the Advanced rendering that has issues, especially getting a balance between exterior and interior lighting. Advanced (Radiosity) uses light bounced off walls etc so is not generally needed for exterior renders. Basic renders very quickly too.
In Basic rendering there were some issues with plants producing a black rectangle around them but I have not had this happen since the update. (See example image)
Allan
Hi Allan
TFP was pretty much unable to deal with my 3DS house, the performance was awful.
I opened some Envisioneer 3 projects that I completed some time ago only to realise why I stopped using it. TFP exhibited the same behaviour relating to brick textures and slate which look truely awful on screen. Also some of the perspectives were obviously wrong.
When I tried to render it, TFP was still running 4 hours later.
My present software will render on screen in a couple of minutes and render a high res image to file in a couple of hours.
That said, I do not have a radiosity solution, just raytracing.
Here is a recent project. I saved this as a 3DS object and was able to import it into TFP but could not render it.
Regards
Peter
Hi Peter,
I do not understand the long render times you are experiencing. The largest I have tried is 1024 x 768 but this only took 15 minutes at highest quality radiosity - raytrace was only a few minutes. You must have a very big model.
Would you like to post your 3DS file so I can try to render it?
Allan
Peter (aka Voodooman),
What s/w are you now using? Since great renders are important to me (as well as quick ones), I need and use radiosity tho.
Have you ever tried Carrara Studio (daz3d.com)? was a free (slightly older) version in 3D World magazine a while back....and a free trial available.....but radiosity renders, especially high quality with many lights, can take a long time....animations can be very long too.
Also, free Google Sketchup imports directly into TFP and there are many free SU models on the web....as well as SU is pretty easy to use and can do simple renders (use styles).
Peter,
I meant to ask this in the earlier post - you said...
Quote from: Voodooman on June 03, 2008, 01:17:18 PM
Here is a recent project. I saved this as a 3DS object and was able to import it into TFP but could not render it.
What happened with your 3DS version when you tried to render it? Did it crash or what?
Allan
Hi
Sorry for not replying earlier, I have been busy with work.
The 3DS is too big to post at 5.98mb. I appreciate that this is largish but I have no other objects at all.
I will post a link to the 3DS tomorrow.
I am using Arcon for the model but feel that the renders are not very realistic as there is no radiosity to soften the edges.
I have tested Artlantis which is very good but is almost US$1000 and I dont think I will get the value from it.
I am happy with the textures so I only need the rendering part of the software, not the textures and objects.
I may however end up a reluctant purchaser in the next few weeks.
TFP is a great tool and superb value, if I was starting out today it would be my first choice.
I never thought I would have 1000s of hours and $1000s invested in this when I started out with FP9!
Regards
Peter
Hi Allan
Heres is the 3DS I was trying to render.
www.software4biz.co.uk/Escargot/Polcrebo.3ds (http://www.software4biz.co.uk/Escargot/Polcrebo.3ds)
I'm sorry for taking so long to post. I am currently project managing a ladscape gardening project and the labourer didnt show so I have been deputising. Its a long time since I spent a couple of days 'on the shovel'. I have been mixing cement and getting concrete flags to site - I forgot what hard work it is, I ache everwhere!
Regards
Peter
Hi Peter,
Well I had no problem importing your 6MB 3DS file and had no problem either moving around it. All the walk through, fly around, dynamic zooms etc, worked beautifully and smoothly. The main problem was that all the texture/colours were shades of grey. I tried randomly assigning some colours but there was no way to know which colour was which and with hundreds in the model I gave up trying on that.
Raytrace render completed in about 30 seconds but with everything shades of grey it was not much to look at. It also appears that all the surfaces are shiny so are reflecting everything which makes for a confusing image. The angular design of the trees seem to be throwing reflections of the sun all over the place adding to the confusion.
Radiosity renders a bit longer 15 min for 640x480 and does not look too bad even in grey (see images) but when the raytrace begins and adds all the reflections they ruin it!
Having wandered all round the building it seems to me it would be quite easy to do in TFP and should come out quite realistic and the trees and landscaping will probably come out better. Interestingly the people did not appear in the radiosity renders - they only showed up in the raytrace step.
I tried to render it in Carrara but it would not open the 3DS file, kept saying it could not find it, try again, even though it was selected! it would have the same colour/ texture problem also I suspect. Can your original software export as DXF? I think that does better transferring the textures.
Allan
I downloaded the .3ds file and got same results as Allan in TFP 12 and agree TFP could do that design fairly easily....i.e. I did not see any unusually difficult areas for TFP. And you could align/match the sun room windows with the supporting wall at the curved corner much better too.
Knowing I could select each item in a .3ds file (without un-grouping) using Carrara Studio program, I imported the .3ds file there. It imported just fine but asked for every .bmp texture file for each separate item....of course none were provided so I simply told Carrara they were not available. Apparently a couple textures came from within (i.e. red roofs) but it appears some transparencies did not.....but are easily fixed in Carrara....or simply there are no lights "on" inside the house.
I selected and changed the terrain to green, set a camera position and rendered....see attached.
With either the texture map .bmp or .jpg files or knowledge of the design, I could make a much better render....including sun and realistic sky and use radiosity.
I'd say I spent about 5 minutes to import and get the render. Render time was about 10 seconds.
It is good to have ability to exchange objects across programs to get a desired result
Just for grins I also did a close-up, added some colors and texture
Render was almost 3 minutes but 95% of time was rendering the hedge greenery details
Since the .3ds import objects can be selected individually and converted to vertex objects if needed, virtually any domains can be set and materials applied to any portions of the models.
Hi
I have downloaded the trial of Carrara and it looks pretty interesting.
As you say, TFP could create the model. However Arcon has many of the features that I have seen you ask for.
i.e. better camera manipulation, super fast 3D manipulation - including dual monitor support (the 2D on one monitor and 3D on the other - see the changes as you build), copy and paste between floors (windows, doors etc), import buildings (unlimited buildings - build a housing estate) etc.
The sun room was built using the built in designer in just a few minutes. The wall below has since been changed and is in the form you see because there is presently a curved stone wall in this location which will be demolished to be replaced by the conservatory. I demolished the wall (with the good old DEL key) and put the sun room on the existing base for illustrative purposes for my client.
Arcon also easily creates the 2D working drawings (see attached) which are my ultimate objective.
Arcon has two other features that you would love, guide lines and snaps. You can position walls to a millimetre and snap walls, doors, windows etc between floors. You can also copy a complete building allowing you to have multiple versions of your design on screen at the same time.
Thanks for your input. I have decide that I am possibly unable to render due to lack of machine power. My first action will be to build a new dual core PC and retry TFP on it.
Thanks
Peter
Thanks for the info.
I did go out to website and look at Arcon....tried to compare (their list) between low cost and pro version....and it seems like the low cost version does not output an image like a .jpg?? And not sure if the support is much good for the English language? Regardless, I have enough design tools for now.
Yes, TFP could use a few bug fixes and some better GUI. However it does work just fine on a dual monitor setup....which is what I use when not using it on my laptop. I have a P4 3.2 GHz with 2GB RAM and render times are fine. Laptop is a 2.4 P4 with 765 MB RAM and it renders just fine too......so you don't need a wonking fast new PC to run TFP....but you do need some good video card for OpenGL and unfortunately TFP does not specify which cards and versions are good or needed....so its a real crap shoot to know whether a vid card will work well with H/W acceleration or not until you try your specific system.
If you need any quick help with Carrara, just ask....I have been using it since before it was named Carrara (was Raydream maybe 10 years ago) and the two main forums for Carrara have excellent users willing to help (like here)....but there are more people using Carrara because its general purpose, works well with Poser and DAZ Studio and Bryce and there are many good low cost plugins too. And they listen to users for new features and have an on-line bug reporting system with feedback to the bug reporter and status of it being fixed.
Hi Doug
Interestingly, my PC is quite modern 2.8ghz AMD 2800XP (2 years old) and I was unable to run Artlantis 2 on it because an instruction set is not present within the processor. I cant remember the name of it, but basically Artlantis uses it for rendering, apparently all dual core processors have it and some single core, so perhaps thats my problem.
I have decided anyway that I should upgrade asap. I do have a dual core laptop and will give that a try, I have not doen so due to pressure of work.
Thanks
Peter
Hi
Thanks to your comments I have been thinking more diagonally and realise that what I may need more than rendering is a good Paint program.
I am trialling Paint Shop Pro and some of the things I want to do are easily doable with a couple of mouse clicks.
I am also in the process of building a new PC with a Phenom triple core, 512mb dedicated graphics, 2gb memory and ATA300 serial drive, specially for imaging/rendering. The bits should have arrived yesterday for the weekend but are a no show.
I am not artistic and will never achieve the results that you guys achieve.
Thanks for your help
Peter
Paint Shop Pro is excellent, I use it every day. It does virtually everything that PhotoShop does and a few things that PhotoShop doesn't do - for a fraction of the price!!
You may find though that the artistic skills are needed more in Piant Shop than in TFP. Once you get the hang of it TFP takes care of the artistic part too, automatically getting shadows, reflections and perspective correct. It can be done in Paint type programms but it is much easier to get it wrong. It can be ideal for quickly fixing some simple things though.
Allan
Thanks Allan
My problem is not the shadows, its the slightly cartoonish look of the renders. The textures and colours seem a bit too bright and the edges too sharp.
I only work with old houses, renovations and extensions and they simply look too new.
My software renders on screen (and full screen) in a couple of minutes, enabling me to see the results pretty much immediately. Actually creating and saving the render as a high res image to file takes a couple of hours.
I am hoping that the new PC will reduce these times substantially, presently I am running an AMD XP2800+ (single core) with 1gb of ram.
I'll let you know how I get on.
Thanks
Peter
Hi Peter,
I can imagine what you mean with the new/old look. Paint Shop can certainly dull the colours if that is a problem - use the Saturation control. If the edges are too sharp you may want to play with the Program Settings/Rendering/Antialias setting (4 is best) - it blends the edges so they are smoother and more realistic. Basic (raytrace) renders can look 'cartoonish' but Radiosity renders are much more realistic. This hopefuly is where your new PC may help - although the specs of my PC are virtually the same as yours and my longest renders are usually only 15 minutes or so. Maybe your models are bigger. It will be interesting to see how it works out.
Allan
Also, more realistic renders come with textures that have "defects" built-in....whether the texture is a photo image (use a picture with dirt and worn surfaces...even for something as simple as stucco) or a procedural shader where dirt/wear can be added with "noise". But it should look 'correct' and not look too obvious....much like what you see daily and don't say....ouch, that looks dirty.
Carrara has extremely good flexibility and control and repeatabilty (you see the effect of each change and know what you are doing without render surprises we get with TFP) for textures (both images and procedurals) and lighting to get great results although you can spend a lot of time in trial and error getting exactly what you envision. You can even make textures in Carrara, render as a .bmp or .jpg and use the image in TFP.
Sometimes better to simply take real photos of existing textures of a house to be remodelled....but you may need to use a photo-paint type program to adjust the image for textures in TFP so image is square like 512x512 pixels (or bigger or smaller depending on quality and viewing distance and file size and render size) and "seamless"....not only for edge to edge matching for texture but also for brightness so end result looks smooth not like it is "tiled" (which it is and will show repetition if done poorly).
There are free texture generator programs, free images (Google, images), and free texture images available on www.
I use Photoshop because it is an industry defacto std and has much in way of resources and support but there are many free or low cost "paint" or photo manipulation programs that can do most/all of what is needed for TFP. I'm also a photography hobbyist so I use Ps there too.
Allan, what does PSP do that Ps cannot (maybe I'm missing a technique)?
I started with PSP long ago and it is a excellent product, as is Corel PhotoPaint, but I've found Ps to be the do-all bitmap program. I also use Illustrator to help make 2D outlines for shape imports for 3D extrusions....and to "mark-up" or dimension a 3D render....tho most any vector or paint program will work the same....and of course cost is a concern and free programs are all worth a try.
Hi Doug,
Quote from: Doug.S on June 23, 2008, 09:43:22 AM
Allan, what does PSP do that Ps cannot (maybe I'm missing a technique)?
Do be honest I cannot remember most of them. I read an interesting Photography or PC magazine article comparing Photoshop with PaintShop Pro and it listed a number of things in which PaintShop Pro was ahead of Photoshop. The only one I recall was the Horizon tool that automatically aligns selected points on the image so it is horizontal (probably remember that as I use it all the time to strighten images - it is so easy). I am not sure now whether the perspecive tool was another or was one that it said Paintshop Pro did better. (Drag the corners of a box so they fit the 4 corners of a buliding that tapers at the top and it automatically snaps it to appear as though it was taken fully front on). Overall the comparison said that if you were in business and photoediting was your bread and butter, then stay with Photoshop, but for everyone else, PaintShop Pro was all anyone would ever need and for one tenth of the price!
That was a few years ago and PaintShop Pro has advanced considerably (it is now Corel too) but no doubt Photoshop has too progressed too and probably has the Horizon and the other tools now too.
Allan
I have no doubt that PSP can do 80-90% of Ps and is well worth the much lower cost if it does what you need it to do.
Yes, Ps does have an easy angle align for horizontal or vertical (or any desired angle) to rotate an image to desired position.
Perspective tool easy to use too.
Image healing (fixing small image areas or cutting out an area but replacing it with a correct looking replacement) and dealing with RAW images from a DSLR camera are handy Ps features as well as color matching images and much more. If printing via CMYK is needed, usually Ps is one of the best....but it is a bit pricey, tho quality is very high and bug fixes are rarely needed and fixed quickly.
I think all software has its own plusses and minuses and all create their own little niche (or disappear! ). Photoshop is certainly recognised as the best. I just wish I could justify the cost! Given all my work is voluntary I cant unfortunately.
Allan