Revit rendering tips

Hi,

Today i read some (revit+accurender) rendering tips from one of website.

I remember "showcase" post member jame and other revit user.So i share for all member.I don't know about revit.But rendering idea is more improve me.I am happy if you get a little help .Thk...

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

Here’s my take on your project (Thanks for the opportunity). Going with the theme of ‘artistic license’, I’ve modified just a few things to make it… different than yours. I’ve included (2) Final files for your use – “008-Final1” and “009-Final2”. Each one uses some different settings as I will outline later. You’ll notice that I’ve made modifications to the material selections (Sorry – the white was tooooo stark for me), modified the number and location of the windows in the upper section and added some brackets to ‘complete the look’. I also added some trim at the top of the entry tower to finish the edge, as well as on top of the stone wainscot. I also added an angled brick ‘lip’ atop the brick soldier at the column bases. Oh, and I changed that ‘Craftsman’ entry door to match the others…. OK I’ll stop now…

Here are a couple of my observations of working in “someone else’s” Revit project:

Materials – These will need to be remapped if you don’t have the same maps or they’re not in the same location. This is VERY tedious, not easy and cumbersome.

Assigning of Materials – Everyone does this differently. You can either assign this at an object’s level (sweep, mullion, frame, etc.) directly or through parameters, or at the Object Styles level, which is more “global”. Both ways have their advantages. However – I’ve found that having to ‘dig-deep’, as it were, to even find out which material was assigned in the first place is very time consuming. My preference (and I’m not saying it’s the correct one), is using Object Styles and assigning Sub-Categories as I create new geometry. I can then assign (in a readily accessible location) the materials in the ‘Material’ override slot.

Material Names – Try to use intuitive and recognizable material names. This helps when you go back to an old project that had the window glass you liked. Items named as ‘roof-1’ and ‘roof-2’, while quick to make, don’t help you remember that #1 is a beige concrete tile roof and #2 is a grey-black blend shingle.

As a side note – the Material Library starts off rather sparse. As you create projects, you create more materials. You can then use Transfer Project Standards – and bring in your old materials to a new project. IF you do this over time, without cleaning out your Library, you will end up with a lo-oo-oong list of materials you’ll need to hunt through to find the ones that are being used – which might be only between 8 and 16.

RPCs – Similar to the materials discussion above. Re-pathing isn’t an easy thing and if you don’t have the same RPC – you’re S.O.L. Also – As much as I like them, I hate them. I haven’t found one yet that doesn’t lend an air of ‘I really don’t’ belong here’ to a rendering. I think this has most to do with the difference of its inherent lighting and trying to match the scene’s light’s setting, shadows, etc.

Model Text, etc. – I noticed that if you don’t touch it… it won’t change. I went to modify the texture on the text and as I closed out, the text reverted to a standard font. I must not have had the font available (and I didn’t know which one to begin with), so I had to redefine the text. It’s interesting that it could “keep it”, even without having the font available.

The same thing goes for the Accurender cactus in the front yard – it remained the same as yours for many test renderings. The minute I moved it, it changed to a local definition (less arms).

I saw you mentioned in your latest version you did a Radiosity solution? Hmmm. I believe I know why you were trying to do this, but my advice is to you is: Don’t. In Accurender, these really only work on the inside, where rays get a chance to bounce around and off of things. Unless you were to set up a dome system and close this in, the rays don’t have anywhere to ‘stop’. This can lead to the ‘overwashing’ of images and an incorrect solution.

You’ll also notice in your renderings, the metal materials in your storefronts – and the one being used for the structure portion of your flat roof at the tower – are showing high specular levels (and appear blue-ish). This is a result of the reflectance for this material being too high. I don’t like using those settings unless I’m close up to an object and I want to see reflections. These will drive up your render times like nothing else as it’s trying to do all these reflection calculations.

Here’s the included render’s stats: - Image size: 6-1/4” x 3-3/8” / Resolution: 300 dpi

Large Entry-008-Final1.jpg

Quality: Best

Backface: check

View Culling: check

Soft shadows: On

Blurry/Blurry: Off

Reflection B: 1

Transp. B: 1

Season: Summer

Sun Settings

Settings: 0.25

Jitter: 0.5

Samples: 6

Cloudiness: 0.25

File size: 416k

Render Time: 2h – 40 mins

Large Entry-009-Final2.jpg

Quality: Best

Backface: check

View Culling: check

Soft shadows: On

Blurry/Blurry: Off

Reflection B: 4

Transp. B: 4

Season: Summer

Sun Settings

Settings: 0.18

Jitter: 0.35

Samples: 8

Cloudiness: 0.25

File size: 408k

Render Time: 3h – 10 mins

Machine: AMD Athlon 64-3700+ / 2.21 GHz / 2 GB ram / nVidia GeForce 5700 - 256 MB ram

It was interesting for me to note the differences in the soft shadow edges between the two. (Keep in mind, I’ve already done 10-15 small test renders by this time). I did modify the sun location in 009 to be a little lower in the sky – mainly to catch the arches a little more - but not too harshly, and moved trees on the right side. As you had modeled the tile roof, I decided to use a rather small but even colored texture – but even with that, I’m still getting a strange color-moiré pattern on the lower right roof. Another problem that Revit appears to still have is that it is not able to apply a texture to a round, or swept object. Note the dome – this has the same texture applied as the walls.

Now, before the “Four Horseman of the Accurender Apocolypse” start their nay-saying…. This is NOT meant to be photoreal… so don’t start comparing apples to oranges!!! This is merely a ‘you can get something nice out of the box’ exercise. (and yes, I too would prefer a ‘plug-in’ type rendering atmosphere within Revit - Factory - hint-hint). I WILL be porting this over to VIZ and do a Mental Ray version, but it may take me a while to get up to speed (I’m a bit rusty). One of my big concerns is that I don’t have a large variety of plant material to use in VIZ, so I’m not sure how I’m going to get to a comparative sample. I will give Accurender this– their method of using procedural plantings is as easy as anything I’ve come across.

As they say on HGTV – “How do I look?”

Robert - Thank you again for letting me play in your sandbox!

Kyle..

__________________

kyle paxton, assoc aia

re:

design studio

3126-1/2 corrine drive

orlando, florida 32803

www.re-ds.com

RAC-2008 -AMD-64 3700+/2.21 gHz/2 GB ram/ XP-sp2 / Nvidia GeForce 5700-256 MB ram / Dual 19" LCD / Wacom

Very nice work!

Thanks, I like very much

Keep going my friends!

Here is good new for Revit user..http://www.archvision.com/revit/2009/