3d Model Render
Francisco Raya
A lot of this is because LO is unable to take advantage of advances in computing power achieved in recent years. There is a lot of pressure in this forum to see LO upgraded to something that is as impressive as SU itself in operation.
If you go back to edit a LayOut file you were working on last week, for example, and find you need to edit the SU model you used in the project, open it from LayOut, make the changes in the SketchUp model and save. Then go back to LayOut. The updates will be done automatically without you manually invoking them.
I'm trying to render a few scenes in SketchUp 2015 and V-Ray 2.0 and as far as I can tell everything is ok - camera is not on any geometry, there are no V-Ray plans, and no hidden geometry. However, when I render the model I get this crazy geometry taking up half of the images.
I find that when I move the camera up (closer to the ceiling) I can see the geometry, whereas when the camera is in the right position the render comes out black (I guess in this case the camera is inside this geometry?).
It's very odd. The best solution that I can think of is to locate the item which is causing the trouble, I'd do this by hiding various elements and rendering and narrowing down which item/items are causing the trouble that way. Then look for obvious problems with how the model is built or rebuilding it if necessary.
I just wanted to follow up and let you know I finally figured out what was causing the issue. It was a component that I was using in my model that was probably created in another software and then imported to SketchUp in a different scale. It looked fine in the model space but V-Ray rendered it in a bigger scale, and that was the weird geometry I was seeing. I just had to explode the components and group them again and everything turned out fine. So in the end it wasn't a V-Ray issue, just an issue with the model that only V-Ray spotted.
Also, try to greatly exaggerate the exposure settings in your view--try using Realistic View mode--under Graphic Display Options, enable Photographic Exposure and experiment with it. Of course, make sure Artificial Lights are
I did manage to get something when I changed the lens material to 100 percent transparent and messed around, although the lights seemed to project up. It might just be the families they are using. I will continue to play with it and reach out to the electrical consultant and see if they have any luck/ideas for rendering their lights.
Could be a Materials thing too. Linked file material definitions and assignments will determine the material appearance in the host project. Maybe transferring materials between projects will resolve. Just a thought.
Just looking at their light level (11400 lumen) you can tell this was not meant to be rendered and it contains wrong information. A 4' fixture should not really spit out more than 5000 lumen unless it is industrial or really high.
I am using Sketchup for my models. On some of my models when I connect to D5 render I get asked to create a new link model or replace an existing one. What am i doing wrong to get this message? I dont want to end up with two SKB models of the same thing in D5 render and if I delete the first model in D5 I lose my textures etc
I must be doing something wrong. Maybe its the fact I am working from two computers (work and home). I start sketchup, I start D5 render. I connect the sketchup file with my D5 render file, I choose replace existing model but I end up with two instaces of all the lights in the sketchup file. If I delte my previous link, I loose all the settings for the various lights
D5 render link problem1280720 105 KB
In linkage D5, the lights played by SU will be renamed after renaming the SU file and then linked. D5 will prompt you to replace the file. After replacement, the model parameters will be fine, and the previous adjustments can also be synchronized, but the lights will not work. D5 will add a new set of lights, with both new and old lights present. The new lights can be linked, but the old lights cannot be linked. However, the new light parameters have not been adjusted, they are preset, and can only be readjusted
When modeling a project, it is considered that the name cannot be changed in the later stage. When encountering a project that needs to be modified, a copy of the original model with the suffix [backup of the first draft] is copied and kept as a backup. Then, the content is directly modified in the file that has been linked, without changing the file name,
What I understand is the current solution. Of course, the problem mentioned by the subject is that the user experience is not very good in terms of operational logic. Before obtaining an officially developed solution, I believe that users should be able to adjust their operating methods to achieve the ultimate goal, which is also the same.
This logic is a bit like [please note that this is an analogy] sending a letter from home to school, and the first letter is sent out, but the family has moved. To send it to school again, a new address needs to be filled in. The mechanical postman also needs to pick up the letter according to the email address of their hometown, but they cannot get the newly written letter.
Did you import the model into D5 through the Live-sync plugin for the first time? How did you always update your SU model in D5? All the assets applied in D5 are in their places, just the SU model shifted, right? Has the boundary of your model in Sketchup changed?
Yes added some site context to the file, so the size of the file grew.
Is there a way to lock it via co-ordinate system? That is how we generally work in sketchup as well. [0,0,0] of one file is equal to the origin point in the other. And when bringing in our model to D5 as well we do the same 0x,0y,0z and then reload eachtime with new version. Even merging files becomes an issue later if the model keeps moving around.
Well there is something called local system and world system implemented within D5. i have no idea of how its implimented within imported models and what co-ordinates it uses. maybe if some admin @Bruce.W or someone sheds some light on it might help us to negate this issue completely.
Sorry for your problem. We will try to improve this problem. BTW, if it is convenient for you, you can leave your advice about this in our forum, this can make more member of our team know your need. Latest Ideas & Requests topics - D5 RENDER FORUM
Working on adding some job listings to the front page of my django site. There are currently 20 jobs listed for testing purposes.I have a fairly simple django model which contains attributes of the such as job status (active, inactive, archived) and the time at which the job listing was created, so that I can order these chronologically.
I know this because if I remove Bulma's (which I am using as a failsafe) from frontpage.html django renders all 20 posts at the top of the page, whereas if I use jobs=Job.objects.filter(status=Job.ACTIVE).order_by('-created_at')[0:4] as the last request, I see the 4 most recent posts at the top of the page and the same 4 most recent posts below these.
To cut the loading time when you load the webpage for the first time, I am trying to load assets such as importing videos/models after the scene has been loaded. That is I am first showing simple elements such as sphere and cube, then later I am loading 3D model. Is there a solution that I can achieve with this?
Could you please help me out here. I could only find incremental scene loading. Babylonjs has also provided tools for this. Unfortunately I cannot find any solution for incremental model(.gltf) loading. Has anyone tried to use SceneLoader.ImportMesh after the scene has been loaded?
Hey thanks alot! It definitely loads the model. However now it does not load any materials/textures. It was loading when I was using ImportMesh in my code before. Now I am not sure why it does not. I can send the model to you if you would like to see.
Then I guess it is a problem with my model. This is the model I have which I got from TurboSquid for free. It is very strange that it works in my code that I posted above but does not work in the code you gave.
Evgeni, thank you for all these solutions. I actually found the issue. It is a bug in Babylonjs. When I upload a sprite along, the 3D model with textures do not get uploaded. When I comment out the sprite code, the model with textures get uploaded. I am sure its a bug. I will upload as a separate question.
Have you, accidentally, disabled the armature from renders?
Like in the pic. This will mean that your mesh will stay in the default position in renders, but will play like normal in the viewport.
The pic is the armature modifier on the mesh, btw.
I did not have any issues with V-Ray 2.0, but the new version seems to come out differently with distorted model. I have no idea why this is happening, and the rendering program should not interrupt the rhino model physically. You can see from the images I attached below that the glass shape is distorted on the left, columns are having cracked color in between, and the columns changed from a cylinder to a weird vertical plane. A normal Rhino render version seems to appear fine. I hope this is my personal mistake so I can fix immediately. If anyone has a solution for this, please let me know. Thank you so much in advance!
It looks like the meshes are lacking in precision/resolution, most probably because the geometry is far from the origin.
Select all your geometry, move it near the origin an refresh the rendering mesh.
I have my model setup in the viewport that it takes up all the space, the document is set at 4096x4096. I hit render, it renders. Then when i hit export document, the tif or psd that comes out is like so tiny compared to what i thought id be getting. The model is just a tiny thing in the center of the document, surrounded by blank space. I want the entire model to be rendered at the full size like i see it in the viewport at the full resolution of 4096. How do i do that? Thanks alot
c80f0f1006