Download Revit 2015 Full Crack 32bit
Inez Delisser
We just received the 2012 Product Design Suite and I've made a deployment choosing the 32-bit option. We have a pretty mixed environment with both 32-bit and 64-bit systems and I was wondering whether I should create a different deployment for users with a 64-bit system. What do you think? Is there an advantage in using the 64-bit application on a 64-bit system?
If you company is allowing the use of 64bit Windows it's honestly crazy not to... With 32bit you're limited to about 2-2.5gig of memory to any application (depending on graphics card and other memory resources) but 64bit will use as much memory as possible (yeah, there's a limit, but something astranomical with todays computers). Is there an advantage, hell yeah! You're practically shooting yourself in the foot by sticking with 32bit.
I can understand some companies are stuck in their ways and prefer to stick to 32bit, but if you're past that obsticle then move all your cad users over to 64bit as soon as possible. Win 7 64bit and 8Gb ram is practically the min spec for these days (and a semi-decent gaming graphics card).
We're upgrading the operating systems when there is otherwise a reason to upgrade the computer. It would be nice to have the funding to upgrade all the CAD users systems, but you have to get by with what you got...
I'm trying out a 32bit back-to-beauty compositing workflow and photoshop is saying my EXRs are in the RGB Built-in colourspace. Is this just a way of saying it's effectively no colour profile/ linear image?
Also the photo I'm using (in the 8bit file) seems to have the ProPhoto profile assigned, presumably because it was taken in RAW. I know this probably means that I should be working in Adobe RGB, but I don't have a wide Gamut monitor, nor does anyone else at my company.
Does any of this even matter if I've got an sRGB working space assigned in colour policies? Am I right in thinking that photoshop is translating the native profiles of the source imagery to the working space? As it happens the image looks identical in the 32bit and 8bit files.
If you want to be ultimately in 8bit you can either place it as a smart object or just double click on the layer to make sure its unlocked, select Image > Mode > 8 Bit > Don't Merge. This will keep the colors as they are in the EXR.
The photo you are using if its using pro photo was probably exported with this color profile from Lightroom or such. It doesnt matter if you are converting this to sRGB as its a lower colorspace, as long as it looks as expected.
As a side note, if you are rendering to EXR I would advise using a 16bit sRGB color space for post production, you will have more depth for your 3D elements and if you really need extra blacks/whites (zdepth for example) then keep this as a 32bit smart object.
Will back-to-beauty compositing work correctly with 16bit? My research seemed to suggest it would be slightly off, and photoshop opens them as 32bit anyway, although I suppose the EXRs themselves will be slightly smaller on disc.
you have very limited options working in 32bit mode in photoshop, nuke would be a better option if you want it 1:1. However I still prefer photoshop for its simplicity/layer workflow. That being said, working in a 16bit photoshop file will give you most of the flexibility you need (again you can just keep what you need in 32bit mode such as zdepth layers and light selects and have them as a smart object within the 16bit working file so you can readjust the blacks/whites when you need separately).
You can place a linear sRGB render into an 8bit photoshop file as a smart object if you wish. You can always go down to a lower color space just not up eg. Pro Photo > Adobe RGB > sRGB. You can technically but you have already clipped the color range by doing so (in the 8bit working document, not in the smart object) - just something to be aware of.
You dont need to work in Adobe RGB space, sRGB is just fine for 95% of archviz work. There is more to this but really for simplicity all web content uses sRGB and lots of print labs now use sRGB printers - with exception of few. Ive used EIZO monitors calibrated for 100% Adobe and you really only get marginal amount of more blue/green. I would recommend if anything having a nicely (hardware) calibrated sRGB montior. Another thing if you are using 3dsmax is that its not color managed, you simply cannot render to another color space other than sRGB, so for now it remains easiest to stay in sRGB. Once HDR Monitors become mainstream and if your 3D software is color managed you can relook into this topic.
Also another note on RAW files, they do not have a color profile assigned to them - Lightroom assigns ProPhoto by default because thats the largest color space available for it currently (and contains apparently more colors than the eye can see). It does this so that you can always bring it down to another color space later such as Adobe/sRGB.
It doesnt matter if you intend on bringing everything to sRGB working space. Whatever the image was before (say you are bringing in a ProPhoto/Adobe RGB backplate, and you bring it into a sRGB working file, it will do the conversion for you and should look exactly the same - since you cannot see the additional colors on an sRGB monitor anyway). If you DO see a difference when doing the conversion you have done it incorrectly, refer to my first reply (I have corrected a mistake I made in red).
All this by the way has nothing to do with your 32bit file, just to clarify so I dont confuse you I was just suggesting working in a 16bit photoshop file so that you can composite your renders in a similar fashion that the VFB does in 3D.
If you want to go down the rabbit hole I have provided some references below for additional reading if it takes your interest - these specific pages helped me learn a bit more about color management (although theres lots to learn).
I did a test with 16bit vs 32bit EXRs and you're right, that there's no perceivable difference, so that'll save me a lot of space over time. However when I try to comp the files in a 16bit PSD the result is definitely off. Not sure if this is what you were suggesting, but it would have given me the flexibility of 16bit (specifically magic wand for selecting masks). As far as I know there is no colour keying in photoshop, but then it's not really true compositing software. Yes, Nuke would be a better option, and I do want to find an alternative eventually, but then you're going to lose the more painterly retouching tools (AFAIK). Would have been nice to keep it in one programme. I did try comping in AE but found it a bit clunky, and I don't think you could insert this in a PSD as a smart object anyway, so it'd add another stage of import/export.
That makes sense about Prophoto. I realised I'm using the cloud-based one rather than classic, so I think my export options are limited, but probably makes sense to to any convertion in photoshop as I'll sometimes want to use photos in the 32bit comp.
You are correct - no color keying in Photoshop. You can select by RGB using the Channels tab next to the Layer tab if you are using a multimatte pass (red, green, blue). Using the wand for IDs that arent pure 255, 0, 0 like a wirecolor will always be a difficult job in Photoshop.
I hear Affinity does a good job - especially for 32bit EXRs and keeps a similar pipeline to Photoshop. There is plenty of workarounds in Photoshop working in 16bit but I would have to have a better understanding of exactly what you are trying to achieve step by step. Im curious as to why you are doing a back-to-beauty & then doing post work on top? If you can show the reason behind the method there may be a better solution - could you instead render the final and do the painterly retouching on top (adding/removing refraction/reflection/lighting passes etc where needed)?
I'm not 100% percent that it's totally necessary, but it seems like a quick and manageable way of getting the result I'm after. Basically everything in or on the building goes in the 32bit PSD, everything outside goes in the 8bit PSD. I'm rendering out a simple model with virtually no interior features - just wall, and just reflections of the HDRI in the windows, then adding photographic elements on top of these, masked to the approriate areas and adjusted with an exposure layer for strength. It seems to work well for getting the balance right between reflection / refraction without blowing anything out.
I think I can understand, maybe... You are showing me your RGB_color pass - this is what you see in the VFB correct? If so then you cannot overlay the reflection/GI etc passes on top of this to get a back to beauty as you are already at final beauty stage before you have started layering the passes (reflection/refraction etc have already been applied). The rgb_color (beauty pass) should appear totally flat, without reflections or gi or anything - refer to this in the vray help +%7C+RGB_Color
In essence, it seems like a very complicated setup - I would maybe re look at your workflow here. Would it not be easier to put the backplate into the render itself and adjust the render in VFB to match the elements - and give yourself some wriggle room to lower/increase each element slightly in post? You can then add people after and color match them to the render. Or did I miss the point?
That's not what I'm doing, in the first image you're seeing Refr. + Refl. +G.I + Lighting + Spec; in the second one you're seeing just the Beauty pass (in normal mode in photoshop - no additions) Which is what I see in the VFB and what I want to achieve. 32bit PSD gives this result.
Not sure what you mean by the the second part, but in my experience, it's not more work. Embeding the relections in the 3D scenes means getting them balanced with the refraction first time, and If I want to add a tree into the reflections, or change a shop interior for instance, then it means a re-render, not to mention the time spend acquiring, placing and adjusting those 3D elements to get the same visual complexity as a photo, and the added scene size. Also can't always get flat photographed back-plates on a specific site, so it's a lot easier to compensate for perspective doing them in post.
b37509886e