[pelias]

Recent posts on forum indicated that there is a portion of users relying heavily on Studio in their workflow from SU to Maxwell renderings. I would like to open a discussion here with the hope to identify the key points of SU plugin which should be improved in order to convince more users to render from SU directly without having to rely on Studio (this is a preferred workflow).

With 2.0 release of the plugin and native support of instances I believe geometry should no longer be an obstacle. I guess the biggest benefit of Studio for SU users is in assigning and creating materials. There is not a whole lot what can be done with material assigning due to SU limitations but there are few things which can improve situation there. Also my question is how big of an issue is the external material editing using MXED? How big effect would it have on your workflow if you wouldn't have to worry about separate MXM files but plugin will take care of them? What it means is that MXED will still be used for editing materials but the actual MXM files will be created "behind the scenes" and managed by the plugin (attached to SU project,...).

My guess is also that auto-mxm is not used heavily - can you confirm that?

Feel free to comment.

Pavol

[Stinkie7000]

'Better' material handling through the plugin would certainly be something that would attract more SU-users.

In this respect I suggest you take a look at the SkIndigo plugin.

[messire]

- automxm is used, a lot!
Eg: most times i download a material from mxm gallery, or from purchased arroway dvd's and then create accordingly with the reflectance file the SU material with same name... then SU only deals with texture scale... the only thing that is hard to know in the workflow, especially with a network and other people creating textures, downloading them etc....is how to be sure the MXM has a SU counterpart... hence the need for importing automatically all MXM textures ( chosen folders in the mxm) into SU...would save time and greatly improve up to date SU library.
The idea for us is that a MXM/SU material is like reality: set for once and never to be touched again, thus used directly in SU without having to care about the mxm anymore once this mxm is set. i'm not sure attaching the mxm to one particular project is a good idea ( could be an option)...because the more we grow the library, the more we want it to be shared by all projects.

- HDRI: haven't been able to use is without the studio ( too difficult to parameter and set where the sun is).

to be continued!
Nils

[marked001]

i was one of those people using studio until i finally tried it with the previous plugin... and am happy to report that i love it and no longer use studio... i dont really have an issue with the material handling, personally.. i dont use auto mxm either..

i agree with chris about swapping low poly components out for complex components..this would totally make instances more useful since maxwell can handle way more than sketchup..

thanks pavol!

[Richard]

Pavol

Mate great timing on this post!!

I'm currently working with a project home builder to do 16 renderings of their range and all the while sitting with them to do the material tests on each. They are loving the ability to see results from the tests achieved so quickly.

What this has done is make me work really fast from SU to MR for quick tests. I have to say I've to date been a studio devotee and pushed any others that ask toward that way. Though now I have done a complete turn around to work direct from SU export.

I've also recently downloaded the latest Indigo plugin and been testing with that. The drawback for me with Indigo is the shear time it takes to get a result clear enough to determine it's correct. MR renders initially quick enough for a test render or a few to determine if you are heading in the right direction. Though I can see a few really great work flow features that shine with the Indigo plugin.

The big point here is I feel that Indigo doesn't have a stand alone interface!!!!! The plugin as whaat has developed it doesn't need to then rely on adoption of Studio type workflow and settings that would limit usefulness of the plugin aimed toward SU type simplicity - I make this point relative to the HDRI as messire suggests. HDRI will always produce the best results for any rendering but at this point the way it is handled (located in both studio and the SU plug) just makes it a feature that will produce the result if you are willing to do hundreds and hundreds of tests to set it right.

So here is my wish list for the plugin (I'm still using the v1.8 plugin sorry):::

1. Option to render at viewport proportions (ie camera angle and image proportions to match SU view - aka Indigo plugin).

I know we are meant to utilise the stage and film plugin to get SU to MR output the same but it must only work if you select the 35mm still camera because it doesn't work at all for me using anything else!!!

Mind you this is the biggest single issue for me in direct export to MR - I cant ever see what the final camera angle v's scene extents will be and this requires more testing then materials.

Even if the use of the film and stage cameras actually worked sometimes I want to generate a shot relative to a certain image proportions and yet I'm stuck with a few limited options of the film and stage cameras and still the output never matches.

This is my bggest area of aggravation of the current workflow from the plugin - I would love to see the Indigo type option of setting desired image proportions being set and the screen border darkened to suit these limits - then of course the output matching the SU camera / proportions upon export.

As I said this is one reason to go straight to studio and avoid direct export.

2. During the work with client regarding material testing I changed my normal workflow utilising the AutoMXM feature prefering to link direct to better suit material testing.

Though I would love some way to better perform this function and confirm selection. I would love a browser type list of SU material / MXM and button to relink each. Would be great if this browser could even show the material preview thumb aka the maxwell material browser.

This feature I believe would really speed up material assignment. and overcome the issue of finding you missed one material or linked incorrectly. If you are exporting with material ID output and multilight enabled just missing one material is enough to make you want to kill yourself or simply again open studio!!!!!

3. In many cases the use of maps direct from your sketchup model is suitable for rendering where not critical (often I find 60-80% of all materials in scene) the current limitation to this is the use of these maps renders only the original map not any colour modifications made in SU aka Indigo, Podium, Artlantis.

This is another much needed feature and honestly a real downfall toward not just the plugin but for Maxwell in general. The current workflow requires the colour editing of maps in PS to produce these mods.

This would be a great improvement to the workflow - not only would it reduce the need to open studio but also MXED and Photoshop!

Again the reference to the Indigo plugin that any colour mods in SU are exported to render.. I strongly suggest this should be the default in SU>MR plug for any material not linked to an MXM.

4. HDRI better handling!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Please

The inclusion of a rotate slider (aka Indigo) though marked CW / CCW for the background and foreground / illumination channels and also a lift UP / DOWN slider....

the current numerical input with no basis on any actual units (just a factor) I find unworkable, there is just no clear way of knowing. The only time I've been succesfull using HDRI was that it only took me 30 tests to get it postioned correctly the previous time i attempted I gave it up as a bad joke by nextlimit after maybe 100 tests.

The fact that we see so few renderings from MR using HDRI is testament IMO that this area of workflow is still broken.

In the future I would love to see something like the global location picker in studio used for HDRI location. Maybe the workflow could be:

When you link to a HDRI it opens in a preview panel where you can select A. The horizon and B. The sun location - these points of reference are then used in studio or the SU interface to locate the HDRI horizon and sun correctly.

Well thats it for now but surely I'll come back with more!

[Sheik]

1. Option to render at viewport proportions

You need to update to the latest plugin mate , although I think it was there in 1.8 already. The camera matches the SU view at any desired image resolution without the Film & Stage plugin.

[pelias]

Thanks for the response - keep it coming. I will sort through the ideas and keep you informed.

Pavol

[Stinkie7000]

Well ... it would be nice to able to have a 'export SU background colour' option, so sunlight (phys. sky) could be used with a flat coloured background.

Yeah ... I know, not physically correct. But it would fit nicely into many SU users' workflow, I suspect.

[Richard]

I seem to spend the most time in Studio placing relatively high polygon library objects and managing their instances: trees and other vegetation, primarily. I simply cannot place them in SketchUp because they would bring SU to a crawl. I've mentioned this before, but what might get me out of Studio altogether is an "autoMXS" system that would swap hi-resolution MXS models in place of low-resolution SKP components, with support for instances. Ideally I would like to be able to use the standard 2D trees while in SketchUp, but have the plug-in swap those with hi-resolution models before sending it to render.

I have to agree with that despite the use of instances would be great to be able to link (aka reload component) to a component external to the model from a lower poly version so REALLY high poly components ca be utilised for rendering. The need to include a proxy and any high poly component in scene when there are a few different ones can still bring SU to a crawl.

Sheik wrote:

You need to update to the latest plugin mate , although I think it was there in 1.8 already. The camera matches the SU view at any desired image resolution without the Film & Stage plugin.

Yes your right mate I do need to update my plugin! I haven't as yet because I'm in the process of completing 16 renderings of different dwellings for a client and when I tried to use the previous to current plugin I couldn't get it working so had to revert to V1.8. Will try the new plug once this project is finished.

Thanks mate!

[Sheik]

Well ... it would be nice to able to have a 'export SU background colour' option, so sunlight (phys. sky) could be used with a flat coloured background.

Yeah ... I know, not physically correct. But it would fit nicely into many SU users' workflow, I suspect.

If you want to do that now you could select to render the alpha map (in export options) and change the background in PhotoShop. But that is a bit more time consuming than what you suggest.

[Stinkie7000]

Thanks, Sheik. That I knew. I admit, I'm lazy.

[x_site]

no excuses for not being able to use proxy groups as yet!

[Michel Wuest]

I also use a lot automxm. I have already built up my own Material-Library. So i can use Materials from a old Project for a new one. Just drag and drop the SketchUp Material on the new new surface and the good mxm material will automaticly exchaged by rendering.

I work on a Mac. And i have build up my mxm Library in the Material Library-Folder for SketchUp so it just works great.

For examlple:
Material-Library-Path: MacintosHD > Library > Application Support > Google SketchUp 6 > Materials > MXM_Materials (own new Folder)

Inside of this Folder i have (a example for one Material):

- mymaterial_skp.jpg > Material Texture used for Sketchup (if you drag and drop this into Skechup material, you have to rename the material to mymaterial without _skp. On the other hand it will not find the mymaterial.mxm. Its also importent to use the _skp at the sketchUp material jpg. Otherwise there are two "materials" with the same name. The automxm isn't loking for the extension mxm or jpg. So you will have troubles.)

- mymaterial.mxm > the automxm Material
- mymaterial_trans.jpg (for example the transmission map for the mxm material)
- mymaterial_bump.jpg (for example the bumping map for the mxm material.....

- mymaterial.skm > it will automatic generated by sketchUp. Unfortunately, however, only if the program is terminated. So if you have a crash in Skechup after drag and drop the mymaterial_skp.jpg, you have it to do again. Skechup can't remember at that material.

For material without texture, i just create a mymaterial_skp.jpg with Photoshop. It's mostliy just a color.

So you see i often use the mxm.

And in Studio i place high-poly plants. Because, if you have big-poly objects in Sketchup, you nearly can't work, because you can't nearly navigate. So you have to switch off the shadow and and and

Thanks

[mateo.soletic]

Recent posts on forum indicated that there is a portion of users relying heavily on Studio in their workflow from SU to Maxwell renderings.

I am one of them. and this is the reason. ( quote from another thread on maxwell forum)

There is a post in the forum main section that asks how to optimize the textures and materials...
I thought it would be interesting to know how everyone is doing it and what are good points or flaws in their systems...
Since we are working with Sketchup too, we need to organize both libraries and its a bit complicated indeed, especially when networks are involved...

Here is what I do:

-mxm are located in the material database of maxwell
- textures are in same folder, in a texture folder... i also made a subfolder within this texture folder which holds the downloaded textures from downloaded mxm or added textures.
- created a SU texture folder in the same material mainfolder. In this folder i keep exact copy of the texture folder, but i remove bumps, and displacements etc maps... i only keep reflectance / main images. THEN, i resize all new images in there so their max size is 200 kb for use by Sketchup ( heavier size make sketchup VERY slow to manipulate the material menu)
- In sketchup folder, i keep materials ( .skm) where they are supposed to be.

Procedure of creating a material from lets say a downloaded mxm on the website.

1 - copy the zip file into the material database folder, in a temporary folder, then unzip.
2 - put the mxm into its mxm folder, put jpgs etc in texture folder ( more precisely in the subfolder i made for those downloaded materials)
3 - copy the reflectance / main image in the SU textures folder nearby ( not in SU program folder) and resize it to under 200 kb ( acdsee makes it possible to do this in batch with many files..just do resize by x % until the file is under 200kb.
4 - open mxm material panel and relink the eventual missing images to the mxm, save it
5 - In SU: create new material, search for the reduced image size, make sure the texture is at the right size by applying it to a test face, and save as xxx.skm into the SU materials library.

Backup ( for new installation, etc, since i do not want the risk to loose everything)..:
I simply backup SU material folder, and MR material database, and overwrite any newly installed stuff, or do it folder by folder in case there is new mxm in future versions...

Cons: long process, risks are high of forgetting something...
Pros: works

What i would like to achieve but cannot figure out... would love to have help here:
Have all those textures and mxm's and skm on the network so the other PC with a license can use it and we can do network rendering or be sure to both have the same library without wondering what texture has been added etc.... Is it possible for MR and SU to work with networked folder?
( assuming i have a fast enough server to make it work ( now its too slow anyway)
Have an automated way of importing mxm's into SU...aka fetch all or designated mxms, use an automated resize tool to get in SU only the main image in reduced size and save the .skm.

How do you do this all? would be interested to know if i am loosing way too much time with my method!

thnx
nils

Thank You Nils if You ever read this thread. Your question answered some
of my questions.
The problem is that none of us have all the time in the world for all of this.
can this get easier at all. I dont think that the people from maxwell are
putting into sketchup plugin as much energy as they are putting into max
or maya. Pity because a lot of people dont want to bother with all of this and they will turn to other app. packages . Every day more and more architects are using SU and they want to be able to do decent outputs quickly.

Mateo

[Richard]

Mateo

I think the issues of networking are very relevant!

Though I think material relinking etc are a result of choice in someway to use a renderer like maxwell as opposed to podium, indigo or similar. The matching of SU with maxwell works well due to the ability to substitute higher resolution textures for the low res ones used in SU. Indigo and Podium for example are limited to the "in model" use of either low res textures or face the resulting loss of performance in SU where you wish to use better maps!!!

Where mawell in that respect comes into its own is with blended or weighted materials which if you have tried to achieve the same with indigo there is great difficulty and almost unusable workflow if you want to edit the model. this option is not available with podium and if it were would have the same fate I think!

I agree though some rethinking on the linking search and the networking of materials needs further consideration!

Cheers mate!