Maxwell Render | Official public forum

We could read diferent opinions on which is the better way.
Now after some time experimenting, it is more clear that none of them is enough, and we will have to work on both.

Now, the problem is, that all you do in studio, will be overwritten the next time you export the model from the plugin. The most insignificant change will force the user to reexport the file again to mxs, which will overwrite everything which was done into the Studio.

As you can see, this doesnot look a very efficient way of working...

But there could be a solution, if Studio could read external references.

Lets assume it is possible for a moment, and look how could it work.
as soon as you export the mxs file from the pluggin, this file could be read from another mxs file created in Studio. In this way you could see handle and work on a file which will never be replaced. This external references system, should be inteligent enough to edit materials, move objects set all rendering settings etc, in a way that all the operations will be memorized as modifiers to the referenced file.
Then, the next time you export the mxs file from the pluggin, nothing that was done in the Studio mxs file, which reads, and modify the other mxs file, will be lost!

Ernesto

Let me explain a bit how AccuRender works.
That is a great way to integrate two softwares.

All the info is saved in the dwg file. As soon as AccuRender is started you need to translate the model (exporting it to AR hidden format) and in case you need to modify the 3d model you can use all the Autocad tools.

I know AccuRender has lots of limitations due to the need of saving the rendering information in a modeling language as DWG, but the same could be done saving half of the info in the DWG file and the other half in a complementary format, that will contain all the Maxwell configurations.

If something like that could be possible, it will be the PERFECT workflow.

Ernesto