flavioeiras

Nicolai, thank you very much for your reply! I smiled when I read "prepare for depression read". Well, truth is that we have enough cheerleaders (friends, relatives) We need some real feedback, to understand if we have chance of devolping something valuable. So I aprecciate you being straight. I made some comments on your phrases, if you could please elighten me. "While it may be sufficient to explain volumes, it lacks the wow-factor to sell a project to a client. They are used to stuff running on their phone that looks way better - how can an architect that costs alot of money not create stuff that looks better than a game on their phone?" Would you believe, then, that this MIGHT be a tool that would make more sense for specific niches? It's a feedback that I've heard sometimes. That we should focus this tool to corporate/industrial architects and draftsmen, basically those focused on "B2B projects", since in those cases it's USUALLY more important to understand the volumes and the concept than to provide the "wow realistic-factor". Do you think that makes sense? And if so, any advices? "The problem with the good looking stuff we got available (unreal) is that hardly any architect is going to bother trying to learn the workflow to create anything decent." That's kinda where our hypothesis is. The hypothesis is that it does exist a relevant market of people who wouldn't learn a complex workflow - but that they WOULD like to provide a "walkable environment" to their client. I totally agree that all the "easy to use" alternatives create poor results (and yes, we're familiar with BIMX). We actually don't want to re-invent the wheel. We just want to stand out in between those "simple solutions", being the one "a bit better looking" among them, or "significantly easier". Something like that. And one more thing: one thing that we haven't seen any competitor making-it-right, is creating an output file which is REALLY plug-and-play to the client. Even BIMX, if I'm not wrong, requires the user to have a plugin installed. Our output is an .exe file, and can be run by a crappy computer. Our hypothesis is that this could be a great value, since you could send STRAIGHT to the client. But maybe this is not THAT relevant, maybe architects usually DO WANT to present their projects face to face, using their own hardware if possible. Any comments on that? Once again thank you very much. And as I said, if you're interested in giving it a try, let me know. And gimme your email address if possible, I can send you a coupom if you ever feel like trying the beta version, or giving it to someone else )

Anyone? Up

Greetings everyone. This is my first post, so nice to meet you all. I’m looking for anyone interested in trying / giving feedback on something we’ve been developing. It’s a platform to create walkable real-time rendered environments straight from the project file, without using any software. The idea is simple: to give the “normal architect / 3d modeler” (who doesn’t want to learn how to code / or a complex workflow) the ability of creating an “interactive experience” of their project. The point here is to hear if you think our concept makes sense. And to know if anyone would be interested in making a few tests with their own projects About the concept, this is basically how it works: #1 You have a plugin installed in your modelling software (Sketchup, 3dsMax, etc) which will “prepare” your file; #2 Your file (.skp, .max, etc) is sent to an online platform that renders the scene and creates the “interactive presentation”; #3 The presentation is sent to your email (under an .exe extension for example) ready to be used, no installation needed (can even be sent straight to a client); And these are the Pros / Cons that we are evaluating, and that we would like to know your opinions on: PROS: Simple to create. Our goal is that the modeler can “setup” his file (by simply using a plugin) in less than 10 minutes. The point is eliminate the need for the whole “realtime engine workflow”, such as worrying about the UV maps, lightmaps, collisions, navigation UX, etc. Easy to use. The interactive presentation itself (the .exe file) is designed so that anyone, from an architect to a child, can navigate on the project. Accessible. Even though the visual-quality is simple, the bright side is that you (or your client) can run the presentation in a VERY basic hardware. Our current mark is that this presentation can be run on a i3 (2nd gen) processor / 2GB RAM / no dedicated graphic card. CONS: Visual quality. Definitely much simpler than what you can achieve by handcrafting an “interactive presentation” in a game engine for example. And obviously much simpler than “static render” (vray, etc). Unnecessary (?). This is the highest risk. Since the visual quality is basic, we wonder if the modeler will find it inadequate to present it to his client. Or if they will just prefer to “navigate on the project” by simply opening the project file itself (I’ve seen Sketchup professionasl doing that, for example, when presenting to clients). If so, our solution becomes useless. Another risk is if the modeler simply doesn’t believe that there is any value in providing the experience to “walk around the project” to his client, believing that “static render” is enough. Price (?). We’re trying to determine if the PRICE for this service would be an issue. In fact, if price WOULD be a problem, we’d be happy about it. Because if a lot of people would want to use “only if it’s cheap”, we can show this potential to investors. But anyway, we would like opinions on price. Our current idea is to charge a flat-fee every time the user sends a project file to create an interactive presentation, and our current bet is to charge U$19. How does it sound? We have launched a 1st concept-video on Facebook last week, just to try some of the impressions. This video is targeted to make a test on future “potential clients”, we do not disclosure that this is still a “beta stage”. My point in making this post here at Cgarchitect is not commercial, so whoever is interested in giving us feedbacks or trying the platform, contact me directly Link to the facebook concept video: Cheers guys, hope to hear from you soon.