Autodesk VIZ 5 in Production

[TheAllusionisst]

Another angle I had wondered about is how Max is under the Discreet banner and Viz is under the Autodesk banner, does this maintain the flexibility to sell off, lets say Discreet for arguments sake, but maintian rights for developing the existing code under the Viz name if times got tough and they had to turn a quick profit for the share holders. It may be far fetched, but sometimes the decisions of share holders is based on economic flexibility.

Anyway, all the speculation and now this announcement does not necessarily alleviate my concerns, I may just buy Maya Complete and have to work a little harder on architectural models/ renderings but have all the character creation/animation of Max and more for my other interest. Before this all started I thought Viz was the obvious choice, now I wonder if this is just postponing the inevitable demise of Viz, and I don't want to invest the time and energy only to have to make the switch later. I think Autodesk shot themselves in the foot by hesitating and considering eliminating the VIZ product line. Time will tell, but I didn't see any enhancements or new features listed anywhere.

[pburgoyne]

You know what? I still don't get it. With the release of the new ADT (with Viz render), why would Autodesk take this (IMHO) step backwards? I mean, this sounds to me like saying that putting a renderer like Viz (even though it's a simpler version of Autodesk Viz 4) into ADT was just a huge mistake. If you think, now you'll have 3 different products doing the same thing (for architects). IMHO, very strange...

Viz is not a step backwards, it address`s a different type of workflow. I can understand the inclusion of viz render into ADT, for people that design and dev in ADT and just need to visualize it saves lots of time without having to own Viz, you get it for free. ACAD has always had cut down rendering technolgy, and with Viz render this continues. THere are things that cannot be done in Vizrender that can be done int VIz. There are many users that dont even use ACAD, but work in VIz, and dont need the Max tools, this is where Viz sits perfectly.

 

So why max and then viz etc and not modular. I think many people forget that Max is dev by the discreet crew and aimed at film/game/dcc markets, it just so happens that AD owns discreet and rendering is useful to the Arch community, its a simple thing for them to strip it down and rebox and sell to architects. I know that the recent price cuts in maya and xsi change the market, but Max was originally dev as the all inclusive flexble cost effective solution. Originally it couldnt offer the highend stuff that was included with Maya Unlimited and XSI, you had to buy plugins, but the philosophy was always to include as much as possible for the lower base price, not segment the market for the elite users. This still seems to be the philosphy but now it is the more expensive package and includes some highend features, pflow and MR.

 

I think a modular approach would be much more work and headaches for discreet and would probably limit some potential profit.

 

I just wished theyd thought about vizs future sooner rather than after the waves from Max6`s anouncment reached the comminty. This is what i found confusing, not the products or features.

 

The other thing is buy what you need today to get the job done, things are always changing.

 

It seems simple,

 

you designa and produce working drawings, render a bit for presentation, buy AADT

 

you render arch viz stuff, buy Viz

 

you render arch viz and need particles, characters etc, buy Max

 

What i want now is the focus bak onto Viz as it was leading into Viz4, we need some new features.

 

just my opinion,

 

Peter

[Jeff Mottle]

I think many people forget that Max is dev by the discreet crew and aimed at film/game/dcc markets,

Actually that's not entirely true. Many of the developers that work on MAX are the same ones that work on VIZ. Just check the credits. People like Pierre-Felix and Alexander, who both hang out every now and then on our forums, are examples of that.

[xgarcia]

Regardless of who develops it, AD/Discreet is screwing VIZ users by saying MAX6 will be the end-all software in their line for design professionals and visualization pprofessionals. I just don't understand the reason for two products, when MAX has it all (had it all since MAX 5 with design extensions). I think Autodesk is trying to cover all it bases and is making money from all the angles - the laughs on us fellas.

[Jeff Mottle]

Something I do find funny, and I guess it's just human nature, is that when MAX6 was supposed to be "the" software everyone complained and cried for VIZ5. Then when they announce VIZ5 people still complain. Nothing wrong with this in my opinion, as all of the issues are discussed and more ideas brought to the table, but funny none the less.

 

What do people think is the best idea for the industry? One software that is dedeicated to Arch VIZ, multiple concurent VIZ programs that have varying levels of capabilites, a start over from scatch, modular software? Any other ideas? If there were no contraints and you could choose exaclty how you would want it done, keeping in mind that there are varying levels of usage and demands within the industy of architecural CG, whether they be primiminary design charettes or full blown presentation CG.

[pburgoyne]

I really meant that Discreet develop Max for those markets, then split it off for Viz, not so much the personel that do the actual dev.

 

Well i for one am happy that they have announced Viz5, i think the time i was most happy and excited about the furture of Viz (mabe only time) was when Viz4 apppeared with a truly exceptional step forward,new radiosity engine, and other arcviz tools that were more than the token tools suplied in earlier Vizs, and that made Viz the must have tool for arch viz/designers differentiated from Max. The shame is that the product was first generation and many of the shortcomings have not been addreseed, and Viz5 did not appear, Discreet had changed direction and focused on Max6, iam sure for econimic reasons, and focus on the arch viz tools was last on the list it seems. If the same efforts for viz4 had continued iam sure we would have the Lightscape replacement we all want, and vray wouldent be used as much.

 

I for one would be very happy to have Max6 doing its thing in the dcc,fil, game arena and Viz following 6 months later with some more archviz devs on top of the core max improvements. This would allow the devs who work on max and viz time to focus on viz.

 

I see no problem with AADT and viz render, if that is sufficient for your needs then AD has saved you money, if not you buy viz aswell.

 

In our product dep we use alias studio along side maya, different tools tailoered to specific tasks and used in one prod line.

 

I think keeping the Viz line be it in AADT or standalone continuing is good news, swallowed back into max and we will lose out on specific arcviz tools.

 

Jeff i take it you are not happy about Viz5? Are you still using Lightscape? or viz?

 

Regards

 

Peter

 

p.s hopeing to grab a pint with jon hey when in london next week.

[Jeff Mottle]

Jeff i take it you are not happy about Viz5? Are you still using Lightscape? or viz?

No not at all, I just like to stir it up a bit to get a discussion going. I doubt this thread would have been half this long if I had not prodded it with a bit of contraversy. I've never used VIZ myself (well not in production, although I do have it) I have always used MAX, when I was not using Lightscape. My next step is to learn vray however as that is what we are using at Smoothe for many things. I think we use the two about 50/50 (vray/Lightscape). All depends on the project.

 

Say hi to Jon for me. Although we work for the same company you probably see and talk to him more than me. As odd as that may sound.

[Fran]

Coming from an Architectural viz background, I prefer to be in a smaller, more focused group of people who do what I do. I think it is important for Max users to have the AEC tools, but not so much for someone like me (who really can't afford it) to have VFX and character animation stuff. I wasn't looking forward to being thrown into a larger pool with folks (nice though they are) of such unrelated interests.

 

My concern was that the "independent" user base of which I'm a part, was somehow expendable. I am relieved to see that for whatever reason, they've decided to keep us. I don't know about anyone else, but it's my intention to whine (whinge) as much as it takes to get some perks into VIZ 5 that Max 6 users will just have to wait for. I think Peter knows what I mean.

[Kerry Thompson]

Hi

Good to see some direction at last. I thought Viz was a goner but it seems to have some life left.

I guess in some ways this could be seen to consolidate ADT maybe ?? All we need now are the drawing management features and some of the parametric modeling features in Revit, put into ADT (or should it be the ADT features put into Revit?). Somehow I do not think that AutoDesk will ignore the vast AutoCAD AEC user base out there. Interesting to see what happens.

Kerry

[Ernest Burden III]

Somehow I do not think that AutoDesk will ignore the vast AutoCAD AEC user base out there.

They rarely seem to be motivated by common sense. Just how vast IS the AEC userbase out there? I really don't have any idea.

[3d-doctor]

ernest:

"They rarely seem to be motivated by common sense. Just how vast IS the AEC userbase out there? I really don't have any idea."

 

in the past year i've worked at four offices that have a copy of viz kicking around but have no-one in the office to use it hence my coming in to do a little freelance work.

 

i look forwads to seeing what viz5 will really turn out to be as i alwys prefer viz to max as it's just a little more "cad like"

[mbr]

MBR : What you say sounds a lot like what Revit does

Richard, here's what the article says:

 

" differs significantly from parametric programs, like Autodesk's Revit, whose cheif benefit is production efficiency achieved by embedding non-design infromation like cost and manufacturer into well understood building components, such as doors."

 

So ones a design tool, GC, the other a simple production tool. It will be a large difference for firms like Morphosis, where Revit is not beneficial.

 

CATIA may cost a bundle (not sure, but I guess it could cost $80k), but Gehry wouldn't have been able to build without it. That's worth it, imo, and others will find it priceless, too. For now, there aren't any 3D programs that have the precision for architecture that is needed to further the profession. FormZ is close, but loses ground with precise curves adn the CDs.

GC and CATIA will make waves, and if GT is successful, the world will be a different place.

 

This could have a small impact on this profession, too, as buildings become more and more complex in their forms (and probably more and more inhouse computer wizs).

 

 

*sorry to throw this in the middle...

[tcorbett]

I think the inclusion of the VIZ render to ADT is a good move by autodesk to keep their business running - now they have a reason to make architectural offices upgrade, and at the same time don't lose those offices to programs with friendlier interfaces, ala form-z.

 

I'm ready to see an upgrade that fixes the radiosity crashes, animation memory leaks, and files that corrupt due to a single shape. (please let there be more stability, please...)

 

Any word on what the increased interoperability between VIZ and ADT might include beyond just the rendering engine?

 

Tom...

[abicalho]

Originally posted by tcorbett:

I'm ready to see an upgrade that fixes the radiosity crashes, animation memory leaks, and files that corrupt due to a single shape. (please let there be more stability, please...)

I'd be interested in hearing about these issues. I honestly haven't heard of any Radiosity related crashes after VIZ 4 SP2; or of memory leaks with animation.

 

Alexander

[tcorbett]

Well, since installing SP2, the crashes have greatly reduced in frequency.

 

However I'm still having a few issues with one model in particular. I should mention that the model is very large, with multiple XREF scenes and objects, and around 60 lights, some of which I acquired through i-drop.

 

The system has had a tendency to crash once the radiosity solution had been calculated. I found that turning the camera view lighting to "default" reduced this problem, so I suspect it is related to some sort of memory issue.

 

Also, I can currently only render around 650 frames (640x480) until Windows returns a "runtime error". Stopping the rendering process and starting it again does not work, the system needs to be reset. Again, I'm guessing some sort of memory leak.

 

Finally, some files have inexplicably become corrupt. Thankfully, I have been able to merge all of the objects into a new model, but the original file would simply not open. I also had a file reverse the z-buffer process for the rendering - surface normals flipped, and objects closer to the camera were occluded by objects further away. Through process of elimination, I was able to trace this to a rectangle shape - once deleted, the file returned to normal.

 

 

Overall I'm happy with the performance of V4 with SP2, it's just the little quirks that I hope they fix.

[angelo]

Alexander,

The only instability I’ve experienced with VIZ 4 radiosity is opening a solution on another computer—I’ve never actually been able to open a file on another computer with a large rad solution and been able to work with it. Sometimes I want to work on camera views or render on a dual processor machine (which I don’t use for modeling) and end up having to run the solution again to keep the file stable.

 

Angelo

[angelo]

By the way, I'm very happy to hear another version of VIZ is in the works. There are zero commitments on new features, so can anyone give us a list of approved or even "un-approved" features?

 

No mention of linking to Revit. Shouldn’t this be mandatory for VIZ to fit into the entire Adesk workflow?

 

Angelo

[abicalho]

However I'm still having a few issues with one model in particular. I should mention that the model is very large, with multiple XREF scenes and objects, and around 60 lights, some of which I acquired through i-drop.

 

Just a reminder that Xrefs may cause problems with Radiosity (as noted in the Readme)

 

The system has had a tendency to crash once the radiosity solution had been calculated. I found that turning the camera view lighting to "default" reduced this problem, so I suspect it is related to some sort of memory issue.

 

Try disabling Display Radiosity in Viewport. Maybe also changing which Driver you're using (Software Z, Open GL, D3D). This description seems related to a video card issue.

 

Also, I can currently only render around 650 frames (640x480) until Windows returns a "runtime error". Stopping the rendering process and starting it again does not work, the system needs to be reset. Again, I'm guessing some sort of memory leak.

 

A Memory Leak will show itself through Task Manager. Just keep it open while rendering, if memory goes up, you have a memory leak. A Runtime Error could be different things, but most likely is caused by corrupted geometry when rendered.

 

Alexander

[abicalho]

Originally posted by angelo:

Alexander,

The only instability I’ve experienced with VIZ 4 radiosity is opening a solution on another computer—I’ve never actually been able to open a file on another computer with a large rad solution and been able to work with it. Sometimes I want to work on camera views or render on a dual processor machine (which I don’t use for modeling) and end up having to run the solution again to keep the file stable.

 

Angelo

Make sure both computers have the same System Units, and that all bitmaps are found by both systems.

 

Alexander

[tcorbett]

Originally posted by Alexander Esppeschit Bicalho:

Try disabling Display Radiosity in Viewport.

 

A Runtime Error could be different things, but most likely is caused by corrupted geometry when rendered.

Yeah, ultimately, disabling the radiosity and using the "default light" only for the smooth + highlights view seems to have solved that crash. Changing the driver (HEIDI, OpenGL) didn't make a difference.

 

I thought at first that the runtime error was geometry related, but have found that it consistantly occurs after about 650 rendered frames, regardless of the camera position, or location along the timeline.

 

This still gives me 22 seconds of material per night, however, so it's not like my work is being hindered. Something about this model will not play nice with network rendering, but subsequent models seem to work fine. Again, I suspect the Erco i-drop lighting might have a role to play in the instability.

[psyanide]

A few months ago there almost wasn't one, and was why the word was that MAX 6 was going to be the be all end all solution. But things seem to change fast.

 

]

 

My office was going to upgrade our coipes of VIZ 3 to VIZ 4, but all 4 of the AutoDesk re-sellers I contacted told me that AD had told them that VIZ was not going to be continued beyond 4. This meant it would have been better for us to upgrade to MAX.

Don't get me wrong, I'm glad they are keeping VIZ running a bit longer (even though I'm not using it at the moment), but I think this kind of thing is a little distasteful.

Consider if we had upgraded to MAX, we would be out of pocket by considerably more than we would be if we just wait for VIZ 5. I'm pretty sure we wouldn't have been the only ones, and I'm also sure there are folks out there who did make the switch and got a grilling from their employers when VIZ 5 appeared, asking exactly why the extra cash was needed.

Fortunately for us, we haven't upgraded yet, and I hope no-one else did too. (Upgrade from VIZ to MAX because VIZ had no future I mean. Any other reason for making that upgrade is a good one)

[Lightning]

Originaly posted by mbr:

CATIA may cost a bundle (not sure, but I guess it could cost $80k), but Gehry wouldn't have been able to build without it. That's worth it, imo, and others will find it priceless, too. For now, there aren't any 3D programs that have the precision for architecture that is needed to further the profession. FormZ is close, but loses ground with precise curves adn the CDs.

mbr,

 

I'm working in an office that is the Executive Architect for a local Frank Gehry building. For that purpose Gehry's office made sure we will use CATIA, which is a great thing. From my limited experience with this software I can tell you the following:

 

1. It is a very powerful program for designing curved surfaces from concept to CAM.

 

2. Its ability to produce 2D drawings from the very complicated 3D models is strong but problematic because this program developers don't care much about developing the existing export feature to obsolete 2D programs like AutoCAD.

 

3. For designing "regular" buildings CATIA is a poor choice. It is very complicated to work with, and the learning curve is like straight concrete wall.

 

4. For the building industry it is extremely expensive. The base module price is around $20K and up, and it performs well only on strong and expensive workstations.

 

5. You are right about one main thing Gehry would have a very hard time constructing his building without CATIA. Therefore this program has a huge advantage in "liberating" the profession for exploring new design geometries and making them feasible. It even made my very modernist office design some "free from" geometries.

 

6. From what I know Gehry Technologies was formed to assimilate CATIA into the building industry by creating a CATIA product that is suitable for the building industry in terms of features and price (but don't quote me on that). We have yet to see if they succeed but they do have a strong starting point.

 

7. CATIA has almost nothing to do with what we are talking about here, architectural visualization. They did adopt Mental Ray for their rendering module, but this is mainly for creating product presentations.

 

Lighting

 

* I'm also sorry to throw this in the middle but this side discussion intrigued me.

[aluigi]

Hi Guys

Interesting what you say but now i am again confused on which way to go.

I was upgrading to max 6 from my viz 4 becouse ofvoices about viz ending like lightscape.

Now viz 5 is coming and max 6 is here already.

If money is not an issue what you suggest i do.

I just want to stick with one software, i am tired

to spend money all over the place.

Is Max the best choise?

I will hold until i hear from you expert advice.

 

Thanks

[Richard McCarthy]

Lighting ::

 

Since you have the pleasure of using Catia, could you tell us a bit more about it?

 

Cos, I am really curious, exactly what Catia can do that's better than other CAD/CAM program like Rhino and Solidworks that doesn't cost an arm and a leg. I know it's a parametric SOLID-based program, just like Pro-E or Autodesk Inventor Pro...

[mbr]

Lighting - thanks for the info. I've seen their process demonstrated before (school tour) and with Randy Jefferson (his partner/engineer) in a material/method class, but never heard the drawbacks or limitations. They just showed us the digitizer, the model with grids drawn on it, and the colorful CATIA model.

 

It will be interesting to see what happens. I am a little scared that people that don't have a good eye will try making buildings like Gehry's, though. The Blob era was terrifying enough for me! Time will tell.