VR, do we even want it?

[AndyC]

Virtual worlds. Every now and again there is another anouncement of a new breakthrough, something amazing thats 30FPS realtime using unreal or another great gaming engine. But part of me thinks this is just a race for VR for the sake of having a race. I say this having directed and produced a VR project with a game engine and often look back at wether it was a good investment or not.

 

So if it was available right now, would you want your clients walking through your entire scene? Lets remember clients arent going to give you 10 times as long to do it, certainly wont be paying you 100's of thousands and will want it water tight.

 

Personally my opinion is no. We are (hopefully) experts at creating choreographed, composed, staged scenerios, giving a glimpse of a special moment. A tease of something yet to be. We have the ability to play with perspective, positioning, correct colors where we want and so forth. Its is this staging that allows us to do the magic we do. So what if it was removed?

 

Would you want it?

[LuckyST]

since I'm an architect first, then yes... I'd want it. VR would allow me to make my projects even better, and see my project before a single brick is layed on the ground.

as for the 3d viz standpoint of view, I understand the possible frustration and the problems the VR would bring, but you are overlooking that VR would make you your job even easier.

[SandmanNinja]

I think the big draw card would be the ability to do a virtual inspection.

If the 3d model was 100% accurate, then the architect could do a walk-through and inspect if it came together as he imaged and perhaps get a chance to re-do certain aspects now that he's 'seen' the first cut.

[CRD]

Like most answers, it depends.

 

I agree that the amount of work needed to make an entire scene look as good as you can make a still or a canned animation look, takes an enormous amount of effort, in addition to new software to learn. So I don't see the effort being worth the trouble for a strictly aesthetic purpose.

 

But in the functional world of healthcare, where I do most of my work, the idea of creating a single bed floor of a new hospital and letting the nurses and doctors take it for a test spin, is very appealing. So I'm about to approach VR from the point of view of design validation instead of aesthetic appeal. Then supplement that simplistic VR with realistic stills or animations for approval of finishes.

 

There is still a wow factor associated with VR and anything that creates that reaction in a client has a value.

[mahorela]

I think it's all about the application, there are some companies around that already deal primarily in real time stuff (roam interactive in Australia comes to mind) but imo, when used for marketing most prospective buyers really can't be bothered learning how to control the camera through the apartment. They want to see very high quality animation showcasing the apartment as it just gives a much better indication of the apartment and is ever so much easier to watch and use. I can see how it would be beneficial in terms of planning etc for architects particularly on very important projects but I think quality levels need to come much closer to pre-rendered standards before it is viable for marketing. Most prospective buyers (in this country at least) are very limited in terms of technical ability, post a flash video on the web and the inevitable calls follow "can't get it to work"........."have your IT guy install the flash player", asking them to pick up control systems for realtime would require hands on training. Added to that, losing the power of selective and artful camera angles etc would not be in anyones best interest for marketing. Particularly the client as there is always something that the client doesn't want attention being drawn too.

[Justin Hunt]

as a desing tool, I am not sure its money well spent. The time it takes to get a solid VR compared to the time it takes for a design to evolve just makes un-usable.

 

However as a training/ demonstating tool then yes it can be well worth the effort.

 

jhv

[SandmanNinja]

Yeah, I was thinking of something NPR for sure - just an accurate model that would probably be used in an internal process.

[Crazy Homeless Guy]

If there is a future for VR in architecture, it will come in the from of an engine that can link directly to a BIM model, and can filter the proper geometry from that model in order to show what the design is that day, and how it is evolving. It needs to be a system that can take information that exits, and use it in news ways, and it needs to be able to do that in a fairly efficient manner. Creating VR models for projects is not financially feasible any other way.

 

Isn't this part of the reason that Autodesk began developing project Newport? Basically to start exploring the practicality of realtime taken from a BIM model?

 

...where I see the functionality of VR coming more into play would be the export of a BIM model to Max, and then possible making it into a container object so the massive amount of geometry runs more efficiently. Then using something like Vray RT or MetaSL, and to a lesser extent iRay.

 

The key will be the continued development of video cards that can handle the massive amount of BIM geometry in real time. That is essentially what is keeping this from happening.

 

Now this doesn't mean a dooms day scenario, it simply means we can visualize more information faster. And even more important, the real time information can be reflective of the current design.

 

As mentioned, one of the current problems is that these models take a long time to optimize, program, and produce. Having a real time model that is a reflection of the current design can be very effective. Having a realtime model of where the design was a month ago is not effective unless the design is complete and you want to show people how they will experience the building before the construction is complete.

 

This is not dooms day. Even if we are able to do this effectively in the next couple of years, the models will be as ugly as sin.... and everyone knows it is sex that sells. Produce beautiful imagery, and you will still have a job. Produce ugly imagery, and you value provide becomes less of an asset.

[Justin Hunt]

I think you have hit the nail on the head in some reagrds. Currently there is just too much information in BIM to be practical for VR and not enough for construction and building managment.

 

Heck is nightmare enough just bringing in a slightly detailed Revit model into Max, let alone walk around it in realtime

 

jhv

[Bwana Kahawa]

We've just started using Virtual Building Explorer - a plug in for ArchiCAD that creates a stand-alone executable file that can passed on to the client.

 

It's proving really popular - it shows instantly where the state of work is that day, architects can use to find issues with the model, and at times we've even resorted to taking screengrabs from it for presentation purposes, as it's image quality give a better sense of form than ArchiCAD's own rendering engine (as it supports ambient occlusion).

 

The only thing that's proving a pain is exporting our larger BIM models into it. Although I wouldn't say it's at the point of replacing visualisations, it's certainly a useful 'work-in-progress' tool.

[Devin Johnston]

Every few years I look at what the state of VR is as it relates to architecture, unfortunately this technology is still way to expensive for most firms. In fact yesterday we look at just how much it would cost to get a state of the art VR system up and running, it came out to be about $150K which included training and testing. Once you get the hardware you still have to convert your model to work with the software that is running the simulation which could take several days. That would allow one user at a time to explore a 40'x40' space interactively. The system uses optical cameras to track your position, that data is sent to a computer which outputs the visual info to the headset your wearing. All of that is hard wired together so you have to wear a backpack just to be able to walk around. The most expensive component in the system is the headset which can run up to $40K a pop. I'd love to get my hands on one of these systems, using it for SD or DD would be very helpful and the marketing potential is very attractive but the cost is prohibitave.