Architectural Office - Rendering Software

[Wrender]

Ah, the age old question of which software to invest in. I work in a medium sized architectural office (about 50 people between 2 offices). Currently we have a smattering of software used by several people. Our production work is done in Revit, and post production work is done using Adobe products (PS, Illustrator, In-Design, etc).

 

That said, the modeling + rendering software is all over the place. Some use a combination of Rhino/Flamingo/VRay, some use Sketchup/Maxwell, and some use Sketchup/3DS Max/Mental Ray.

 

We are trying to standardize one workflow. We need something intuitive to most people in the office, but can produce a range of quick concept images, all the way to photo realistic images and try to control cost + training budgets.

 

I'm one of the sketchup/3ds max guys and appreciate the level of control 3ds max presents. However, it's complex and very expensive. Training would be intensive and costly to get everybody switched over. So I started looking at Maxwell. Most people in our office know sketchup really well but would struggle with Rhino. I think I could be convinced Maxwell is the way to go - due to intuitiveness, plugin directly to sketchup, floating licenses, etc.

 

However, the hang up is with the quality and time. I've heard quality images take a really long time to get the graininess out of the image. Is this still true? Often we need to get marketable images extremely fast - and photo realism is a rare luxury and less important.

 

I'm looking for input/opinions on these software platforms - knowing that super high level rendering capability is not necessarily the goal. Speed, cost, ease of use are all important.

 

Thanks,

Ryan

[Devin Johnston]

If realism is not a priority for your firm then Maxwell is not the software for you, its main function is producing photorealistic looking renderings. It also has the disadvantage of being the slowest ( 10 times slower than Vray) of the 3 render engines you mentioned. Out of those three Vray is the most widely used and versatile (depending on who you ask) and a large majority of the Arch Viz community uses it. The benefit of this is there are lots of tutorials available, they have a very responsive forum, and most of the plugins you'll find support it. Vray has the flexibility of being able to produce any type of rendering from NPR to photo real and it can do it extremely quickley. The downside is there is a steep learning curve but I think that can be said for all 3 of these engines. If you're looking for a modeling package between 3D Studio, Sketchup and Rino it really depends on what your modeling, assuming it's architectural projects and given that your also using Revit I'd say 3D Studio is all you really need.

[Corey Beaulieu]

Completely agree with Devin!

 

As far as design software goes, I find that, while easy pick up, Sketchup is very limiting. Revit is also limiting, but produces a great set in the end. Rhino or Max would be my way to go to for design, Revit or straight CAD for documents and as to the render engine, I'd have to say Vray fpor time and quality ratio. Like Devin said it has a plug in for all the software mentioned accept for Revit so:

 

Rhino w\Vray or Max w\Vray for design\render and Revit for CD's. A bonus for Max might be it's ever growing connectivity to Revit. So maybe you could design in MAX, Refine in Revit, and start to publish Photo-Real Renders back in Max with Vray without having to remodel or fix too many small things.

[Tommy L]

Cant you render natively in Revit?

 

Completely agree with Devin!

 

As far as design software goes, I find that, while easy pick up, Sketchup is very limiting. Revit is also limiting, but produces a great set in the end. Rhino or Max would be my way to go to for design, Revit or straight CAD for documents and as to the render engine, I'd have to say Vray fpor time and quality ratio. Like Devin said it has a plug in for all the software mentioned accept for Revit so:

 

Rhino w\Vray or Max w\Vray for design\render and Revit for CD's. A bonus for Max might be it's ever growing connectivity to Revit. So maybe you could design in MAX, Refine in Revit, and start to publish Photo-Real Renders back in Max with Vray without having to remodel or fix too many small things.

[Scott Schroeder]

If you are looking to keep costs down, I'll echo what Tom said. Just stick with Revit and do all of the fancy-dancy effects in Photoshop.

 

Realistically, if Sketchup/Rhino/Whatever is going to give you a half-crap image and you are doing to spend all of your time in Photoshop anyways. Why invest in it?

 

Other Software -> Max is a poor workflow. The time you take fixing all of the errors the export/import process gives you, you could model the thing 10 times over in Max. Either learn max to the fullest extent or don't waste your money investing in it.

 

If you are in a firm and you can get access to the Revit files, then great. But don't expect them to be that great either. Depending on how your Revit teams create them, they could be giving you little bombs. Revit linking is decent, but fails at anything larger than a small home. Again, if your Revit team creates things properly then the linking gains some more power. But if everything is just generic walls and materials, then linking goes out the window.

[John Dollus]

another vote for sticking w/revit and the built in mental ray rendering. If you add Max later on, it will mean all of your materials and lights translate over with file linking so there's less of a learning curve. going w/max and vray will mean $$$ + a rather steep learning curve and you lose a good portion of the benefit of working within Revit.

[Wrender]

another vote for sticking w/revit and the built in mental ray rendering. If you add Max later on, it will mean all of your materials and lights translate over with file linking so there's less of a learning curve. going w/max and vray will mean $$$ + a rather steep learning curve and you lose a good portion of the benefit of working within Revit.

 

I've rendered with Revit before and found 2 major problems. One is it's too limiting in terms of material and lighting flexibility. The second is modeling in Revit is cumbersome for any kind of detail. Furthermore, modeling that much detail (like a railing) often weighs the model down unnecessarily and slows down other production staff working on construction drawings.

 

That said, I tend to agree with the other posters that 3DS Max (MR or VRay) gives the most flexibility, speed, etc. However, the cost and training implications are a tough pill to swallow. I love the program and use it extensively, but I'm not sure I can convince the other 15 people that need to use it as well. That's really the only reason I was entertaining the notion of going to Maxwell. I thought it was a little more intuitive and wouldn't require so much hand-holding to get people going. Sounds like I might have been off base there and there is actually quite a bit of training involved in getting spun up on Maxwell as well.

 

This discussion is helpful though - thanks for the insight!

[Tommy L]

I'd give some attention to your Revit pipeline before re-tooling.

[Justin Hunt]

Whilst rendering in Revit is much slower than Max it is a very good option. You also have the ability to do flat shaded renders which are very effective for a clean, clear presentation style.

 

As to the level of control Revit gives, once you dig a bit deeper there is a surprising level of control. Its been simplified and sure you dont get to use many of the more specialized mentalray shaders, but 90% of the time you wont need them. for the other 10%, use Max.

 

Of the 15 people, how many really need to be producing pretty pictures?

and what about Vray for Sketchup?

[Chris MacDonald]

Cant you render natively in Revit?

 

You can, but it's a basic, cut down version of mental ray, which in a shootout in a magazine I subscribe to failed to match the rendering speeds of the full max version of mental ray - probably owing the the lack of control over the setup. You really don't have anywhere near the same kind of control over material setups as you do in max either.

 

All in all, it really is quite a shoddy half assed attempt at providing a rendering solution within the software. Most likely because autodesk want to keep 3ds max as their flagship rendering product. This is based on my limited digging around in it with a colleague, so I can't claim to be an expert in it either.

 

I can also imagine that adding entourage and trees/foliage in revit would be a nightmare too.

[BVI]

 

Other Software -> Max is a poor workflow. The time you take fixing all of the errors the export/import process gives you, you could model the thing 10 times over in Max. Either learn max to the fullest extent or don't waste your money investing in it.

 

 

We haven't found this at all, especially from Revit. Max 2013 has really improved its import process, less flipped faces from sketchup and Revit and a much cleaner import. If the model is well constructed in Revit then its not a problem to get it into Max if you know what you are doing.

[Scott Schroeder]

We haven't found this at all, especially from Revit. Max 2013 has really improved its import process, less flipped faces from sketchup and Revit and a much cleaner import. If the model is well constructed in Revit then its not a problem to get it into Max if you know what you are doing.

 

I 100% agree with you. However, the part in bold the key. When your Revit team only cares about how the model looks in sheet view, you end up with varying results at times.

[M V]

My experience is rendering in Revit is total crap. Google Image "Revit Rendering" - they all look the same. Very little settings for controlling environment, the materials dialog is junk, and Mental Ray is Autodesk, so enough said. If you want to save on cost by not having to buy a bunch of seats of Max, I would go with V-Ray for SketchUp. SketchUp Free gets a lot done and you can't beat the price. VRay for SU is cheaper than VR for Max and the quality is what you expect from V-Ray and most people can learn SketchUp in a weekend. It has its limits but for Architecture, I think its perfect. V-Ray for SketchUp is working on a new release very very soon. I would wait to see if they run a promo on pricing. The new features I have seen and heard about are really going to make this plugin a Max killer for most.

 

Also, I just saw on a banner on this website that Maxwell is coming out with a plugin for Revit. Hmmm, should be interesting. Maxwell's plugins are incredible, its just the damn render engine that's the problem. No one I know has the time to wait for a MW render to cook.

[Tommy L]

Your other option is to hire a freelancer / studio to do your renderings. If you get a good workflow down then it can be fairly seamless. Balanced against the software purchasng, the training and the disruption to existing protocols this could be your best option.

 

Your original post says you are not aiming too high with quality, well if you do all your design development in Revit w/ Mental Ray then you can just send out your 'final finals' with an FBX export to someone who is well versed in Max.

[Sketchrender]

I would have to say from what you have said, you already have the software in the office .

Must be doing well to have all the software you mentioned.

But personally not every body should an expert.

Autocad/ sketch up for basic concept modelling, and hand it over to someone who loves 3d modelling.

Find someone who lives and breaths it. Get him or her tooled up and let the architects do the architecture.

That will cut your costs down.

Phil

[Francisco Penaloza]

The eternal question is “Where is the magic render button” and sadly for some people there is not a magic button.

As straight answer to your question, at first view VRay may be a good option, for all the points expressed above, but be aware of the learning curve that VRay has and price; it is an excellent tool but you need to learn it, no magic under it . Now there is small differences between each version, Sketchup, Rino, Max, although the core is the same interface change a little so do features.

Now a better option instead of Maxell is Shaderlight, low price, great quality, very easy to use, you can get instant results just clicking render, and then some love in photoshop and you are gold, a great example in this mere forum

http://www.cgarchitect.com/2012/10/the-making-of-block-15-terrace

Now if budget is a must, there is nothing wrong with Sketchup rendering, it all depend of the creativity or the designer and good example here

http://www.cgarchitect.com/2012/04/the-making-of-usc-village

as you can see you guys already have the tools need it to do good quality renders, for what I read in your post is that you are looking for special tool that “everybody” will be able to use to produce great renderings in short time, honestly if you do not spend serious time on training, I don’t see that happening, Scott as a good point mentioning that Autodesk BIM-topia fall a part because Visualization and Construction drawings are complete different, so far it does not work.

Now another great option is what Tom Living mentioned, if you all use different software, do not have time or money to spend in training or buying high end rendering machines to work with Maxwell, better hire someone who know what it is doing, a good ArchViz artist, will create a decent workflow between Max, REVIT, Rino, Sketchup, Bonzai 3d, Form Z and what not, Mental Ray or VRay will create good renderings, plus if you guys hire a local artist you will helping to fix our decadent economy

My two cents.

[howelaw1]

Revit is really not that bad for rendering. Even though MR takes longer than Vray to produce something of equal quality standards, the fact that you can do everything in that one program and edit it on the fly really makes it efficient.

 

And by the way you can produce quality renders in Revit, you just have to individually tweak the settings inside the rendering engine. Another advantage of Revit is that you can do image edits to the render inside the program, like increasing the brightness of the render immediately without having to re-render to get the right brightness level. Obviously you can just do this in your image editing program of choice.

 

That said, nothing beats the intuitiveness and undoubtedly more powerful modelling capabilities of a 3D program as opposed to BIM software.

[Wrender]

Thanks for the responses guys.

 

Francisco, thanks for the links. This effort of "culling" software is to simplify our training requirements. I'm a firm believer that great renderings can be produced from ANY software. It's just training everybody on 1 program at a higher level is much better than letting everybody go willy-nilly on their program of choice and using it half-as$ed because they haven't received any kind of formal training.

 

Outsourcing really isn't an option - we use rendering primarily for process and understanding architecture and only intermittently produce a final polished rendering for a client. So in house expertise is highly desirable for all stages of rendering capability.

 

I think after mulling the question for awhile here's my proposal (for better or worse) to our firm:

 

Construction Documents continue to be built in Revit which automatically creates the "bones" of a render model.

 

Export to Sketchup for additional detailing - which has tremendous capability when paired with Photoshop for most process work and conceptual marketing material.

 

Use 3DS Max (MR) for polished renderings - speed is often critical, and while pricey, we can probably get by with 2-3 licenses making it affordable.

 

Thanks for all the input - much appreciated!

[matthewspencer]

While I'm a Maxwell person I'd also echo the Vray recommendation in your case. I'd just add that the learning curve might not be as painful as you're expecting. Why don't you just identify a few Vray presets, tell those unfamiliar with the software to use them for now, and in the meantime get people training/exploring? It can be a really gradual transition. Plus Vray gives such immediate visual feedback that any troubleshooting is quick.

 

Would respectfully disagree with a recommendation like Shaderlight. While very affordable, alternative rendering engines like these suffer from very small user communities, as confirmed by the very quiet Shaderlight forum.

 

When you're tired of dealing with black splotches come over to the bright side of Maxwell (only joking...mostly...)

[Wrender]

While I'm a Maxwell person I'd also echo the Vray recommendation in your case. I'd just add that the learning curve might not be as painful as you're expecting. Why don't you just identify a few Vray presets, tell those unfamiliar with the software to use them for now, and in the meantime get people training/exploring? It can be a really gradual transition. Plus Vray gives such immediate visual feedback that any troubleshooting is quick.

 

Would respectfully disagree with a recommendation like Shaderlight. While very affordable, alternative rendering engines like these suffer from very small user communities, as confirmed by the very quiet Shaderlight forum.

 

When you're tired of dealing with black splotches come over to the bright side of Maxwell (only joking...mostly...)

 

 

Don't get me wrong - I would jump at the opportunity of using VRay (I personally have used it before). The learning curve really doesn't frighten me - it's really just the price tag. I have a hard time justifying an extra $1,000 license on top of the already expensive 3DS Max license to save a few seconds off a render. Don't want to get into a Vray vs MR discussion - I think they're both valid. We could use VRay for sketchup - but I think it's pretty handicapped in terms of functionality.

[matthewspencer]

Sounds good to me. Everyone in the office hunkering down and standardizing to a 3DS/mr workflow can only be a good thing.

[Justin Hunt]

If you are going to end up in max, why do the extra detailing in sketchup? Why not do it in Max ?

[Wrender]

If you are going to end up in max, why do the extra detailing in sketchup? Why not do it in Max ?

 

Modeling in Max seems to be too complex for 95% of our staff. I don't think it's nearly as intuitive for architectural modeling - geared more towards the gaming/film industry than to the architectural industry? Maybe just a misguided perception, but shared by most at our firm.

 

We also utilize the sketchup model itself for a lot of imagery and diagrams completely independent of Max.

Edited December 13, 2012 by Wrender

[Francisco Penaloza]

Modeling in Max seems to be too complex for 95% of our staff. I don't think it's nearly as intuitive for architectural modeling - geared more towards the gaming/film industry than to the architectural industry? Maybe just a misguided perception, but shared by most at our firm.

3dsmax is not an Architectural design software, REVIT, autoCAD Architecture, CATIA or so, they are design for that. 3dsMax is a 3D modeling rendering, animation software, that we also use to do Architectural renderings that concept should be better understood, IMHO if you guys want to base a whole work flow and software purchase decision based on everybody becoming proficient on Renderings, is not a good idea, it become a waste of resources and time, architects dealing with GI, irradiance maps at the same time that are trying to decide if the rooms are to big or the A/C cut the ceiling, it does not work.

Where I work all initial concept design, and presentation are done in Sketchup, because is faster, no need to create constructions levels or exact wall ceiling connection like on REVIT, then we produce very high quality stylized rendering from sketchup and photoshop only, color floor plan, elevations and what not, then when the design is 70% done, we go to Max, create photo real renderings or animations, to define materials lights and so, at the same time all constructions drawings are done one REVIT or AutoCAD architecture.

Architects design and do basic renders, Me ArchViz artist make it look awesome

maybe in your company everybody should learn more of Photoshop, to get more out of Sketchup, before they jump in to Max. You not always need a photo real rendering to get a project or sign a design.

 

But that's our work flow, different that your reality, not saying that it is the best, take our advice with a pin of salt

[Scott Schroeder]

Modeling in Max seems to be too complex for 95% of our staff. I don't think it's nearly as intuitive for architectural modeling - geared more towards the gaming/film industry than to the architectural industry? Maybe just a misguided perception, but shared by most at our firm.

 

We also utilize the sketchup model itself for a lot of imagery and diagrams completely independent of Max.

 

 

3ds Max is NOT that complex. I teach at a University in my spare time and if I can teach a handicapped kid with only one good functioning hand how to use 3ds Max in the course of one semester, I would hope that a studio of professionals could pick it up quicker than that. But, of course, that kid wanted to learn and didn't go into it already with a list of complaints about how it's too hard.

 

You are not teaching them everything that Max has to offer. As others have said, you get a small but effective team of max users and you let them run with it. Your entire office staff doesn't need to know Max, just a small handful of experts. Your special operators if you will. 2-3 licenses of Max tops is all you need. Besides, you have network licenses available with Max so whoever needs it at the time checks one of your licenses out. If you start to see a demand, you add one more licnese and so on. You don't start out by buying everyone a stand alone license.