AccuRender nXt

advanced rendering for AutoCAD

hi guys have being using ar3 for almost 8 years now exploring nxt. but notice the interface differs quite abit from ar3. one such interface is the radiosity section in ar3. so for nxt we just have to click indirect lights for radiosity ?


Views: 286

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

For now work with the presets, for exterior use the default exterior lighting setting interior, use either daylight or artificial settings and so on, till you are familiar with the settings then you being to experiment till you find a comfortable base.

Try the online tutorials and the ones from accustudio.
yo bro thank for the info
NXT no longer seperates radiosity out as a seperate function. Having used Accurender2, 3 & 4 I believe that you will find NXT relitively easy to switch over to and a very big upgrade. I would suggest that you make sure your Autocad version, video card etc can handle it if you are using the same machine that you were doing AR3 on.
Indirect lighting replaces radiosity for calculating reflections between matte surfaces. Unlike radiosity, there is no lit mesh which can be displayed in OpenGL in real time. On the other hand, there are no modeling size limitations for this calculation as there were with radiosity. Artifacts such as light leaks and jagged shadows are also a thing of the past. There are also fewer switches to set (no "molding and trim" switch, for example.) The calculation is generally more accurate.
On the other hand, there are no modeling size limitations for this calculation as there were with radiosity. Artifacts such as light leaks and jagged shadows are also a thing of the past. There are also fewer switches to set (no "molding and trim" switch, for example.) The calculation is generally more accurate.Those where confusing days.
Yes, but with radiosity, when the lighting of surfaces was done, you had just, for each point of view, to calculate specularies. Some renderer allowed you to travel in the model with a good lighting effect, in real time (except for specularies), with the mouse, like in a game...
A radiocity calculation done back then can be saved and reloaded again for continues rendering and if you have shut down the system you can even change materials almost like shaderlights
Yes - we could use the radiosity solutions for quick light intensity maps. This was good for presentations to City Officials who needed to know if your project had "light leak" onto neighbors. The ability to have a tonal value in the model that would allow for shaded real-time walk through was fantastic and I even did that for a few clients. Most of the "artifacts" and such came from sloppy model building. Yes, AR3 had its quirks, just like other programs, but there are a few things I still miss. Also - it still feels like AR5 output is inconsistent - but that is subjective. (mostly because you have to stop on the same number of passes, with the same settings, same view, etc. to get the same output - but this repeatability is tricky to get)

Yes, I miss AR3 at times. Never liked AR4 and just missed AR2 but AR5 is getting there for me.
but the quality of nXt renderer, is far more better. All my customers love it, and me to. The artefacts in AR4 was embarrassing, and AR3 too basic... I used "Lightscape 3.2", very good, but big gaps (bump textures), and not confortable. 3ds max, as we say in french a "gazworks". Definetly, nXt is a big progress... and in a constant improvement, and the tool of the nicer group of buddies all over the world... ;o)
nXt is by FAR easier to use then any previous version. For me, I load the model, drop in my textures and just use the exterior preset (95% of my work are exteriors). Click render and maybe adjust the tonal setting... maybe.
Missed AR3 too. In my option it is easier to use that than nxt. The artifacts I got around. Before then it was 3ds max 3.1. the landscape library of Ar3 stole my heart and its easy of use and predefined material library.

AR4 produced better and faster rendering than AR4 but the instability after Win Xp, brings to mind the days of AutoCad 2000. The AR3 interface of it makes better setting up of views. Added features of HDRi made the switch mandatory.

People see my works now and find it impossible to believe i still use accurender. So I tell them it is Nxt. Nxt, AR3/4 are far apart. With added features like Material editor, Image Editor, Plant Editor, and now Path Tracer and much more down the line.
hi guys thank for all the reply. i must agree nxt render quailty is much better. tried one of the attached image but it appear grainy . any chance if we can make it more sharper?

understand that it need alot of passes to cook the renderings. if i compared rendering with ar3 and nxt , nxt provide much better renders but slower while ar3 not as good render but much faster...

always have difficulties doing animation with accurender. do nxt intergrated animation interface allow objects movement etc... or must use co-motion 2?
Attachments:

RSS

Search

Translate

Latest Activity

Peter Milner replied to Peter Milner's discussion RenderFarm passes and tasks
"Hi Rich, That could be the answer. We have a new designer working at one of our other sites and she may have started a drawing from scratch instead of using a template. Therefore it would be set to use the standard rendering engine. Thank you for…"
10 hours ago
Rich Hart replied to Peter Milner's discussion RenderFarm passes and tasks
"Is the rendering engine set t be the Path Tracer on that machine? I see it is disabled on my computer if the engine is set to Standard. http://accurender.ning.com/forum/topics/tasks-in-render-farm-window"
10 hours ago
Peter Milner posted a discussion

RenderFarm passes and tasks

Got a strange glitch here.On one of our PCs, when sending a render to the Farm, the option to change the number of tasks is greyed out and stuck on 10. However, when a job is sent to the farm, it is automatically broken into 25 tasks.The PC is running the latest versions of nXt and the Farm and has been working perfectly up to  now.Any ideas?See More
15 hours ago
Peter Milner commented on Peter Milner's photo
Thumbnail

screend brochure 2019 05

"You may be right on the bricks. What looks like noise is actually the texture of the fabric."
15 hours ago
George Ioannidis commented on Peter Milner's photo
Thumbnail

screend brochure 2019 05

"Those are all exceptional work, Peter! Congratulations!On this one only: bricks look big to me, but maybe I am wrong. Also some areas in shadow look still a bit noisy."
Oct 16
Peter Milner posted photos
Oct 15
Roy Hirshkowitz replied to Roy Hirshkowitz's discussion AccuRender Studio for AutoCAD
"1-  On the Rendering Tab there is a popdown called Destination.  The option is called something like "Local Out of Process".  2-  No, installation will require admin access."
Oct 5
Mark Brinkman replied to Roy Hirshkowitz's discussion AccuRender Studio for AutoCAD
"I am an old Accurender user. I now need to try and re-create some old images from old models. (about 20 years old) I have now downloaded Accurender Studio, and now work with AutoCAD 2016 and 2017 I have 2 questions related to Accurender Studio: 1)…"
Oct 4

© 2019   Header image courtesy Peter Milner   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service