AccuRender nXt

advanced rendering for AutoCAD

Having used Ar3, Ar4 and NXT consistently for production drawings in the last one year, I have come to the conclusion that NXT lacks precise camera controls especially for exteriors. I particularly like the controls in Ar4. Also, Ar3 does a good work of it. However, NXT has a better rendering engine. I often find myself running to Ar4 to contol and save camera views before coming on to render in NXT. Am I missing something or is it yet to come?

Views: 886

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

We don't provide a camera utility as such-- nor is any planned. The AutoCAD camera utility works nicely. There is a WalkAbout utility which allows you to save views as well. What is it specifically that you're having trouble with?
For some reason, I find it more convinient to orbit around my model for a satisfactory view with the ar4 controls. I need to be able to pick a specific camera location and a target. After this, I need to be able to fine tune the position by coordinates that I can input to adjust height of camera, moving a bit to the right or left to avoid or include ojects in the scene, etc.
The AutoCAD camera utility lets you pick a location and target. You can load that view into WalkAbout and use the arrow keyboard keys to fine tune it. There is control over the increment as well.
Okay, I will try that. I was however more comfortable with doing everything within the walkabout window in ar. Thanks Roy. I will get back on that.
Let me know-- I'd love to see some of your work when you get a chance.
My own way around this is to set a camera view(location, height, focal lenght etc) with AutoCAd, then use the orbit and walk tools to fine tune. Load this into walkabout in Nxt(apart from the change in AutoCad viewport size and that of nxt) this leaves very little adjusting in Nxt walkabout.
I use the old dview from the command line
I will again add my voice to this long running discussion (from the older AR5 forum).
Simply put, I agree with Yinka. The controls of the vantage point in AR5 are not very easy to use. The last time that AutoCAD and Accurender worked well together for me was under 2006 AutoCAD and AR3. After 2007 or AR4 there was something always wrong with setting up consistent and real world viewing locations.
I specifically do not use AutoCAD cameras. I never have. I found DVIEW to work very well. I especially hate the mouse controls that allow for real-time movement. It has taken me many months of retraining myself to deal with the odd actions of AR5 when it comes to vantage point control. Also, the mouse controls do feel backward to me as others have mentioned. If you move the mouse right and are changing the camera it actually appears to shift the target left, which is relatively correct, but backwards in terms of what you are controlling.
That is why I use control lines and set up DVIEW view names in AutoCAD by clicking on actual points (endpoints) in space for both camera and target. Then because DVIEW views do not appear in AR5 view pane I force AR5 to acquire the DVIEW named view and then save it in AR5 under the same name. Because the AutoCAD perspective view after 2007 no longer matches the render view in AR5 in terms of ZOOM I still need to adjust the field of view to approximate the same in AR5. Yes, a lot of work, but it makes it consistent.
I do the same, but I miss ar3 cameras
That is exactly what I am saying. We have had better times in the past with cameras. I wish Roy could somehow revisit the camera issue by looking back at ar3 and ar4. I think ar3 had best camera and then ar4. NXT however has an amazing rendering engine. Well done Roy.
Alejandro, Yinka and Eric - three AR users missing the good old days. Well, at least as far as camera & view controls go.
I am still not comfortable with this camera issue. For instance, I am unable to repeat this camera view which I achieved with ar4 (find attached). Also, what about light fixtures and render ready cars, etc.

RSS

Search

Translate

Latest Activity

Peter Milner replied to Roy Hirshkowitz's discussion AccuRender Studio
"Yes, the glass material translated as Refractive automatically."
Dec 23, 2020
Roy Hirshkowitz replied to Roy Hirshkowitz's discussion AccuRender Studio
"Yeah-- like I mentioned the caustics are accurate but could be annoying.  Things that might alter it include changing the sun angle so it's not striking the chair's metal surfaces so directly, changing the roughness of the chair…"
Dec 23, 2020
Peter Milner replied to Roy Hirshkowitz's discussion AccuRender Studio
"Here's the latest render using metallic materials. The chrome now looks a lot better. I do feel though that the reflected light on the back wall is too bright."
Dec 23, 2020
Roy Hirshkowitz replied to Roy Hirshkowitz's discussion AccuRender Studio
"Ah-- so that's a function of the material type.  The standard material won't give you a mirror anymore.  You need to change the material to metallic and you should get something more familiar.  Use the Type popdown on the…"
Dec 18, 2020
Peter Milner replied to Roy Hirshkowitz's discussion AccuRender Studio
"Pacing a mirror on the back wall (reflections = 1.0, noise = 0.0), you can see the difference more clearly (top image is nXt)."
Dec 18, 2020
Peter Milner replied to Roy Hirshkowitz's discussion AccuRender Studio
"You can see from these two images that there is definitely something wrong with reflective surfaces. It appears the light is being reflected, but not objects or textures. In the nXt version (top image), the carpet texture is being reflected in the…"
Dec 18, 2020
Roy Hirshkowitz replied to Roy Hirshkowitz's discussion AccuRender Studio
"It's interesting-- overall the quality of this interior is very high for that short amount of processing, and may be acceptable for certain scenes.  In this one, however, there are some reflective caustics that are taking longer to…"
Dec 17, 2020
Peter Milner replied to Roy Hirshkowitz's discussion AccuRender Studio
"ARDECAL now works. Here's the image after 10 minutes of rendering. I do have a slight concern that reflective surfaces seem rather dull. This is particularly evident on the end frame of the desk and the base of the chair."
Dec 17, 2020

© 2021   Header image courtesy Peter Milner   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service