Chief to Blender

[init666]

He realizado una prueba rápida para comprobar la velocidad del render de Chief (raytrace) y de blender (cycles). Estas son las imágenes. El tiempo de renderizado es:

Chief: 5 min (detenido)
Blender: 1 min (terminado)

Chief me parece demasiado lento (incluido los cambios necesarios para intentar acelerarlo).

Se agradecen más opiniones.

 

I have done a quick test to check the render speed of Chief (raytrace) and blender (cycles). These are the images. Rendering time is:

Chief: 5 min (stopped)
Blender: 1 min (finished)

Chief seems too slow to me (including changes needed to try to speed it up).

More opinions are appreciated.

[payettedesigns]

Share with us the process you use with Blender and Chief Architect in terms of integration. I would like to know if its worth it. 

 

David

[init666]

Es muy fácil el proceso de trabajo con blender. Estos son los pasos a seguir:

1. Exportar a collada desde Chief.
2. Importar collada desde blender.
3. Añadir cámaras (se pierden todas en la exportación).
4. Renderizar (eevee o cycles).

No es necesario, aunque se puede, cambiar nada. Ni luces, ni texturas. Creo que si exportas a 3ds se respetan las cámaras, pero blender 2.8x no admite 3ds.

Cuando renderizas en blender con eevee la velocidad se parece a la de Chief pero es mucho más potente en blender.

Cuando renderizas con cycles la velocidad es muchisimo mayor que en Chief y con muchas más opciones. Además la nueva versión posee una opción de filtrado de la imagen renderizada que quita muchisimo ruido y acelera mucho el proceso.

Para cualquier duda, aquí sigo...

 

The process of working with blender is very easy. These are the steps to follow:

1. Export to collada from Chief.
2. Import collada from blender.
3. Add cameras (all are lost in the export).
4. Render (eevee or cycles).

It is not necessary, although it is possible, to change anything. Neither lights nor textures. I think if you export to 3ds the cameras are respected, but blender 2.8x does not support 3ds.

When you render in blender with eevee the speed is similar to that of Chief but it is much more powerful in blender.

When you render with cycles the speed is much greater than in Chief and with many more options. In addition, the new version has a filtering option for the rendered image that removes a lot of noise and greatly speeds up the process.

For any questions, here I continue ...

[Alaskan_Son]

On 3/23/2020 at 12:28 PM, init666 said:

He realizado una prueba rápida para comprobar la velocidad del render de Chief (raytrace) y de blender (cycles). Estas son las imágenes. El tiempo de renderizado es:

Chief: 5 min (detenido)
Blender: 1 min (terminado)

Chief me parece demasiado lento (incluido los cambios necesarios para intentar acelerarlo).

Se agradecen más opiniones.

 

I have done a quick test to check the render speed of Chief (raytrace) and blender (cycles). These are the images. Rendering time is:

Chief: 5 min (stopped)
Blender: 1 min (finished)

Chief seems too slow to me (including changes needed to try to speed it up).

More opinions are appreciated.

 

I'm curious about what we're looking at here. 

• The one on top looks clean, but also cheap and unrealistic.
• The one on the bottom looks awful in my opinion (the backsplash, upper cabinets, and photo hanging on the wall immediately jump out).
• The one in the middle is hands down the most realistic but it looks grainy and incomplete. 

Which rendering is from which software and using which rendering style?

[init666]

28 minutes ago, Alaskan_Son said:

 

Tengo curiosidad por lo que estamos viendo aquí. 

• El de arriba se ve limpio, pero también barato y poco realista.
• El que está en la parte inferior se ve horrible en mi opinión (el protector contra salpicaduras, los gabinetes superiores y la foto que cuelga en la pared saltan inmediatamente).
• El que está en el medio es el más realista, pero parece granulado e incompleto. 

¿Qué representación es de qué software y con qué estilo de representación?

El de arriba es Chief PBR, el medio es Chief Raytrace 5 min y el de abajo es Blender Cycles 1 min.

Estoy haciendo muchas pruebas y el problema es que Chief raytrace es unas 10 veces más lento que Blender Cycles con una calidad similar, pero sobre todo que Chief no muestra resultados hasta pasados muchos minutos y Blender los muestra de forma instantánea y progresiva (y esto es una ventaja enorme para ver como puede quedar la escena antes de que termine).

Pero sigo probando...

 

The top one is Chief PBR, the middle one is Chief Raytrace 5 min and the bottom one is Blender Cycles 1 min.

I am doing a lot of testing and the problem is that Chief raytrace is about 10 times slower than Blender Cycles with a similar quality, but above all that Chief does not show results until after many minutes and Blender shows them instantaneously and progressively (and this is a huge advantage to see how the scene can look before it ends).

But I keep testing ...

[Alaskan_Son]

3 minutes ago, init666 said:

The top one is Chief PBR, the middle one is Chief Raytrace 5 min and the bottom one is Blender Cycles 1 min.

 

This is exactly what I was guessing but wasn't sure.

[TheKitchenAbode]

I tried Blender about 2 years ago and found it to be very awkward to use and it seems to be lacking in any detailed documentation.

 

I loaded up that Bachelor plan from Chief and adjusted the sun, lights and materials to be more conducive to CA's PBR rendering mode. This renders in about 15 seconds on my system.

[init666]

 

En esta prueba vemos lo que indicaba. Me parece excelente el sistema de Chief (iluminación física) similar al que incluye blender (eevee).

 

Para concluir añado algunas observaciones sobre blender:

 

1. Es GPL y gratis.

2. No es un programa de CAD ni de arquitectura. Es similar a 3D Studio o Cinema4D.

3. A partir de la versión 2.8xx ha cambiado completamente.
4. Es complejo, similar a los mencionados antes.
5. Es abierto y muy potente (ampliable).

6. Incluye dos motores de renderizado: eevee (tiempo real) y cycles (raytrace) y admite muchos mas (libres y comerciales).
7. Tiene una comunidad de usuarios cada vez mayor (sin ellos no hubiera existido).

 

Y aunque uso Revit de forma asidua, siempre me ha gustado Chief, aunque necesita una característica, que aunque no es imprescindible, sí que es muy recomendable: el idioma. Tiene que traducirse si quiere salir de donde está. Parece un programa enfocado al mercado americano (y no sólo por el idioma). Por favor corregidme si me equivoco.

 

------------------------

 

In this test we see what it indicated. I find the Chief system (physical lighting) excellent similar to the one that includes blender (eevee).

 

To conclude I add some observations about blender:

 

1. It is GPL and free.

2. It is not an CAD or architecture program. It is similar to 3D Studio or Cinema4D.

3. From version 2.8xx it has completely changed.
4. It is complex, similar to those mentioned above.
5. It is open and very powerful (expandable).

6. Includes two rendering engines: eevee (real time) and cycles (raytrace) and supports many more (free and commercial).
7. It has a growing community of users (without them it would not have existed).

 

And although I use Revit regularly, I have always liked Chief, although he needs a feature that, although not essential, is highly recommended: the language. It has to be translated if you want to get out of where you are. It seems like a program focused on the American market (and not just because of the language). Please correct me if I'm wrong.

[TheKitchenAbode]

The comparisons are interesting however, I'm not certain that they are actually providing any guidance on which rendering program/method is best. The reason I state this is that each rendering program will interpret the materials and lights differently, as such a render may look better in one program but that may just be due to the materials and lighting being a bit more aligned with that particular program. From the last set of comparisons, I don't find any of them to be acceptable, appears to prove that no matter how capable in theory a particular rendering engine is, they are all capable of producing poor results.

[BenMerritt]

10 minutes ago, TheKitchenAbode said:

From the last set of comparisons, I don't find any of them to be acceptable, appears to prove that no matter how capable in theory a particular rendering engine is, they are all capable of producing poor results.

 

I haven't looked very closely, but the issues with the images in the most recent comparison look to me like JPEG compression artifacts, which have nothing to do with the ray-trace itself. If the screenshots were compressed as PNG (or as JPEG with a higher quality factor), they'd probably look better. (Of course, then they might be large enough that they would exceed the limit on the file size of attachments.)

 

Then again, I'm working using a remote desktop tool, so everything on my screen looks it has JPEG compression artifacts...

[Ridge_Runner]

6 hours ago, TheKitchenAbode said:

I loaded up that Bachelor plan from Chief and adjusted the sun, lights and materials to be more conducive to CA's PBR rendering mode. This renders in about 15 seconds on my system.

That view is pretty impressive, Graham. Is that a PBR or done in Blender? Do you have an estimate of how much time you invested in setting up the lighting, materials, etc. to get that quality of image? Subjective, I know, as many of us would take much longer to get to that same point - if ever. I am always blown away with the quality of your images as compared to mine.

[TheKitchenAbode]

1 minute ago, Ridge_Runner said:

That view is pretty impressive, Graham. Is that a PBR or done in Blender? Do you have an estimate of how much time you invested in setting up the lighting, materials, etc. to get that quality of image? Subjective, I know, as many of us would take much longer to get to that same point - if ever. I am always blown away with the quality of your images as compared to mine.

 

Thanks Mike, that is an X12 PBR. It did take a while to get things adjusted as everything needed to be changed, all lights and materials. What also took time was to correct some other problems with that plan, always takes longer when working with a plan created by someone else as you have to check everything. My own plans take less work as I'm using my saved library items as the model is being built.