I have been reviewing and talking to other peers and I can safely say LumenRT is below par when it comes to its competitors.
LumenRT is below par in these areas:
However, there are functions that LumenRT is better at, but overall this is below par and needs some serious development/research into what the competition can offer and bring LumenRT up to speed and beat the others
Bentley need to reach out to key users in this field and work with real life data and try to make LumenRT work, work better, work faster and ..............
Question: Would I spend £3.5k on LumenRT or spend £1.3k on a competitor.... what do you think
Will it be great if you can share some video or images for us to have a look.
The point you mention is also depend on the model size and what you want to render ?
LumenRT is the one which can handle big model with ease, we have used other application which even can handle big size model.
Never a less we would love to get some points to make it better application always for you guys.
For @Material we have added new lib files for Update 16.
For @Object Library we have stared working and by the end of this year we will have something new.
For Render time please feel free to share some results and sample file so that we can start testing and make it better for future.
For Render Quality we are working to improve with RTX version which is already provided some results for update 16
And For performance please also share some results and sample file which we can have a look.
Again Thank you Ian for sharing and highlighting the point we will have a look to this.
We too have client's who lament at the lack of finesse LumentRT has in comparison to it's competition.
Some will go to the hassle of exporting DGN models to DWG just so that they can get the look and feel, both graphically and in ease of use, that they get from the competing tools.
Things that are often raised:
- Lack of detailed documentation (many options do not seem to have explanation)- Difficult to manage interface (Sliders are all in fly out menus that need to be expanded - rather then just being well laid out on an off screen pop up menu.- Lack of customisable mouse/keyboard mapping. - Lack of non perspective Elevation Plan Views - Inability to import/export preferred settings (or setting up seed/template for company pre-sets)- Rendering (materials) look "plastic" and over saturated- It's not obvious where to source additional content (characters/cars) - Very little control over Non photorealistic styles (eg hidden lines with shading, white card model, line thickness etc.- Watermarking saved images in designer mode is also annoying when it is licensed through MicroStation - its not a trial mode
cheers for the additional concerns....
As I mentioned when you compare the functionality v cost of LumenRT and compare it to its competition, it is fare less impressive and more than twice the price
Yes there is a free add-on to MS, but the Pro version is c. £3355 per seat. Lumeon is £1360 per seat. UK prices from 04/11/2021
So if you pay more than twice the price you would expect it to be as good or better
I echo all of the same issues mentioned by Ian and Robert, I cannot reproduce the images quality of my competitors with using LumenRT. The interface is annoying, the help, material and objects are all seriously lacking. I have posted before about how my LumenRT images always look washed out.
The only reason I keep paying for this overpriced software is for its ability to take in a Open Buildings model directly.
I wonder how successful others are in bringing in a model from MS to Lumion?
OBD Update 8
Windows 10 Pro
Hi Gary, the reply to your question is, very successful exporting a .fbx from MS and importing into Lumion works very well, but is is better and faster to do all your material attributions in Lumion,
for example this attached image took 50 seconds to render, snow and landscape import all part of the Lumion package.
Interesting. I will certainly look into this. Thanks.