Mstn+Luxology vs 3dMax: Preferred AEC rendering app?

MS and Luxology are excellent tools for rendering still images of a building model. -Gary

"The quality of the end product is in my opinion, already comparable with advanced 3D applications like 3D studio Max. The biggest influence is the knowledge of the user."

Perhaps to an extent but the old adage of a workman always blames his tools is not applicable here because with MS and Luxology doesn't have the full set of tools/settings to output what is commonly accepted as high end Arch Viz stills.

For Arch Viz, I can't see MS ever being a standalone Modeller and Renderer that top Arch viz artists would turn too. From my experience most Arch Viz firms use V Ray as the render of choice and with good reason; its

light years ahead of Luxology in speed and quality and most commonly used with 3DS Max. I worked on a project where I built a series of building models and site plan within V8i, exported a master model of the buildings in correct orientation and brought into Max via DWG. There I applied all materials and set up lighting and physical camera for stills and animations - It worked perfectly. I find Architectural Modeling is not as easy to achieve in Max as I do in MS. I'm still amazed at how robust the solid modelling tool-set is at being able to produce & cope with large building models. However, MS can't easily produce the quality of images Max & V Ray.

When I last used Luxology in SS2 I found Microstation lacked proper material UV mapping controls, no camera exposure via numerical input for consistent results (F-stop, ISO etc..), does not support proxies ( Evermotion models anyone?) , no override material to control colour bleeding and that's only the tip of the iceberg. I came to this conclusion after creating an interior model of an office job I was working on. I completed the geometry, applied materials (with difficulty), set up lighting, and rendered. I found trying to get a decent looking image like pulling teeth so I did an alternative test exporting the model into sketchup, applied the materials and rendered using Vray for SketchUp. Within minutes I was getting still shots of superior quality that I doubt I ever could have with Luxology.

I do believe it will improve but if people have access to both software packages, how many people would want to struggle with MS/Luxology than use the leading Arch Viz renderer?

For those of you who haven't seen it already check this out (be sure to fullscreen the video)

Its all 3D studio Max & Vray, After Effects and Premiere.

Does anyone think they can get anywhere near this with Luxology?

Thanks for the feedback...

I think your points are well taken. Vray looks pretty much the one to beat.... for now.

In the meantime...Some questions

Mstn-DWG-Max/VRay Pipeline:

1. Can the materials assigned in Max be transferred to a revised incoming DWG file? Is this robust?

2. Can materials defined in Mstn/LX transfer? I guess they would need to be repalced by VRay's materials.

3. Proxies: Are cells or shared cells or RPC's automaticallly replaced by Max proxies?

4. Convert to meshes: I hear that Mstn solids / surfaces are often converted to meshes using the mesh tools before exporting for better control. DO you do this as well?

Render quality: Why is it so difficult?

1. Is it because of the lack of real time accurate preview?

2. Finicky Global Illumination? This was the reason why a lot of scenes have a huge number of lights in Mstn Masterpiece, which was a huge time waster.

3. ....?

Hi Bloom,

What a fantastic movie did you added to you're story.
If I understand you're story, you compare the quality of MicroStation alone with 3D studio with the (specialized) plugin V-ray.

Is MicroStation + Maxwell render (it stil works :-)) as a plugin not more honest to compare with?

As a standalone (cad!) application I don't know any other peace of software where you can reach such an amount of quality from the sketch, to cad drawing to visualization without the need of an external specialized plugin. 

Regards

Louis

Hi dwy.seah@gmail.com

1. As I recall Microstation DWGs did not operate like AutoCAD DWGs even when both used the file link method. Essentially if you made a change to the DWG it would update in the .max file with the materials still in place. For me it was not really an issue because my files went from .DGN ->.DWG ->.MAX. If I had some design changes, because I was applying 1 material per level I simply exported the DGN again and reapplied the each material to the specific level and added the required UV mapping coordinates. It only took 30 seconds to sort so it wasn't really an issue for me.

2. I've no idea but I can't see a reason for applying a single mat in MS. If there was a luxology material I liked, I would simply note the basic settings and use and image files in a brand new vrymtl in max. Its a far superior material editor interface in my opinion.

3. Again I'm not sure but my guess is probably not. If you haven't already, check out evermotion's models to see all the goodies that can be used in max that you can't use in MS. www.evermotion.org/modelshop

4.Nope, simply model in solids and export as ACIS solids. These import as editable meshes in max which allows you to use material ID's (for applying a different material to a different geomtry face if using a multisub-object material - very handy)

With this workflow, get all the modelling that MS can do done in MS and simply leave the pretty stuff to Max and you have a winning combination. Yes its expensive to have MS V8i, Max and Vray but if you have access to it then it makes work a pleasure. Sadly due to the economy I no longer work with an employer that has Max and Vray but I hope to return to it soon.

Hi Louis

I'm really asking why (other than cost) would anyone use MS & Luxology for Arch Viz when Max & Vray give superior results producing high quality photo realistic images & animations.

"Is MicroStation + Maxwell render (it still works :-)) as a plugin not more honest to compare with?"

I would say no because although Maxwell  imports files within its studio and is a standalone application, there is also V Ray standalone. Its a shame Bentley did not go down that line as then we really would be closer to attaining high quality photo realistic images.  Whilst can give nice results you need to wait weeks on an image clearing up properly. Maxwell is often mocked in the Arch Viz community because as it is an unbiased renderer, it takes ages to produce images.

"As a standalone (cad!) application I don't know any other peace of software where you can reach such an amount of quality from the sketch, to cad drawing to visualization without the need of an external specialized plugin."

Whilst Max is not a CAD app, it does ship with Mental Ray which is capable of producing similarly high quality images although many feel it does not quite compare  with V Ray. It is entirely possible to draw from scratch in Max (many do). Sketchup is also capable of producing excellent images (after post process work with photoshop, but photoshop is also necessary after every render for the finishing touches) albeit in a non-photo realistic style.