forum.datacad.com

I bought visual reality back in the 1990s and was in immediately pleased that I could see the rendering while I was working on it as well as the speed of the rendering. Prior to this I had used velocity, which had no preview window and took all night to render. Unfortunately, it wasn't too long before this product became orphaned and with no upgrades it could not keep up with the other rendering competition. I did some animations with visual reality on several public projects in the late 1990s and at the time I felt the results were acceptable. Now looking back, the videos are low resolution, grainy and jumpy and I don't believe that using visual reality today will effectively change those problems.

It wasn't too long before visual reality began feeling bulky and frustrating to use and the results were no longer satisfying. I then bought Artlantis which I still use today and am very satisfied with. Currently I use the studio version which allows animations to be produced. Great results, ease of use, and rendering speed for photo realistic renderings are all features that I value with this software. For anybody that would be interested in Artlantis, you should view the animations and the renderings in the galleries on their website (as submitted by users).

DRTAIA wrote:<snip> It wasn't too long before visual reality began feeling bulky and frustrating to use and the results were no longer satisfying. I then bought Artlantis which I still use today and am very satisfied with. Currently I use the studio version which allows animations to be produced. Great results, ease of use, and rendering speed for photo realistic renderings are all features that I value with this software. For anybody that would be interested in Artlantis, you should view the animations and the renderings in the galleries on their website (as submitted by users).

Very interesting!

I haven't been doing many renderings or animations lately, but the ones that I've done were with Visual Reality. Awhile back, I was doing a bit of research and liked what I saw with Artlantis ... and have been keeping an eye on it. I've been thinking that if I get to doing some renderings and animations again, Artlantis is the one that I want to switch to.

Thanks for the info!

I downloaded the Artlantis demo and the gallery post are impressive. I did not find it quite as intuitive as other rendering engines and feel their are better options much more reasonably priced. If one was doing quite a bit of animations the price point of Artlantis Render "might" be justifiable but I would also look at Luminon.

Just my 2 cents worth..

Robert

Steve Baldwin wrote:

DRTAIA wrote:<snip> It wasn't too long before visual reality began feeling bulky and frustrating to use and the results were no longer satisfying. I then bought Artlantis which I still use today and am very satisfied with. Currently I use the studio version which allows animations to be produced. Great results, ease of use, and rendering speed for photo realistic renderings are all features that I value with this software. For anybody that would be interested in Artlantis, you should view the animations and the renderings in the galleries on their website (as submitted by users).

Very interesting!

I haven't been doing many renderings or animations lately, but the ones that I've done were with Visual Reality. Awhile back, I was doing a bit of research and liked what I saw with Artlantis ... and have been keeping an eye on it. I've been thinking that if I get to doing some renderings and animations again, Artlantis is the one that I want to switch to.

Thanks for the info!

Its interesting in reading your comment about intuitveness with Artlantis as I now remember that it was quite frustrating at first (I even ended up calling the seller with a basic question or two). But, once you get the "logic" it is really easy to use and most important it is very fast compared to other high end renderers. It is a French program so some of the commands seem a little different at times , but a good solid program none the less. Objects Online is the only US distributor of Artlantis that I am aware of. Depending on the resolution that you specify (and of course your computer hardware), a typical rendering can take anywhere from a few minutes to an hour (for a complicated render at high resolution).

DRTAIA wrote:Its interesting in reading your comment about intuitveness with Artlantis as I now remember that it was quite frustrating at first (I even ended up calling the seller with a basic question or two). But, once you get the "logic" it is really easy to use and most important it is very fast compared to other high end renderers. It is a French program so some of the commands seem a little different at times , but a good solid program none the less. Objects Online is the only US distributor of Artlantis that I am aware of. Depending on the resolution that you specify (and of course your computer hardware), a typical rendering can take anywhere from a few minutes to an hour (for a complicated render at high resolution).

I'll most certainly revisit Artlantis as time allows and when my new rendering rig arrives. I never say "no, never" to any software as this is such a changing industry we are in. I eventually settled on Thea Render and there is a new release soon to be in development that promise a boost in speed and ease of user interface.

A somewhat related comment I read today: "still images are on the out and animation is the way of visualization architecture". Although I don't see still images ever being totally "out"...I use them almost daily for design development, there may be a certain degree of truth in that statement. Any thoughts?


Robert

Robert Scott wrote:I downloaded the Artlantis demo and the gallery post are impressive. I did not find it quite as intuitive as other rendering engines and feel their are better options much more reasonably priced. If one was doing quite a bit of animations the price point of Artlantis Render "might" be justifiable but I would also look at Luminon.

Yeah ... the price for Artlantis is a bit steep. Before I pay that, I would want to test a bunch of demos. I have a list of all the rendering programs that I hear about .. and will definitely add Luminon to it.

DRTAIA wrote:Its interesting in reading your comment about intuitveness with Artlantis as I now remember that it was quite frustrating at first (I even ended up calling the seller with a basic question or two). But, once you get the "logic" it is really easy to use and most important it is very fast compared to other high end renderers. It is a French program so some of the commands seem a little different at times , but a good solid program none the less. Objects Online is the only US distributor of Artlantis that I am aware of. Depending on the resolution that you specify (and of course your computer hardware), a typical rendering can take anywhere from a few minutes to an hour (for a complicated render at high resolution).

One of the things that I like about VR is the very quick test renderings ... so the speed of Artlantis would be a big plus.

Several of the newer rendering engines have "interactive" rendering. You can see and adjust your rendering on the fly.

Did you mean Lumion 3D?
http://www.lumion3d.com/

If you scroll down to the bottom of the following page, you'll find rendering engines and programs.

Let me know if there are any others I should add.

http://www.datacad.com/test/Competitor_Info.html

Yes, Lumion 3D is correct.
A similar product at a lower price point is Lumen RT
http://www.lumenrt.com/

Mark F. Madura wrote:Did you mean Lumion 3D?
http://www.lumion3d.com/

If you scroll down to the bottom of the following page, you'll find rendering engines and programs.

Let me know if there are any others I should add.

http://www.datacad.com/test/Competitor_Info.html

Mark, here's another you can add:

http://www.thearender.com/cms/
Thea Render is a standalone rendering engine that also has Sketchup plug in that allows interactive rendering.

A somewhat related comment I read today: "still images are on the out and animation is the way of visualization architecture". Although I don't see still images ever being totally "out"...I use them almost daily for design development, there may be a certain degree of truth in that statement. Any thoughts?


Robert[/quote]

I agree with you. I prefer the stills as the viewer can control the time spent and the image considered - the other nice thing about stills is you can fix(up) the image in photo shop (if needed). For overall project presentations to a group I think that animation is a great tool but I would still combine it with still images. Most of the 3D imaging for that I do for clients are stills - although with animations of high enough resolution I have manually scrolled through the animation stopping at individual frames to discuss certain aspects of the project.

Mark F. Madura wrote:Let me know if there are any others I should add.
http://www.datacad.com/test/Competitor_Info.html

Nice list, Mark - I never knew some of these even still existed!