Nevertheless, you are quite right that once you’re set up, Enscape is gloriously easy to use and share models.ĭ. Might seem like a small technical issue, but actually it is why I have stuck with Blender despite having licenses for just about everything else. Whereas I can export FBX/IFC to Blender and do whatever I like to the model and lighting.

My laptop can’t export to Enscape, for example, but that’s where my Revit license is held. As it’s hung off proprietary software, it is limited in who can control it. Though really isn’t it mainly just an ambient occlusion pass over the image textures? But I don’t know how easy it is to get to the next level of realism, given that it is doing everything on the fly. It is very good at looking okay out of the box. Even I don’t always have that hardware (e.g. That makes it hard to distribute to some people, such as clients, as they often don’t have that sort of hardware. You need a decent machine with a discrete graphics card to make it usable. It can look great, but it has a few major disadvantages compared to baked lighting in Blender in my experience:Ī. They do get bogged down with large models though.Įnscape is a funny one. I see nobody picked this thread up, but I’d be interested to discuss some more.įor years I’ve been exporting from Revit to Blender and baking lighting in order to get accurate and fast-to-navigate models to show clients and review design coordination.

Enscape revit lights