Hi kimi kimi, I'm researching this topic for quite some time now but haven't installed one yet. So take my responses according to that First of all i strongly recommend reading this Guide to GPU Rendering by Chaos Group. From background reasons to rendering advices, it's a great article (It's for 3ds Max but general idea applies for everything). Half of your answers awating you there. 1- Check this manual for Supported Features in Interactive Rendering in V-ray for SketchUp. 2- They're all technically gaming cards, aren't they? And i don't think there is a specific one for Sketchup + V-ray combination. You can check this website for GPU or CPU comparisons: http://www.videocardbenchmark.net/ . There are lots of useful charts to examine. Another benchmark result for GPUs from Furryball. Also check this website for helpful articles: http://www.gpurendering.com/ 3- I think yes, it works. 4- 5- 6- no idea 7- SSD makes them load faster just before render for sure but i doubt you'll have enough space for all the resources from various works (You can use SSD only for resource heavy works maybe). You need to decide whether that load time is on your list of priorities or not. 8- I would like to hear as well

Spot Light should be sufficient. Other options might be Rectangle Light and IES Light. Refer to this manual to see how light types differ: https://docs.chaosgroup.com/display/VRAYSKETCHUP/Lights

It's a completely rebuilt plugin. There are very few similarities from 2 to 3. I'm not sure if this is the best way to learn. Any reason for not just using 2 for now to learn and then upgrade to 3 when you are comfortable with the features.

See this entire thread!

Hi Make sure the model you apply displacement texture is a group/instances

@filibis said: I think it's clear in the official website: https://www.chaosgroup.com/vray/sketchup You can try contacting them by clicking 'contact us' and see their response. Many thanks my friend, now i see the price... but you see Albania doesnt work .. i will contact them thanks

ErnieBoy, could you please share the .skp file? (Also which version of V-ray do you use?) I'm not sure what causes it really. It could be overlapping geometry, shadow or reflection of a hidden geometry, weird lighting positions/setups, environments/fog etc... If you're using V-ray 3 , Denoiser feature is a good solution for noise issues: https://docs.chaosgroup.com/display/VRAYSKETCHUP/Denoiser

Please download Laubwerk plugin again, they manage a solution.

I believe you have to render with a black background, otherwise, the matte picks up the background.

@filibis said: Hi, I don't think it is possible yet. They introduced fog for aerial perspectives but it's not the same and limited to sunlight. There is also this material called Subsurface Scattering that has some volumetric options etc. but i doubt it can be used for your purpose. Thereby, you can try to add it in post production Thanks for information. You are right... Post production is the way to go for now.

i'll give it a try over this weekend. Thanks

@unknownuser said: No idea what to do, have tried clearing all of the files related to V-Ray, but doesn't seem to have solved anything. What do you mean you cleared files? What if the files you cleared are the files the uninstaller needs. I'd reinstall the old version and then try uninstalling.

@rich o brien said: Edge colouring is a good idea. I use X-ray mode when marking edges. It makes seeing markings more apparent. I hit "K" for back edges. It's faster that xray mode and allows for visual clarity as you don't see everyting but lines. Sometimes I combine it with my own shortcut for hidden edge visibility "CTRL+SHIFT+H" @unknownuser said: Currently we are adding various file export options to WrapR to make direct import into other apps easier. What about import into WrapR and then from there to Sketchup? Maybe it's possible and useful.

Hey Andy, To help further, we'll need to know what version of V-ray you're using. Typically, this type of problem is due to displacement. But if you are not using displacement, then we'll need to take a look at your v-ray settings. Could you post screen shots of your V-ray settings? Also, if you havent' already done so, try restoring V-ray to default setting and see if you can get a normal render....its real easy to go overboard on the settings and you don't need to tweak the defaults much to get a good render. (before you ask how to restore defaults(or any other questions), please state vray version) Sorry for the late reply......darn deadlines...

OK Thanks.

@monkers said: Even better would be a dialog with a list of scenes each one would have a check box beside it. that way you could custom show/hide in each scene. Something like this? [image: zk9a_HideinScenes.gif]

Post production. Very busy guy he is

Yes, you're correct, the collision geometry covers up the hole, as MSPhysics generates convex collision for all linked faces. You can fix this by subdiving the group even into more convex sub-groups, like in the image below: [image: tHe6_TableSawCarriagetestV1.png] For more accurate convex subdivision, you can use Convexify by fredo6. But then, either way, your model will endup with multiple geometries, ruining the view. What you can do about it is have another, hidden layer, calling it "MSPhysics Collision", where all the convex subdivisions will be stored. Then have the original, non-subdivided versions of the groups be visible and set to MSPhysics->State->Ignore, so they don't interact with MSPhysics simulation. Here is how it should be: Table Saw Carriage test V1.0.skp You can enable the "MSPhysics Collision" layer to see the collision used for simulation.