@gaieus said: @smokinbakin said: Does anyone know why this is happening? Because you're a lucky man.

From ASGVis' Download section: http://software.asgvis.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=267&Itemid=18 bottom right corner. Then you got an online version at vray.com http://vray.com/vray_for_sketchup/manual/index.shtml

@gaieus said: Just let me know when you decide and I can change it for you. That'd be cool, but I won't change it now

SO i made a lil video containing some "special" vray settings... the most difficult part were the batch render + dr somehow i managed to make the 3 pcs run their cores to 100%, then i did something and they work 100% then 0 and so on... heres the video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a3K9dv4OyPo ill post some pics later on... ill take any advice involving vray settings...

No worries Kwisten. I think people don't realize that software isn't the only side of our business, so once you realize how much those other parts actually contribute to ASGvis as a company it does make a little more sense. I know that you're waiting for more from VfSU, and we want to get to being as on par with VfMax as we can. We have the opportunity to do so with the current state of the V-Ray SDK and the new overhaul of the Core will only make it easier for us to add the features we need. As to a V-Ray studio, that's something that's in the ChaosGroup's ballpark, not ours, and something that they really don't have too much of a interest in. Even if down the road, the different V-Ray plugins wind up relying on rendering through the V-Ray StandAlone (which is pretty much a commandline renderer at this point), it will be the responsibility of each of the plugins to generate the appropriate scene file and there really wouldn't be much of a chance to modify or adjust that scene before it would get rendering through the standalone.

Thanks Stefan...and Thomas. My desktop crashed, so I bought a new laptop and have to reinstall everything. What a pain!

It's an indoor swimming pool water.. I tried fog with different multipliers but I hardly see any difference. For pool I don't need fog? and I don't need a volume either for a good water effect? thnx for the reply and also on asgvis website.

My knowledge is limited to AutoCADLT, SketchUp and modo so I'm not at all surprised that some of the features I find unique to modo are not unique at all. I'm a furniture maker and a stair builder. I recently purchased, from a junkyard, a pile of old wood painted signs that were destined to be burned. I'm going to cut them up and make cabinets out of them. I was faced with the question of how to render wildly irregular surfaces - some shiny, some dull, many different colors, different degrees of surface distress, etc. I think modo, especially considering it's Painting feature, might be able to do that for me. Of course I've spent so much time working my way through modo tutorials I haven't been in the shop in three weeks!

@ebraahim said: hi guys when u dont have a su texture to size it, how u guys add bump map to it? i use the bump map as my texture and reduce the color mutiplier to 0.01 becuz its not possible to change diffuse color seperately from its texture how you do that? Set a texture in your diffues, as you say you do, then add an white TexAColor map to the transparency slot. That will make that layer invisible when rendering, but still visible in SketchUp. Then you add a second diffuse layer underneath with just a plain colour - this layer is what you'll see when you render. (Note that you use a TexAColor map type in the transparancy slow - no just setting the colour.)

I have heard alot of people speaking on Modo possibly not being the best tool for Archviz/Modeling work. While I do not think there is a "best tool", many are good or great, I do think a few really shine and Modo is one of them. Modo is not just a tool for doing organic modeling. While it does do that well it can excel at architectural modeling as well. Modo can model down to as tight of a tolerance as you want to throw at it. I do not know to many architectural modelers modeling tighter that maybe a 1/16" or a customer who expects tighter tolerances that that either. If someone is saying modo can not model accurately then they have not taken the time to learn how. I used to say "sketchup does everything I want it to do" too, but the more I use it the more I find myself doing things in modo that I can not do as easily in sketchup. I think we as artists always need to be moving forward...we just hope that our software is moving forward as well. THIS is where sketchup falls short for me. The lack of high poly support is beginning to be a killer for me. So many people want to add good trees into a visualization (stuff like xfrog or onyx trees) and we all know that will grind sketchup to a halt. Yes, there are good work arounds but they will never equal a great full 3d tree. Again, Sketchup is great but if you are looking for a well rounded FULL 3D package then I would spend the money on Modo. The sketchup importer......Yes it falls short. Much of this is not Luxology's fault though. We have heard this was a matter of Google not working very well with Luxology. Below are some good video's showing the architectural capabilities of Modo. Sorry, they cost but there are some great models and render examples on the modo forum as well. http://www.luxology.com/store/training_series14.aspx http://www.luxology.com/store/15_architectural_interiors/ Scott

It all depends on your needs. If you're okay with SU's toolset and poly limitations, go with Vray. No need of going through the hassle of exporting to modo, cleaning up your model etc then.Then again, if you think you'll be needing a bit more in the future, get Modo. If you buy 301 now, you get a free upgrade to 401. personal observation Me, I got both. Yet, if I were in your shoes, I'd choose Modo, as it doesn't look SU is going anywhere, for the moment.

Controlling the softness of the shadows of the sun can be done through the Sun Size parameter. You'd get to that through your sky settings in the Environment rollout

dont think there is any output of the .visopt possible maybe just do some print screen ? usually I save the entire .visopt with reference names...

Well, that's one thing, it certainly won't be the quickest. But it doesn't has to be. But the main issue is that file format other than the BMP format tends to be complex, especially when they compress the images. And if you don't find a good library that can read/write the formats that's supported on both platforms you have to do it yourself - learning the structure of the file format. Speaking of this, I might see if I an make a class that handles the BMP format as it's one of the most straight forward formats out there.

I have done both, I have a shared folder which all the materials are placed by V-Ray. But even so, Sky material is not a material, it is a setting, I had previously installed an older version but reinstalled with the same version I'm running. I will try try try again!

that pluggin is great. Thanks again for your help.

Can you post an image of your render? Also info on what V-Ray for Sketchup version you use as well as settings?

thank you dalomar. I'll frequent the ASGVIS forum more.

We are aware that activation emails aren't getting sent out and are looking for the cause of the issue as we speak.

No, just remove the material from the outside of the group/component. Apply material to faces instead.