Current Visualisers

[Tim gregory]

Please can someone explain what tools are available for object building in Capture (Atlas in particular)?

 

I presume that it will support basic primitive shapes like rectangles and circles, does it support any level of Boolean tools where objects can be merged or subtracted? (To give a rectangle panel a curved corner or create a hole through a solid shape?).

The tool that I use the most is Extrude, making it fairly easy to create a lot of the model from the usual 2d drawing, does something like this exist in Capture?

 

It would be nice if the small simple sets and stages could be created within Capture without using external software.

 

Capture has basic library objects such as cube, sphere etc and can set the dimensions of these so it is pretty basic.

 

I would highly recommend giving Sketchup a shot for this, it does exactly what you need, really easily.

 

The import into Capture is very easy and you can import extra models into the existing drawing.

 

 

Why not download Sketchup free, the Capture demo and then have a play. I am fairly sure you can import into the demo version of Capture.

 

Tim

[timsabre]

Please can someone explain what tools are available for object building in Capture (Atlas in particular)?

I presume that it will support basic primitive shapes like rectangles and circles, does it support any level of Boolean tools where objects can be merged or subtracted? (To give a rectangle panel a curved corner or create a hole through a solid shape?).

The tool that I use the most is Extrude, making it fairly easy to create a lot of the model from the usual 2d drawing, does something like this exist in Capture?

 

No, there is nothing like this in Capture. There's a range of solid objects you can use but to manipulate them like that you'd have to import from external 3d cad.

 

edit- aah another Tim beat me to it. The demo version of Capture is fully featured except you can't save, so you could test Sketchup import.

[Judge]

I have tried nearly all of the visualisers, and to somebody used to programs like Illustrator, Photoshop etc I think that ALL of them have a weird interface. Martin Show Designer is possibly the most intuitive.

I went with Capture in the end because it was as somebody else said earlier in the thread, the best bang for buck. I went through Polar to Argo and now have Atlas and it has improved so much. Reporting and plots are decent, and the ablity to import from Sketchup is very useful.

Being as they are all a bit of a thing unto themselves, and that they all produce incredibly good and realistic visualisations, the criteria should possiby be: what are you prepared to pay - and what lighting desk are you using? Some play better than others with certain brands.

Capture have got onboard with Avolites lately in a big way. The ChamSys MagicVis is remarkably good, especially as its free. I have never tried using it with anything other than MagicQ though. I very much like how it will make thumbnails of the scent to use as legend on the master playbacks. Which is only anu use really with the new HD screens - the MQ500 is great for this.

All of these programs are A World Of Pain and very expensive . I am over the pain threshold with Capture and its paid for so I shall stick with this. Let us know how you get on.

[DonkiDonki]

I have tried nearly all of the visualisers, and to somebody used to programs like Illustrator, Photoshop etc I think that ALL of them have a weird interface. Martin Show Designer is possibly the most intuitive.

I went with Capture in the end because it was as somebody else said earlier in the thread, the best bang for buck. I went through Polar to Argo and now have Atlas and it has improved so much. Reporting and plots are decent, and the ablity to import from Sketchup is very useful.

Being as they are all a bit of a thing unto themselves, and that they all produce incredibly good and realistic visualisations, the criteria should possiby be: what are you prepared to pay - and what lighting desk are you using? Some play better than others with certain brands.

Capture have got onboard with Avolites lately in a big way. The ChamSys MagicVis is remarkably good, especially as its free. I have never tried using it with anything other than MagicQ though. I very much like how it will make thumbnails of the scent to use as legend on the master playbacks. Which is only anu use really with the new HD screens - the MQ500 is great for this.

All of these programs are A World Of Pain and very expensive . I am over the pain threshold with Capture and its paid for so I shall stick with this. Let us know how you get on.

 

 

 

 

I am playing with the Atlas Demo now, a quick question if someone can help? How do I brighten objects in live view, is there an ambient light setting that can be tweaked or do you have to add some fixtures and begin lighting things directly?

 

OK so it looks like scenic creation for Capture really is best done in an external app, so what is the best option in terms of compatibility? If you create a model in another program with textures and other details, which route will import most painlessly?

 

 

I have just been playing with importing Sketchup models into Atlas with interesting results.

The import process has thrown up a few errors on most model imports and the translation of textures seems pretty hit and miss. (though a bit better than my old version of Wyg)

 

Presumably when creating your own models with sketchup there are methods of texturing and other advanced modelling features that should be avoided to ensure a clean import into Capture, is anyone aware of any guides or resources that give any detail on such things?

[niclights]

To adjust the ambient lighting for a particular view in Capture Atlas go to Design tab, select the relevant view in Project and you should find the ambient lighting level in the Camera Properties section.

[DonkiDonki]

Another question for Capture users.

 

Complex geometry. While most work only requires quite basic models for venues and sets there are occasionally projects which require considerably more detail and complex models.

 

Also things like chairs and tables which can add a lot of models to a file.

Will Capture manage to play nicely with a few hundred chairs and tables as well as a detailed set and stage? (I use PC's which are always fairly recent high-end spec so I should be working within the top end of Capture's performance hopefully)

 

In terms of performance, I need to be able to get detailed models lit for generating visuals but am happy to hide a lot of it when running pre-vis as this is something I already do with Wyg. So I can live with less than stellar frame rates in live views so long as the program doesn't reduce to a stuttery mess. (I have learn't to avoid a few scenarios in wyg that really reduce the system to a crawl)

 

To adjust the ambient lighting for a particular view in Capture Atlas go to Design tab, select the relevant view in Project and you should find the ambient lighting level in the Camera Properties section.

 

 

Thank you http://www.blue-room.org.uk/public/style_emoticons/default/smile.gif

[timsabre]

Adding lots of chairs and tables does slow it down. However you can put them all on a layer and hide the layer while working on the lighting, then just enable the layer when you want to export a "pretty" view.

[indyld]

Complex geometry slows all 3D CGI software down which is the reason that a lot of tricks are used in the CGI business to keep the polygon count to a minimum for each and every shot. Along with using stupid amounts of processing power.

 

There are ways to reduce the impact of the geometry, particularly turning off the way that light in the space interacts with the geometry itself, turning off shadows or radiosity (not sure if you can do the latter in Capture). This is along with the above suggestion of layering up the stuff with a huge polygon count so you can leave it off most of the time.

 

Many working with this type of software don't have a general CGI background and so it's worth learning some of the techniques that you can do in order to keep your model as efficient as possible. One thing to know is that many models you'll find online, or even in the libraries, are hugely inefficient in the way they are built and even quite badly put together as meshes having been bodged and exported in all kinds of nasty ways. Building your own minimal and efficient geometry, particularly when knowing full well you are going to dupe the hell out of it in another model.

 

Another trick is to composite the final image using renderings for the set/stage and a different layer for the high poly stuff like chairs and tables.

 

Polygons and light sources eat processing power - sadly we can only do so much about about the latter when using a dedicated stage lighting package. This is why for a certain kind of high quality pitch visual, something like Blender is a better bet however good R194 of WYSIWYG becomes.

[Tim gregory]

I think chairs etc are fine. I regularly work with plots with 1000 plus seats. I am fairly sure that the library has seating and table options.

I normally create a few layer sets so I can turn off unwanted objects, but in recent years this has been more to simplify plot views than visualiser speed.

 

It might be worth checking which version of Sketchup Capture is compatible with. It may be that the latest version is not yet supported.

One of the minor frustrations with Sketchup is keeping on top of the constant updates, especially when a colleague sends back files saved in a more recent version.

 

Capture has a forum on their page which may give some answers but I have found the software guys very quick to answer when I have emailed them with questions.

 

Tim

[DonkiDonki]

I thought it might be helpful if I provide a few examples of the kind of stuff I'm producing with Wyg and see if those of you with experience of Capture think it could produce similar results.

 

 

 

 

All of the above images are Live views in Wyg, it runs so well on current PC hardware that I barely ever need to use the Render option anymore. Creating videos is almost as easy as taking stills once the model and plot are done.(And I'm about 10 versions behind the current release)

 

 

 

 

 

I even use Wyg for other little CAD projects like working out how to partition my Peli case for my Chamsys MagicQ gear or even build a loft bed for my daughter. (Not something I'm expecting Capture to do but it does show the versatility of Wyg, just a shame it's so damn expensive to keep up-to-date)

 

 

 

Adding lots of chairs and tables does slow it down. However you can put them all on a layer and hide the layer while working on the lighting, then just enable the layer when you want to export a "pretty" view.

 

That's exactly how I do it with Wyg now.

 

It actually manages to run with surprisingly high levels of geometry and lighting together, having lights moving at the same time AND having a moving camera suddenly puts a huge strain increase when you already have lots of model detail though.

 

 

My workflow generally involves taking rough venue details with a 2d set drawing and using those primarily to produce a lighting plot. At the moment, once I have a basic layout and plot in Wyg it takes very little additional effort to add more details and end up with something good enough to produce visuals. (That's why I have kind of stumbled into visual production rather than the usual graphic art/photoshop kind of background)

 

Still most of my work starts with the lighting plot so that is the most important thing.

 

For now I will continue working in my old version of Wyg and get Capture Atlas anyway. (unless anyone has other recommendations I should consider?)

I'm just struggling to decide which version for now, the sensible choice would be the cheapest Solo edition as the upgrade path is well priced. However it is common for me to need 3-4 DMX universes so that may get to be a pain real quick. On the other hand, dropping a couple of grand on a piece of software (Could go for Quartet but then I may as well go all out for Symphony)that I can't immediately use is pretty crazy.

Add to that I'm going to have to teach myself how to use a more complex CAD of some kind just to get back the functionality I have now with Wyg.

 

However, seeing as my version of Wyg's fixture library is now next to useless for pre-vis and I can't even get close to justifying the cost of buying (and maintaining) a new licence; I really need an alternative solution for the future.

 

 

As it seems that Capture + CAD is the best option going forward I'd better start doing something about it. (Mind you if anyone watching happens to have a recent version of Wyg Perform that they are thinking of parting with at a bargain deal then PM me quick!)

 

At least I will have plenty to keep me busy during all those mind-numbingly boring corporate conferences for a good while!

 

Another question!

 

Does anyone know what happens if you produce a plot with too many DMX universes for the version of Capture you have?

(for example, if I get the Solo license to test things out, can I still produce the plot paperwork showing fixtures addressed to more than one universe? A custom text field next to each fixture would do it)

[timsabre]

Does anyone know what happens if you produce a plot with too many DMX universes for the version of Capture you have?

(for example, if I get the Solo license to test things out, can I still produce the plot paperwork showing fixtures addressed to more than one universe? A custom text field next to each fixture would do it)

As far as I can see, you just can't control the fixtures on the unsupported universes from a control desk. However all other functions still work.

[DonkiDonki]

I think chairs etc are fine. I regularly work with plots with 1000 plus seats. I am fairly sure that the library has seating and table options.

I normally create a few layer sets so I can turn off unwanted objects, but in recent years this has been more to simplify plot views than visualiser speed.

 

It might be worth checking which version of Sketchup Capture is compatible with. It may be that the latest version is not yet supported.

One of the minor frustrations with Sketchup is keeping on top of the constant updates, especially when a colleague sends back files saved in a more recent version.

 

Capture has a forum on their page which may give some answers but I have found the software guys very quick to answer when I have emailed them with questions.

 

Tim

 

 

 

Any arguments for or against which CAD program to use with Capture? Sketchup seems popular I guess because it is free. Even the Pro version isn't too expensive compared to Autocad or Vectorworks.

 

Seeing as on occasion a CAD file does turn up to work with (usually on the larger gigs when a decent production manager gets involved with things) which usually seems to have originated from Autocad or Vectorworks it would make sense to go with one of those. (it can be areal pain trying to edit down an architects CAD of the entire venue in Wyg to get to just the bits you want, it really doesn't like large cad drawings like that)

But once again those are expensive bits of software, so maybe Sketchup or even something like TurboCAD?

 

The other consideration, is version compatibility. Should I only consider latest versions or would something like a 2015 version be fine? (quite a cost difference for Auto & Vector)

 

Thank you to everyone who has been helping, I think I will attempt to take my questions to the Capture forum from now on and see what kind of response I get there.

 

 

Feel free to chip in with anything else you feel may be relevant.

 

 

Cheers http://www.blue-room.org.uk/public/style_emoticons/default/drunk.gif

[Tim gregory]

I looked at Vectorworks when originally moving over from Wyg (for exactly the same reasons as you). At the time Vectorworks looked a lot better for 3d work than AutoCad.

In the end I was put off by the complexity of learning a full CAD package and given the fact that Sketchup Pro was so cheap so we went for that.

 

My initial reservations with using Sketchup was that it didn't appear to be accurate compared to a proper CAD program and more for creating quick and rough concepts.

That was not correct at all and I have now used it for multiple projects to create accurate models.

One of the advantages with Pro is that it has the LayOut program as part of it which is very good for producing good looking structural drawings.

 

I have since used ArchiCAD for a building project I am working on (unrelated to lighting) and you realise how limited Sketchup is for producing multi floor / sectional drawings and proper building plans.

Drawing venues and set though is very easy to do.

 

Tim

[DonkiDonki]

I looked at Vectorworks when originally moving over from Wyg (for exactly the same reasons as you). At the time Vectorworks looked a lot better for 3d work than AutoCad.

In the end I was put off by the complexity of learning a full CAD package and given the fact that Sketchup Pro was so cheap so we went for that.

 

My initial reservations with using Sketchup was that it didn't appear to be accurate compared to a proper CAD program and more for creating quick and rough concepts.

That was not correct at all and I have now used it for multiple projects to create accurate models.

One of the advantages with Pro is that it has the LayOut program as part of it which is very good for producing good looking structural drawings.

 

I have since used ArchiCAD for a building project I am working on (unrelated to lighting) and you realise how limited Sketchup is for producing multi floor / sectional drawings and proper building plans.

Drawing venues and set though is very easy to do.

 

Tim

 

 

 

Thanks for sharing Tim, it's very helpful.

 

 

 

 

So far Capture Atlas has got me close to pulling the trigger although the choice of CAD is complicating the choice a little.

 

At the moment there is Sketchup Pro (I really need to be able to import and export dwg and dxf) although I need to do more research on it's Autocad compatibility. For some reason Autocad itself isn't tempting me. (I notice there is LD Assistant for Autocad which is it's lighting app but I've never heard anyone even mention that one)

The other option to Sketchup Pro is Vectorworks, I'ts a lot pricier than Sketchup but does seem to have good industry support plus there is always the option of trying Spotlight and Vision if I don't get on with Capture. (But it is very pricy. Did I say that already?)

 

Looking at Vectorworks has got me thinking more about spotlight and Vision and whether I should be giving that combination more of a poke. It appears to be a similar package to Wyg although much less intergrated (though it looks like it may be on it's way to better integration) however I haven't heard a single person recommend it or in fact, mention it at all so far.

 

I will probably try to find out more about that this week, including what the complete setup is going to cost. (again, keeping an eye on the ongoing costs as much as the startup) so if anyone here has some experience I'd love to hear.

 

Even if I do opt for Capture, Vectorworks is looking a strong choice for the previous reasons. I will have to decide if it costing at least three times as much as Sketchup Pro is really worth it. (I'm hoping not to have to spend more than a couple of grand right now so getting Vectorworks would definitely force me to start out with a cheaper version of Capture)

 

It doesn't help that everyone of these programs is going to be a whole lot of hurt with me learning the damn things. http://www.blue-room.org.uk/public/style_emoticons/default/blink.gif

[DonkiDonki]

Well that was interesting.

 

Firstly there is very little from the last couple of years of Vision that can be found on youtube; most of the stuff that comes up is about 8 years old! Not a good sign to a new prospective customers.

 

Even worse, they appear to run almost exactly the same membership payment system as Wysiwyg. The cost structure is different but ends up about the same for a complete setup.

I guess that explains who they see as each others main rival?

 

Once again, cost of entry is high but acceptable but the membership renewal is crappy at best.

 

As far as I'm concerned, long term customer loyalty of any product should result in increasingly better discounts and service with a golden target point where free stuff is dangled like a 3d rendered carrot.

Shame none of the Vendors think this way.

 

 

 

Well it still looks like Capture is the favourite, now what's the chances of one of the cheaper CAD packages holding there own against Vectorworks/Auticad for general CAD compatibility?

I only need basic CAD tools for building stuff after all.

 

(I give up trying to edit all the typos and stupid autocorrect changes; this was posterd from a phone, sorry)