I would be interested to know if anyone else finds the new set up for editing and browsing materials as baffling as I do?
I have read and re-read the Wikihelp pages and have got someway into it, but have come to the conclusion, sadly, that what I at first thought was going to be a greater ability to create more custom materials, seems just to be a more illogical and complicated version of what went before. If anybody can explain why it is an improvement on the previous releases, I'd love to hear from them and revise my opinion?
The only thing I find different about it, (other than some re-arranging
of commands), is the new ability to add or take away physical and
thermal properties to the material images, called "assets". They are
using the word "appearance" to mean the actual jpeg or png images,
and those are called assets too. Appearance properties are separate
from the assets.
But if you keep in mind that the jpeg or png material image is at the
root of it all, and that you can get those images from anywhere, you
can build your understanding from that fact upward. Some will insist
that the OOTB materials and their asset properties are all you need,
but I rarely use any of those.
And if you are only building an architectural model, you don't need
any thermal properties to render and represent the model.
Edit: Anyone who thinks they can correct any of what I've said here
is welcome to do so.
See these bricks I rendered, and you won't find any OOTB bricks
adding new parameters/properties related to thermal physical properties has brought Revit to the actual definition of 'Information' which is in the middle of B I M.
Eventually it wil/should become a powerfull tools to build the buildings virtually (with all inherant properties)
Only my own materials to choose from. I can pick one or many
materials from any Revit version's library or from my own camera
or anywhere there is an image I would like to be a material. I can
add any kind of asset properties or appearance to my materials.
Clearing away everything but your own material will minimize the
baffle affect. See the image.
vector 2, I am impressed with your ability to create your own materials, building them up from your own images. If you can offer any advice on how to create suitable images then I would be obliged. I have tried in the past but had very poor results, mostly because of the lighting conditions or the 'joins'. You are correct in what you say that the materials build from the 'appearance' but inherent in their appearance are texture maps, tints, transparency etc etc which I would like to understand more. I have been trying to create a stained soft wood 'Weatherboard' material for ages and have given up.(Weatherboard I believe equates with 'Siding' in the States, but the boards have a completelly different profile to the siding examples in the OOTB materials, and to date I have not found a suitable soft wood image either.)
On another tack, I appreciate the additional 'assets' of physical and thermal properties are a step forward, as 'parveen.revit' wrote, and are important additional components which, in theory, will help with energy usage calculations etc but my efforts to add them to my materials, thus far, have been very hit and miss. This is mostly because the add asset button will not add the chosen asset or because their hasn't been a suitable 'Physical' or 'Thermal' asset for the material I have created.
To sum up, none of my ambitions are aided by the 2013 set up.
Appreciate that you appear to be far more independant of these constraints, thanks for answering.
Thanks for the compliment IMCornish.
You asked for "advice on how to create suitable images."
First I will say that the Revit library images are useful, but just
like the door and window libraries, their usefulness is limited,
(except for construction development rendering).
The way you make any image suitable for presentation rendering
is to prepare it for rendering. And the best program for editing
images is Photoshop. The Revit material editor has some
appearance editing tools, but not nearly enough. For example, if
an image looks terrible tiled because it's dark on one side and
light on the other, then you need to balance those differences. Or
you might need to alter the contrast of an image so it looks better
Just learn how to make an image suitable for the kind of rendering
you want to do.
Some will insist that the OOTB materials and their asset properties are all you need
Not "all that you need", but a very good starting point. Brick, for instance, has at least 50 different options for rendered appearance, out of the box. Each of these can be tweaked, color being the easiest thing to change. And of course, you can replace any "image" file fro the ootb materails with you own, keeping the physical and thermal properites that come with the ootb materials.
Also, you may want to try Pixlr.com rather than Photoshop to edit youe own images. Pixlr editor is free, while Photoshop cost hundreds of dollars.
Scott. thank you, whilst I have an old version of Photoshop I had never heard of Pixlr, thanks for the pointer. Will give it a try when I can get the basics of the new 2013 dialogs sorted. My editor images (materials and assets) refuse to show any images and remain black, so new images will just be a distraction currently.
Log into access your profile, ask and answer questions, share ideas and more. Haven't signed up yet? Register
Start with some of our most frequented solutions to get help installing your software.