Version 2013 Materials & Assets

[IMCornish]

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?

[vector2]

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

like that.

[parveen.revit]

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)

[vector2]

---

@IMCornish wrote:

 "baffling" 

---

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. 

[vector2]

---

@parveen.revit wrote:

(with all inherant properties)

---

inherent

[IMCornish]

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. 

[vector2]

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

rendered.

Just learn how to make an image suitable for the kind of rendering

you want to do.

Edited by
Discussion_Admin

[scott_d_davis]

---

vector2 wrote:

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.

[vector2]

I agree with everything you said davissc, and it's good

to post these things here for others to see. And that's 

a good tip about the Pixlr.com. 

[IMCornish]

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.

[vector2]

Keep in mind that the intent of rendering in Revit is

more for construction visualization than it is for 

presentation. Once the owner has seen what the

building will look like from a concept sketch created

and rendered in 3Ds Max, and has agreed to having

a construction model begin, then all they want to

see is construction renderings and 2D drawings.

Custom materials may come into play, but they

will not need to see an artists' vision through a 

presentation rendering again.

[IMCornish]

I can't wholly agree with you.  In the UK our Planning System demands, more and more, to be able to see realistic views of proposals before they will give permission for a project to proceed.  Further the whole point of BIM is that it can go the whole way through the whole of the buildings life  with the central file being adapted as it moves through the various stages from conception, construction and management to possible future demolition.  A great possibility, within this process, is to produce 3d construction details which are getting to be quite common in the UK.  I believe this to be far more understandable to all who view our drawings, yes starting with our clientele, who having seen, and not had to imagine what they are getting, are then less inclined to want changes in the construction phase when they actual see what they are getting, to builders who don't have to interrogate you about 2d black and white details.  Just my point of view but I also like to produce a good set of drawings which tell the story and give me satisfaction also.  Visualisation and presentation are to my mind synonymous and I hope that as Revit evolves that it will embrace this.

[vector2]

---

@IMCornish wrote:

"to be able to see realistic views of proposals before they will give permission for a project to proceed."

Do you mean you agree with me? My post from above stated:

"Once the owner has seen what the building will look like from a

concept sketch created and rendered in 3Ds Max, and has agreed

to having a construction model begin, THEN"...

@and you wrote:

"they will give permission for a project to proceed."

Also do you see why Autodesk includes 3Ds Max when we purchase

Revit?

[loboarch]

---

IMCornish wrote:

If anybody can explain why it is an improvement on the previous releases, I'd love to hear from them and revise my opinion?

---

One thing the "assets" data scheme adds to the definition materials in Revit is the ability of the assets to be used in more than one material.  For example you might need a material "gray concrete" in your project but that "gray concrete" needs to be used in multiple places and in some of those places it needs different compressive strengths.  So maybe you have 3 strengths but only one appearance.  In 2013 you will create 3 Revit "materials", you can use one appearance asset and 3 different structural assets for the materials.  If the concrete used needs to change color for some reason now just that asset nees to be changed and all 3 "materials" will get the change.  in 2012 you would need to make changes to all 3 materials and make sure the changes made are the same for each.

You can hear one of the QA team here at Autodesk, Jim Smell, talk about some of the changes in a bit more detail in this interview.

In know Pixlr was mentioned as a way to alter images for use in creating materials, another one that is free and I like to use is Paint.net.  It is a fairly powerful Photoshop substitute.

[vishal.parmar]

Hi I need Help, How do you insert your own image file to Revit library for an appearance asset. Thanks 

I want to use the attached as my material. 

[IMCornish]

This is fairly easy. Open a project, click on the Manage ribbon and pick 'Additional Settings' and on the drop down you will see 'Material Assets'.  Click this and  a blank 'Asset Editor' will open and at the bottom of the dialog, to the left, there is the 'open/closes Asset Browser' button.  Click on this and the Asset Browser will open. You can then create your own materials/asset library by clicking the star like drop down button (bottom left).  One this is achieved the new library will appear in the dialog listing. You can then right click any appearance* asset from the other  out of the box libraries and add it to your new library. I would suggest picking one similar to the appearance asset that you are trying to create.  When this is done you can send the asset to the blank asset editor by clicking the 'up arrow' that appears, when you hover over the asset, on the right hand side.  Whence in the Asset Editor you have opportunities to change many aspect of the material asset, one of which is the image to be used.  By clicking on the name of the image or the drop down to the right of the image you can select the address of the image you wish to use.  When editing of the asset is complete click 'apply' and your asset will be saved back to the library you created.  *Alternatively, click the 'up arrow' on any library asset to transfer it to the editor and when edited save it to your library file. You cannot change the OOTB library assets because they are locked.

When you have your asset, you then need to open the Material Editor and add you new **** asset to a new material.

See also: http://wikihelp.autodesk.com/Revit/enu/2013/Help/00001-Revit_He0/3032-Customiz3032/3042-Project_3042... and follow all the topics

[IMCornish]

Having started this discussion, we have been all around the houses but I still am of the opinion that the new arrangements are not an improvement and far more complex and for the most part are frustrating and don't work.  Time and time again I have created project and practice 'material and asset' libraries, when you try to use these libraries the asset values are changed or have disappeared completely.  For example I created a project material which was a green paint colour and as such I had an appearance asset which reflected this, however when I wanted to use this in a linked project, my shade of green had become cream, in fact RGB 98 115 101 had been translated to RGB 242 242 229 !  Also, can I get either the material or the asset editor images to work, no, they remain black as do some of the material thumbnails and despite having reported this, no answers are forthcoming!

My efficiency is being eroded and I wonder if anyone else is experiencing this problem? 

[IMCornish]

I would agree that you are right in your statement that you can use 'Assets' in more than one material, unfortunately, I believe this to be in theory only. See my previous post.

[IMCornish]

vector2, yes, but your position appeared to me that you don't take colour and rendering beyond the initial design stage. My position is that it can be used much much more within a project's lifespan.  Also, not everyone who uses Revit has the benefit of 3Ds Max, yes it comes with some of the more expensive suites but I can tell you that in the recession hit UK there will be many using Revit who cannot afford the subscriptions for Autodesk suites and will certainly not have it.  We have had 3Ds Max for the last two years, but I have yet to find the time to learn it, I certainly cannot afford the time or the cost of being taught, sadly.  If you have 3Ds Max, and are able to use it, then you currently have a great advantage over me which is why I would like (expect perhaps) Revit to be a more complete package.