spectral and render improvements

[Anonymous]

I don't know if the Fusion 360 rendering engine is spectral.

I would like to see dispersion for glossy materials.

Also I would like to add my own hdr environments

- F360 lacks area lights

- A blend material would be nice to mix with masks, procedurals or fresnel, two materials

- is not possible in render to have rt feedback while changing floor color

- is not possible to add glossiness to the infinite floor

- the sphere (isn't a sphere) preview material is too dark

- render output doesn't permit to choose the resolution

- we have enough powerful processors to generate high resolution renders and animations

- vr360 html5 output would be a nice feature

- sketch shaders for hand free renders would be cool

[cekuhnen]

I am not sure if in Fusion the render engine interface / technology is based on Keyshot or if they wrote their own library.

Both render engines work pretty much the same way.

Keyshot itself only supports HDRI IBL and cannot place lights for better shot design control.

If this is turly based on KS I think area lights might never come.

[Anonymous]

F360 render engine is really powerful, not fast as KS but quite good.

Probably they share the same Embree technology differently implemented or it's the cpu side of Cuda (iray)

For jewel design dispersion is basic.

Also coating dispersion gives a touch of photorealism to some materials.

I would like to see also depth of field effect and a better physical camera control to achieve photorealist results similar the ones produced by Keyshots or iRay.

[michallach81]

I have too add to wishlist a wish for different way of render decals, now it seems that deacal are placed on separate layer above render it self. It looks odd. Decals get only shades from scene, and at the end they displayed in very low resolution. If it matters I was using png file with transparency.

[cekuhnen]

I feel all those KS renderings look pretty much the same.

The upside of what Fusion offers it is easy but easy often means less usable

if you are ok with basic stuff fine - for me it is a toy.

I hope with Fusion they selected an engine that is not as crippled as KS.

Thea for example is pretty cheap and outperforms KS by a lot.

[Anonymous]

Selecting our own HDRI images is something I asked for ags ago. THe image softening is way too soft and loses too much detail. The render image is limited by screen res. The texturing options are limited and material editing is also primitive.

So yes, I would love to see more rendering improvemets. 

[Anonymous]

I've tested the available Keyshot plugin within the latest Fusion360 on Osx but it doesn't work.

I don't think that Autodesk will implement for Fusion360 a render engine full featured as Keyshot.

regards

[Bug.Robotics]

For me to use Fusion 360 Ultimate on a daily basis I would, without a doubt, need a competitive rendering tool.  The current tool is just not going to cut it to send out to a client or a perspective client.  The rendering tool needs to be much more robust.

[hutchij]

This is a great list of requests. Most are now in the backlog. Some (like sketch shading) are under review. 

One general comment: the rendering technology in Fusion360 and A360 Cloud rendering is not based on Keyshot. It is in-house technology built from the ground up to target the design market. As such, it is based on a physical pipeline and it is capable of some the advanced effects mentioned above. Please keep the feedback coming. 

There was a request for a "better physical camera". Notice that DOF has been added in the Render workspace. I am very interested in a prioritized list of physical camera effects that you would like to see next. 

John

[Anonymous]

Hi,

the DOF is not Physical, just checked now.

I think that the blur is exaggerated, I prefer a physical approach.

Me, like you, love photography and we know well how a reflex (mirrorless) camera works.

We need time exposure, shutter speed, iso, aperture values.

regards

[hutchij]

You are right, this is not described with the camera metaphor. I prefer that approach also. We had pushback to make it "more user friendlly".  However, it is implemented internally with a physical aperture so we could potentially switch to that presentation. @Nolan, can you comment on how the blur parameter maps to aperture. 

John

[colin.smith]

Can you give me an example of a blend material?

Thanks

[phazaar]

Unless I'm missing it, there seems to be no ability to put light sources into a render (or even control more than the basic direction of shadows cast) - this seems to me to be the logical next step after depth of field. What's the point in more camera controls etc if you can't control the light? Any photographer will tell you that light's more important than the camera...

[colin.smith]

Hi @phazaar

You are correct, there are no light objects at the moment, however that feature is on our list.  

[colin.smith]

We have done some of these already or have them on our short list

• add custom HRD env
• light objects
• improvements to preview swatch
• local render will allow you to choose the resoultion

[Anonymous]

I vote for much better light control.

Rendering as it is now, is very nice for fast preview and 'come over and have and look' scenarios.

But for out of the house rendering, it's in my opinion useless. Light control is of essence when doing serious rendering work. ADF360 rendering needs some work here, to get up to speed with the competition.

Ex. One of my models consists of many components, all sized by parameters (still a limitation of ADF360). So I get problems rendering because components are moved after building them, because the components are designed in one position and assembled by joining and moving. The design xy plane is at a different angle and distance compared to the assembled model. Thats just the nature of my model. In the rendering view ground shadow seems to move correctly when raytracing, but the model dont reflect light with respect to the light position. So the model look strangely ghostly when rendered.

As a consequence of the faulty lighting, this funny behaviour is happening. In the rendering view, when the raytracing is on, you can rotate the model around Z. When you do, the ground shadows rotate, witch is weird, but the reflections change as if the light source is fixed in the scene. If you rotate the light from the environment dialog, the shadows move as expected, but the reflections are fixed, which is weird.