RPC Trees: Is there an alternative?

Anonymous · ‎02-11-2010

Is there anyone who is as disappointed with the output achieved with RPC trees as I am?

Theyre spindly and lacking depth and substance, they look like clones of each other, even when you rotate them, and they look rubbish in shaded views and dont produce sensible shadows in renders... why are we now stuck with these?

As far as i've been able to ascertain, this is the new way of things in Revit, and I havent been able to achieve an alternative. I've tried importing things from sketchup and autocad and various models, but you dont seem to be able to edit and apply materials to imported models, so i get white trees.

Trees were great back a few years ago before they got rid of Accurender, what happened, why?

Can anyone help me get a better result somehow?

Anonymous · ‎02-11-2010

lime-blue-

wow- i just realized i always thought there
were only two kinds of trees- the RPC trees
and everything else- but it guess the AccuRender
trees were different..

when i first got MentalRay in revit i was concerned
too about those RPC trees.. but the more i learned
about how to make them look good- the more i was
convinced they might be slightly better..

i just never gave that much thought to the trees..

now you got me thinking.. lol

some of those Accurender trees WERE pretty
damn good come to think of it.. but still- i just
don't think i would use them now even if i could..

Anonymous · ‎02-11-2010

take your pick- aren't they gorgeous..

Anonymous · ‎02-12-2010

here is an old AccuRender pic that somebody did-
and notice those trees do look pretty darn good..

but also notice how unnatural the light looks on
that house.. i think i was just so happy the get
realistic looking light with MentalRay that i have
never given much thought to the planting..

but STILL- sometimes those RPC trees look
really good..

i don't really know what to think about the default
planting we have now compared to something else..

if you find out anything- let me know..

Anonymous · ‎02-12-2010

lime-blue- here are some trees i found and
rendered in revit real quick for you..

but listen-up everybody..

what if! and especially some of you CAD
jockeys that think maybe you should learn
revit but you're really not quite sure what's
going on..

what if! what if revit could do anything
the human mind could conceive?

i don't think too many of you even know
what 64 bit computing is..

but think of 32 bit as the size of a shoebox..
then think of 64 bit as the size of those
cargo containers like they put on ships-
stacked three high and tight together
covering a football field.. that's how
big 64 bit is..

revit is now 64 bit..

Anonymous · ‎02-22-2010

Thanks for your replies vector2.

Not sure what the 64bit speil has to do with anything here,..however..

Dont get me wrong, i'm a big fan of Revit, and to be honest, the Mental Ray renders look great on the building. I have no problem with MentalRay, and seeing it's in Maya and 3DStudio and probably all the other Autodesk products in the group, i've seen that it's capable of great things.
I'm just disappointed that instead of the usual improvements and building on the brilliant functions of previous versions, with the introduction of MentalRay, we have had our old trees and entourage taken away, but not properly replaced. In this area, we have taken two steps forward, but then three steps back.
I have no doubt that MentalRay is capable of everything Accurender could do and more, it's just that as far as I can see at the moment, we seem to now have no option but to use RPC trees, which I feel are inferior to what we had in previous versions.
I may be wrong, there may be ways to use proper 3d trees and get green leaves and brown trunks, and that's why i'm putting it out there for some help.

Does anyone else even agree that the new trees are inferior? Am I on my own here?

Maybe someone can just tell me how to make the RPC trees cast proper shadows and look a bit more gutsy, I'd be happy with that..

Anonymous · ‎02-22-2010

lime-blue-

MentalRay is a rendering program.. whatever trees
happen to get put with whatever installation of the
program has nothing to do with the program..

YOU render what YOU want to render..

those trees included with the revit render version
are only trees somebody thought to place in there
for you to get started.. there are THOUSANDS of
different kinds of trees..

what's wrong with the shadows made by these trees?
see image..

Anonymous · ‎08-23-2015

vector2

those trees look great.but they are not revit families. other way to import 3d trees into Revit is from a dwg file, but then becomes very difficult to change the materials on those, as they appear as grey in revit.

ToanDN · ‎08-24-2015

You realized this is a 5-year old thread?

Yes you can change the material of imported 3D trees by edit the DWG file and change everything's color to By Layer.

The real question is why would you want to use 3D trees instead of RPCs? Are the trees schematic cartoonish like? Real 3D trees with trunks and leaves and whatnot will tax Revit tremendously.

Anonymous · ‎08-25-2015

Hi,

Thanks for the quick answer

I realized this is a 5 year old thread, and thats why I asked, maybe something changed in this 5 years. Guess not. I know how to change materials to imported dwg's but like you said , this is not an easy process and Revit will struggle with a lot of imported trees, even with a high performance computer. I am using Archvision's RPC trees, but I am not satisfied at all. like said in the thread, they have no depth, bad shadows, no reflections, and when I try to build a forrest like background the space behind the trees appears as black. So there is no trick in getting a nice vegetation background here?

Anonymous · ‎06-15-2016

Personally I don't like bringing CAD imports into my Projects,...

that said,... the company I work for, deals with very picky clients,... who want realistic looking views (granted we don't render in revit,....that is MAX + Vray) but we do give them realistic views. which are pretty **** detailed and realistic.

as for taxing revit with 3D trees,.... ???? really,.... don't you know how to work with WORKSETS!!! you do know you can switch worksets off while working

my biggest question is this

revit 2012: 100mb CAD Imports in a 1mb project template = 101mb project

revit 2013: 100mb CAD Imports in a 1mb project template = 101mb project

revit 2014: 100mb CAD Imports in a 1mb project template = 101mb project

revit 2015: 100mb CAD Imports in a 1mb project template = 190mb project

revit 2016: 100mb CAD Imports in a 1mb project template = 187mb project

all projects and families are purged,.. and NO,.. it's got nothing to do with the way the families were created, as it always worked fine,... it's just from revit 2015 onwards,... that there seems to be this BUG that increases the file size, even when one saves the families out the 2015/2016project,.. they equate to 100mb

Oh,... and fixing the Scale Factor for families to work in the project environment would also be "NICE".... seeing as it has never worked.

even though Autodesk said they were working on it,.... that was in 2008!!!!!,... it's now 2016.

you don't have to answer to this post,.. but if you can please pass it around to the proper people,.. so they can fix these issues,.. ACTUALLY FIX IT,...

not give me some politicians/type answer,... whereby avoiding the question,... and making it sound as though everything is a USER ERROR

(as said,... scale factor still doesn't work in the project environment,... after 8yrs)

ToanDN · ‎06-15-2016

Well you are barking the wrong tree (no pun intended). I do not work for Autodesk so I can't pass your whine to anyone. But I am doing you a favor by answering to your post to bump it up so someone may be able to look at it. You are very welcome.

Also, if you know how to google, you should be able to submit your complaint directly to Autodesk as a benefit of being their customer.

@Anonymous wrote:

etc and etc...

and but if you can please pass it around to the proper people,.. so they can fix these issues

....etc and etc

sdbrownBECK · ‎06-15-2016

Are you only using the RPC content that came with revit or do you have the Archvision Subscription. I find the RPC content to work very well. There is a necessary trick though, you need to install the "entourage workshop" it allows you to tweak the RPC content, ie make it transparent, or in my case I typically adjust the gamma so they come out darker and not as "washed out" looking.

SamuelAB · ‎06-16-2016

Revit made a mistake by purchasing right to RCP trees, they are bad. they don't render in anything else that Mental Ray (not even in 3ds Max's new default ART renderer) and they don't import into Unity.

The only proper solution is to build your own or hope that Revit ditches Archvision for a better solution. This space desperately needs more competition and Archvision's antiquated technology is not the long term solution for the market.

Anonymous · ‎06-17-2016

if complaining about sudden file size increase, and the fact that scale factor hasn't worked since 2008 is whining,... then I'm so sorry to have made you reply,... I guess one should just pay enormous subscription fees yearly and be grateful for "awesome" updates,.... like the most stable version of revit ever ... 2015

thanks so much for your favour,.. I'm forever grateful to you