This is what the CAD file looks like, now I can save it as a .3ds but then I have to import it into blender and save the walls, the floors, and many other pieces one by one. There’s also no cohesion in the model so the floor ends up being on the first and second story as the same material, and the stairs are a separate material and the cabinets are spread out all over 3 materials that intertwines with railing, window trim and more.
Our artist currently just takes the CAD file and remakes the model in Revit and then I have to use blender to save all the pieces and edit the UV mapping. Then I have to add collision to the home, then I have to dress it up.
What should be a “simple” 3-5 hour job turns into a 3-5 day job per model. Budget one day for mental break down and crying profusely.
You just have to Group The separate parts off your building. Uncheck combine meshes and check uv mapping when you import The file in unreal. You have to give all gruop a colission in mesh editor. You can do that with batch edit.
I think it would be faster to just model the apartment directly in blender or 3ds max (cause you can link CAD files it’s even easier). Use the cad drawing to model directly on it with the snap tools. MAX/Blender to ue4 will give better results imo. How would you do your uv mapping, uv unwrapping, etc. by skipping the 3d modeling software?
Or, I have an architect friend who takes his revit models, bring them in max to make uv mapping/unwrapping and export to unreal. Don’t make cad, to remodel in revit, to send to unreal. If you can, skip revit. Take the cad and model directly in blender/max and send to unreal.
Also, don’t worry too much about collisions. You can select some walls in unreal and put a simple collision box on it (via mesh viewer) or add a couple brushes, make them invisible and they’ll act as block volumes in the scene. For archviz, imo, you don’t need overly complex collisions boxes like in games. Clients won’t run and jump everywhere.
After ue4.10 The uv mapping works just fine on simple meshes. I use complex collision as simple and yes it looks pretty… I normally separate and group as much as i can. If Your scene is getting to heavy you can combine meshes after import and keep The lightmaps.
There’s no reason to make it in Revit and then import to Max. It would be easier to take the .pdf or .dwg and trace over it rather than model it in Revit. Because Revit is a bit hit and miss when it comes to importing geometry. Especially round objects!
It does do simple geometry well though. I imported a 46 storey building using the Revit model the other day and the only things that really need cleaning up are the round columns. It HATES round objects for some reason.
But again, something like a small residential house would be much easier to do in Max anyway because even the simple geometry that Revit exports is sometimes high on the poly count compared to if you just modelled it in Max to begin with.
There was a thread on here ages ago that discussed exporting the round objects from Revit as a DWG Solid. Still not perfect but it fixes the issues you mentioned. I’d still rather remodel it in 3ds though.
@, certainly looks good but this is a game environment. People in the design/architecture industry don’t want that kind of aesthetic. They want soft shadows, they want perfect G.I, they want photorealism… Even at the cost of having something that looks 100% totally unoriginal
Any chance you can remember the thread name?? Exporting round geometry is limiting our presentations at the moment. A work-around would be great instead of modelling thousand upon thousands of round pipes and columns!
What program generates the original CAD drawings?
If it’s an Autodesk program, going through something like inventor (or straight Autocad 3D) might be possible.
Also, 3ds Max supports scripting through MaxScript. It should be possible to point it at a folder of 3ds exports and have it assemble a scene and export as FBX using scripts.
You may be able to skip the Revit bit entirely then.
If that doesn’t work, then re-modeling in Max (or Inventor?) based on measurements might be faster than trying to go the conversion path.
Revit or AutoCad. Using scripts sounds… messy. There’s no work around when it comes to this. It needs to be modelled properly. Even the wall joins are going to show shadow bleeding unless done correctly - which Revit doesn’t do.
Yes, a scripting solution would have to be debugged to be robust!
Building walls in 3ds Max using world-space texture coordinates can improve the look of texturing.
Using ProBoolean union blocks will weld up the corners to avoid the light leakage.
If you have the data in AutoCad, then I have seen someone take a path from AutoCAD -> Inventor -> FBX before that yielded nice-looking 3D.
If you’re an Autodesk subscriber that has access to many different tools, that might be worth looking into. If you have to pay thousands for each of the tools, maybe not as much
Also, learning Inventor is yet another tool to learn, with a different workflow.
i noticed form working with a few interior designers that they don’t give a **** how the internal mesh looks. as long as the model renders properly in an offline renderer, they’re happy.
I think they use something like Revit or the likes to import or use the models and i have to painstakingly clean up the model or hire someone to do it. then unwrap it before putting it in unreal engine. it’s just something we have to suffer until the industry hopefully takes real-time engines into consideration
[]
i noticed form working with a few interior designers that they don’t give a **** how the internal mesh looks. as long as the model renders properly in an offline renderer, they’re happy.
I think they use something like Revit or the likes to import or use the models and i have to painstakingly clean up the model or hire someone to do it. then unwrap it before putting it in unreal engine. it’s just something we have to suffer until the industry hopefully takes real-time engines into consideration
[/QUOTE]
So they just export straight from Revit? I like that idea and I hope someday Autodesk consider optimising for game engines. But I don’t think it will ever be as good as modelling in a dedicated app like Max. They’re also the people that are a pain in the a** to deal with because they have no idea the amount of work that goes into a render and think it’s all fine and dandy to just work with what they created - while completely disregarding the process behind it.
