artlantis 3 and Archicad 12

[Anonymous]

Has anyone tried (or even beta-tested) Artlantis 3 on a mac platform?
I'm wondering if it is stable and fully compatible with AC12 and older Artlantis legacy files
The new features look impressive....but the reviews still leave me wondering.

Thanks
e

[Karl Ottenstein]

Yes. I tested 3 for several months on my Mac Pro, first under Leopard and finally under Snow Leopard. It runs beautifully and can open all older files.

Just note that if you open an older file, while all new features are available for you use, you will not magically have more information. Model layers are only in an atl file if you export using the Artlantis 3 export add-on.

I found the Artlantis 3 user interface much more fluid and responsive than in any earlier version. In earlier versions, I sometimes experienced UI delays, or had to do strange things to modify some values. On my Mac Pro, Artlantis 3 works as quickly as I do with no delays, no crashes.

Karl

[Anonymous]

thanks... i know what you mean by 'strange things'...
but wow - your review sounds impressive. my archicad models are usually quite large...so i'll try to follow up on the topic of speed.

[Karl Ottenstein]

emerich wrote:
i'll try to follow up on the topic of speed.

Keep in mind that I have 8 cores, which accounts for a good deal of the responsiveness that I experience since all cores are used to generate the preview.

Look forward to hearing your experiences. Try the demo.

Cheers,
Karl

[Thomas Holm]

Karl wrote:

emerich wrote:
i'll try to follow up on the topic of speed.

l

Karl,
I'd just like to know your opinion on the speed complaints that's turned up in the Artlantis forums. Do you think it's a question of less than ideal user settings, or is this a real problem with Artlantis 3 compared to 2?

[Karl Ottenstein]

Thomas wrote:

Karl wrote:

emerich wrote:
i'll try to follow up on the topic of speed.

l

Karl,
I'd just like to know your opinion on the speed complaints that's turned up in the Artlantis forums. Do you think it's a question of less than ideal user settings, or is this a real problem with Artlantis 3 compared to 2?

Hi Thomas,

Well, I have not experienced any speed issue at all for exterior, daytime renders. Some people have reported that things are somewhat (10-20%?) slower - but the quality is higher. So, it is a tradeoff.

Rendering a friend's file for him, there was a big increase in time for high antialiasing of a neon shader casting light on a bump mapped surface. But, the result was better than before.

The radiosity can now be adjusted with advanced settings - and depending on those settings, things may take longer. "Easy" settings for "exterior" and "interior" are there for most people.

Depending on the settings, the preview may generate more slowly. With 8 cores, I would not really notice that. Somebody with 1 or 2 cores probably would. So, I'm interested in hearing emerich's experiences.

The UI speed is a different issue than the render speed, and the UI is perfectly fluid.

Cheers,
Karl

[Thomas Holm]

Thanks, Karl. To me, your opinion is important. I'll buy!

[Karl Ottenstein]

Thomas wrote:
Thanks, Karl. To me, your opinion is important. I'll buy!

Thanks, Thomas ...but I don't want the guilt of potential disappointment.

Please download the demo of 3 to see if it performs satisfactorily on your machine. 😉

Cheers,
Karl

[Thomas Holm]

Karl wrote:
Thanks, Thomas ...but I don't want the guilt of potential disappointment.

Don't worry. I know what I'm doing. I didn't believe it but I had to check if there were any substance to the alleged 10x increase of render times. I've got a more recent MacPro with 16 virtual cores, so if its fast enough on your machine it should be on mine. Artl2 uses all the cores. And I've used Abvent software since 1985 so I'm aware of the risks involved. I promise I won't sue you

[David Collins]

Testing the Artlantis 3 demo I'm afraid I have seen render times increase by an order of ten, both with projects migrated from Artlantis 2 and with projects generated entirely in 3. I hasten to add the models I'm working with are huge, from 3.5 to 5 million polygons, and I'm typically using more than 20 light sources for interiors, nor am I stingy with bump or reflection, so I'm definitely at the extreme end of the user bell curve here.

I agree that the radiosity quality is somewhat better in 3, but given the cost in rendering speed, I think this version may put us a little too deep into Dwight's Uncanny Valley. For all that, I do plan to upgrade, if only for the layer control.