I’m after any recommendations for the best way to reduce complex / heavily detailed plant geometry without losing the size of the tree or plant. I am a landscape architect and want to do mass planting using proxies within Enscape, but still need the plant models to be of manageable size. Purchasing species that i need, most of the models are 200mb - 1gb for one plant.
When i use Transmutr to simplify the mesh, the leaves lose faces along the edges, therefore it becomes sparser and smaller. I’d like to find a way to retain the leaves shape but reduce the internal triangulation if possible.
I just reread some of what you said. I was thinking you had a problem in SketchUp, but it’s in Enscape that you still want to optimize the models. It seems a shame to take the full model via SketchUp and Skimp. If it’s in a format that MeshLab can read, maybe that would work to simplify it better than Transmutr.
A lot of the file size could be in the textures and not the mesh. Megascans for instance has a 60 mb rock that is 300 kb without the materials. You can always down sample the material resolution to keep file size down. Can you post a screenshot of one of the plants you’re working with to give us a better idea of polygon count?
Thanks, i will try MeshLab next time. I prefer not to reduce the geometry of things in the foreground or key areas but it just takes too long to load Enscape when i need to quickly open and pan around the model for meetings with clients or colleagues.
