Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

Ar Vs The Others

88 posts in this topic

Posted

Hi,

I want to add caustics, sss, etc to my renders. Is there a

review that compares the different render engines?

Is there a poll that shows how many C4D users have

AR, VRay, etc?

I see the review for VRay but it seems more like

the companys info than an independent review.

Seems like there was a review I saw several months

ago, and someone added a link to a very cool car model

outdoors that was done with C4D alone, i.e. without AR (?)

Thanks!

Cal

ps- also wanted to turn on the lights in this new forum. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

usually, AR will do a great job. You just need to tweak it a lot to get things right. Vray however does that job quiet a bit faster than the AR You'll still need to tweak it and it has some issues, but overall it's a better renderer. ;) But it comes with a price. (if you are going to add volume caustics... those things are death slow on the AR - Surface is a little more doable, but it will still take a lot of time)

I've been looking around on the net for those questions, but nothing came up unfortunately.

I think that if you are a professional, you should have a copy. if you are an amateur, you can still have one. it can save you a lot of frustration with GI. just consider the price tag

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Personally, I can say that AR is a great engine. It can produce some very nice renders, but since MAXON wont comment on whether its still being developed or on the verge of extinction, its rather hard to make the decision to buy it.

VRay is also a very good engine. Its very good for exterior and interior stuff, however the current version has an issue with flickering when you have object movement and GI. Not sure when this will be addressed, but to get no flickering, you have to adjust the settings up which kills render times. However for camera fly-thrus with no or little movement, its great!

FinalRender is one that a lot of people leave out, and im not sure why. Its a great engine and has the "architectural" material. Which means it uses the native C4D material settings. VRay cannot do this. You have to set up a seperate vray material. FinalRender also has the Shader Tree which looks like an xpresso window editor, but its for making custom materials.

When it comes to rendering object animation (like character animation), FinalRender does a great job, and its fast! I recently had the opportunity to use it on a small animation I made, and there was no flickering with very low GI settings. The only draw-back is that you'll need to familiarize yourself with the shader tree. At first it can appear impossible to learn.

Hope this helps.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

AR is very old. And MAXON won't comment on whether it's planning on upgrading it

Hadn't considered that possibility, so I just emailed their customer support with that question....

is it still alive and will it be upgraded? Will let you know if they reply (or not).

Seems like they would want to keep us purchasing the module rather than a 3rd party engine.

VRay sounds and looks great, but at (cough! cough!) $1230 US vs $595, I have to think long & hard about it.

Thanks for the FinalRender info.....sounds like a viable choice for me.....will see if there are any trial versions

of the engines available to try before I buy.

Also will try to compare feature sets of the different engines, but you still have to drive it to know what it can do.

That's why I wanted some user feedback on what you like or not about a particular renderer, how many use

AR vs others. It will help me (an others hopefully) to make the decision on which one to invest in.

Things have been getting a bit tight lately! =O

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

I see the review for VRay but it seems more like the companys info than an independent review.

The Cafe's review of Vray was completely independent as are the others. We're free to say what we like. Vray in my opinion gives superb results but it's way over priced or the C4D version is. I'm sticking with the AR module as it's easier to use and I'm still not getting the most out of it yet.

3DKiwi

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

yeah i have to agree with Vilandra. Vray is great for stills, animation is iffy. Like there are a lot of guides, but they are really long.

Vray is great for displacement though. It does it very quickly, and of great quality. (spd)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

I'm sticking with the AR module as it's easier to use and I'm still not getting the most out of it yet. -3DKiwi

Good to know.....but would like to get some feedback from MAXON about AR's future.

Edited by megacal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

I'm not sure you will get to much info there. In my opinion it is a case of wait and see.

Steve.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Hopefully they will want to assure us they are still developing it.

I'm still optimistic (notwithstanding the price of petrol, melting glaciers,

and a sinking dollar).....will let you know. =)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

...just had a nice chat with a good guy at MAXON USA in California, and

without devulging any details, assured me that AR is indeed viable

and being developed.

So as Steve said, we'll have to "wait & see".

I'll start saving my milk money.

laugh.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Well at least thats something :)

Steve

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

There's a few posts here saying that Vray doesn't work for animation. Mmmm...

http://www.swaystudio.com/Sway_Mine_HR__.htm

This is the 3D Max version of Vray but the only thing that differs here is how it links to the program. The render engine, the part that determines if the image flickers or not, is exactly the same. This animation is 100% CGI.

Cheers

Karl

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

...just had a nice chat with a good guy at MAXON USA in California, and

without devulging any details, assured me that AR is indeed viable

and being developed.

So as Steve said, we'll have to "wait & see".

I'll start saving my milk money.

laugh.gif

Care to call him back and ask him if any other modules are still viable? Dynamics comes to mind? How about Thinking Particles?

3D-Pangel

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

And ask him about my fillet tool while you're at it!

Cheers

Karl

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Now that he's said that. California is going to break apart and sink slowly into the sea.

Actually, the sea is coming to us as we speak!!! =O

But they won't even communicate that little bit of harmless information with their customers.

Apparently we don't deserve to know that kind of information.

Yeah, I passed on that as well, letting him know in no uncertain terms that

MAXON needs to drop some crumbs to the faithful about AR (I didn't ask about

the other modules yet).

You would think MAXON would want AR to be The Premiere renderer for C4D

so no one would spend their money elsewhere. Beats me.

Although from a small survey I did of members, it appears that AR is still the most

widely used, and only a handful have purchased VRay or another engine (?).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Good to know the pros & cons of the different renderers. Price is

a big factor for me.

I would like to know if MAXON is going to try to compete with

VRay......side by side, is VRay that much better than AR, or

does it have a particular feature that is missing in AR?

I'd still like to find that car and who did it, evidently with

C4D alone.....anyone remember that post?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Vray is not only more accurate than AR, it's also faster....

The downside - some features from c4d can't be used. I'm doing a project with vray now, and I just find out that it doesn't support include/exlude objects in the lights attributes. Version 1.1 is coming soon and I hope they'll fix those integration problems....

The price is VERY high, and I wouldn't have bought it unless my client wanted that vray "look" so much...:)

peace

kobi

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

the FinalRender gallery is pretty impressive.....and it's only $100 more than AR.

In general, the renders I've seen with AR are good-very good, FinalRender better,

and VRay best by a significant margin.

It's very subjective at this point as I haven't found a comparison of the same scene rendered in each for an objective comparison.

Maxwell seemed comparable with FinalRender. Just going by the gallery pics......don't know how fast each is,

or what strengths or weaknesses they have if any.

Fryrender appears to be capable of incredibly realistic renders comparable (or better than?) VRay. But also expensive.....795 Euros.

I'm more interested in realism than speed.

Anyone have experience with Maxwell or Fryrender?

Edited by megacal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Didn't paulselhi do the same render with different render engines in a recent thread?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Interesting info you managed to get there...i really do hope there is a new AR soon,i've been hanging on hoping there will be a new version so i don't have to blow all my money on Vray

Love their software.

Hate their PR department.

Maxons PR is ok...Compared to pixologic...a year and half mac users have been waiting for Zbrush3,with loads of missed released dates and misinformation :) ....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

maxwell and fry render are both very slow. they require less settings and achieve realism a lot easier, but are very slow. Basically they are just very advanced light simulators. More for enthusiasts rather than production. I personally need speed, so not even considering them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

I've been using Maxwell for a little while and its great for still pictures, but you have to be prepared for insane render times.

One very cool feature is multilights. You can basically adjust the strength of all lights individually in your scene whilst it is rendering and after rendering is complete.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Notice that none of the animation examples on the Fryrender site have moving objets, only moving camera and some light changes. It's probably safe to assume that it has problems with 'object animation' otherwise they would certainly have an example on their site as that's the Holy Grail, so to speak.

Cheers

Karl

Edited by Lesia44

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

maxwell and fry render are both very slow. they require less settings and achieve realism a lot easier, but are very slow. Basically they are just very advanced light simulators.-Vozzz

Didn't know that....is a light simulator same as a raytracer? How is AR, VRay, or Final different?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Pathtracers (like Maxwell for example) are a step beyond that....-Codexus

Excellent overview....thanks!

Are you happy more or less with AR alone, or plan to add another renderer?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0