Jump to content



Forums, gallery and free tutorials for Cinema 4D. Registration is fast and free. Please ensure you read our rules before joining.

Photo

Vray?


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
31 replies to this topic

#21 dataflow

dataflow

    Cafe Master Blaster

  • Regular Member
  • 11,884 posts
  • C4D Version:14 Studio
  • Location: sydney

Posted 31 March 2009 - 04:35 AM

Why aren't you just using my lighting and adjusting to taste? All the shadows that you see in my two examples are a result of the lights I've used.

data, just about everyone buys AR by default so I don't think most people realise that AR just provides bells and whistles and the bulk of the rendering capability is built in to C4D. I certainly don't think that people refer to the built in capabilities as AR3, they definitely see that as a completely separate module. I'm on R11 but I don't have AR3 (as I use Vray most of the time) and, in the context of this thread, I think it's worth pointing out that you don't need to shell out for AR3 to get Ray Trace speed increases.

Cheers
Karl


i have never seen anyone say eg... "the new built in render engine is faster".
they always/most of the time say "the new AR3 is much faster"
im not saying you aren't right, that people shouldn't say AR3 is faster.
but its much easier saying "AR3" then "built in render engine"
Dataflow Donations C4D beta tester

#22 StCanas

StCanas

    This is not me...

  • Regular Member
  • 4,399 posts
  • Location: England

Posted 31 March 2009 - 04:44 AM

But you'd have to look long and hard to find anyone other than me who's running R11 without AR3 so most of the time I think everyone assumes AR3 is where the speed hike has come from. I don't think I've seen anyone engage in any kind of discussion about plain vanilla R11 renders. And it's worth noting that the renders I'm getting out of R11, aside from not being able to do stuff like DOF, are better than the ones I get out of 10.5 with AR.

Cheers
Karl

Edited by Lesia44, 31 March 2009 - 04:44 AM.


#23 randyarchy

randyarchy

    Vilse

  • Regular Member
  • 859 posts
  • C4D Version:13 Studio
  • Location: orebro sweden

Posted 31 March 2009 - 04:59 AM

AR is great for GI and the use of GI with few exceptions is for people that dont light a scene. And Karl you don't seem to be one of those people.
I on the other hand am one of those people and sadly I dont use Gi since it flicklers in 10.5.
/Randy
just leave it there.

#24 spacescraper

spacescraper

    spacescraper

  • Regular Member
  • 360 posts
  • C4D Version:13 Studio
  • Location: london

Posted 31 March 2009 - 09:39 AM

i do thank you all for your input.

i ended up using AO but i adjusted the materials alot and voila! (attached) this took 47 seconds
and looks as good as the 3 minute render.

i found it was more the materials than light.
i did leave the sky and sun in. and left the blur reflection up at 35 % in places (the joy of a 8 core and 16gb)
and in the end just attched a 22 % area light to the camera.

good day for lighting, thanks for all the help again.

G (happy man) :signthankspin: :) :) :)

Attached Thumbnails

  • Picture_9.png
  • Picture_8.png

Life is Breathtaking boys and girls!

#25 stevehewitt1950

stevehewitt1950

    SteveMacc

  • Regular Member
  • 3,508 posts
  • C4D Version:11.5 (or older)
  • Location: Manchester, UK

Posted 31 March 2009 - 10:29 AM

I'm not sure why you would use AO and GI together. AO doesn't really do anything that GI doesn't do, it just fakes GI. Plus AO is very slow. Without GI, your sky is not really adding much except to reflections. Attaching a light to the camera is the same as using the autolight,

For the type of scene you are doing, turn off GI and AO. Use 3 area lights with soft or area shadows instead. Try Karl's lighting set up.

Edited by stevehewitt1950, 31 March 2009 - 10:35 AM.

Steve

#26 StCanas

StCanas

    This is not me...

  • Regular Member
  • 4,399 posts
  • Location: England

Posted 31 March 2009 - 11:05 AM

I don't use AO very often because it has a tendency to make things look dirty. Notice the bottom of the telephone numbers. They're starting to look as if they've been standing in a wet field for a year or two. :signthankspin: Although sometimes, used sparingly, it can work OK in the corners of rooms.

Cheers
Karl

Edited by Lesia44, 31 March 2009 - 11:11 AM.


#27 stevehewitt1950

stevehewitt1950

    SteveMacc

  • Regular Member
  • 3,508 posts
  • C4D Version:11.5 (or older)
  • Location: Manchester, UK

Posted 31 March 2009 - 11:32 AM

I don't like AO much for exactly that reason. As you point out, Karl, the shadows at the bottom of the numbers are completely artificial and shouldn't be there. AO has only generated them because of the proximity of the ground. To me they look like stains.

If GI is set correctly, AO shouldn't really be necessary.
Steve

#28 spacescraper

spacescraper

    spacescraper

  • Regular Member
  • 360 posts
  • C4D Version:13 Studio
  • Location: london

Posted 31 March 2009 - 01:06 PM

thank you ill look into not using it so much :signthankspin:

i do like the finish and the numbers look and feel are signed off.
its one of those (high production) low budget things! you know not so precious about it.

thanks to you lot up there (above) for your thoughts etc on the subject

G
Life is Breathtaking boys and girls!

#29 mrkucz

mrkucz
  • Regular Member
  • 1,133 posts
  • Location: Swanton, Ohio

Posted 31 March 2009 - 05:09 PM

I thought we made a thread for the comparing of render engines a month ago, what happen to them and why aren't anyone pointing the questioner to any of the reviews or threads.

Almost forgot, cinema renderer AR3 is quit as good as vray as i recall in the thread we made here about amonth ago as "Dataflow" should remember.

There where lots of render between FR, AR3, and vray.......
.....honestly you couldn't really tell the difference in vray or AR3.

Lesia.......how can you put down AR3 or FR if you don't even have or use ether of those.

Edited by mrkucz, 31 March 2009 - 05:14 PM.


#30 StCanas

StCanas

    This is not me...

  • Regular Member
  • 4,399 posts
  • Location: England

Posted 05 April 2009 - 04:58 PM

Did I put either of them down?

Cheers
Karl

#31 dataflow

dataflow

    Cafe Master Blaster

  • Regular Member
  • 11,884 posts
  • C4D Version:14 Studio
  • Location: sydney

Posted 05 April 2009 - 06:49 PM

no but you put 1 up :)
Dataflow Donations C4D beta tester

#32 Guest_rithsharc_*

Guest_rithsharc_*
  • Guests

Posted 05 April 2009 - 09:32 PM

sorry to go a little off topic here but i've noticed that the vray forum seems to be down. any ideas on what's the status on repairing it?




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users