Jump to content


Unbiased Renderer

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

#21 eldooder

  • Regular Member
  • 637 posts
  • Location: London, UK

Posted 24 July 2009 - 01:22 PM

Not sure i'm right, but I think that may be instaneous near enough on a still image. You're not rendering as such just playing with lights via the interactive renderer..Could be wrong though..

Edited by eldooder, 24 July 2009 - 01:23 PM.

#22 sneather

  • Regular Member
  • 1,025 posts
  • C4D Version:13 Studio
  • Location: USA

Posted 24 July 2009 - 01:38 PM

As much as the post lighting control sounds interesting, I can't imagine how it would work with something like AfterEffects, where I do all my final compositing. Speed is ESSENTIAL for me. It sounds like Maxwell isn't known for that? How about VRay? Fry?

#23 paulselhi


    "He should be hung" I think he is Your Majesty

  • Regular Member
  • 4,688 posts
  • C4D Version:15 Studio
  • Location: London England

Posted 24 July 2009 - 01:47 PM

Hsrdelic..if your clients were impressed with MR renders it may be worthwhile showing them the archinterior renders for vray by evermotion. You can d/l the pdf's with images

Vray will render at a fraction of the time that MR takes, is well suited to animations, especially flythroughs.

As far as setup time goes once you get the feel for interior renders it is quite fast. If you model to real worls scales then you can often reuse setups from one scene to another with minor tweaking.

As you build a mat library, or d/l/buy one you will find that mat setup is also going to be fast

Edited by paulselhi, 24 July 2009 - 01:51 PM.

#24 StCanas


    This is not me...

  • Supporter's Club Silver
  • 4,601 posts
  • Location: England

Posted 24 July 2009 - 02:20 PM

Or try this lot for Vray stuff


Love the New York apartment interior where you can see the Chrysler building out of the window. It's in the gallery section.


Edited by Lesia44, 24 July 2009 - 02:26 PM.

#25 colibert

  • Regular Member
  • 2,836 posts
  • C4D Version:12 (or older)
  • Location: london

Posted 24 July 2009 - 02:34 PM

Love their stuff, could that at that site all day long!
My Website - If you spell Chuck Norris in Scrabble, you win. Forever.

#26 sneather

  • Regular Member
  • 1,025 posts
  • C4D Version:13 Studio
  • Location: USA

Posted 24 July 2009 - 02:44 PM

I don't have much call to do arch-vis work. Primarily, product, and broadcast branding.

I assume Vray & the others are equally adept at that sort of thing? I do seem to notice a heavy emphasis on architectural work.

#27 HSrdelic


    MAXON computer GmbH

  • Admin
  • 9,055 posts
  • C4D Version:16 Studio
  • Location: Croatia

Posted 24 July 2009 - 02:59 PM

Sure i tought about vray but there is also ar3 that i already have and it produces great images but it took me(and it still does)some time to disect ar3 and Michael Vance tutorial really explained alot.

Check it out here http://mvpny.com/R11GITutorial/R11GITutorial_Part1.html

One reason that i want to go for an unbiased is that you dont have to "master" all the settings in classic biased renderer - it is simply a simulation not a complex setup and tweaking.And i can tell you that lately only thing that satisfied me were qmc renders with high sample count so i already have a speed problem.

In unbiased render,i presume(?)you simply create materials and lights wich have their physical properties and engine calculates it precise&accurate - you dont have to tweak anything,increase samples,photon counts,diffuse depths and so on,the down side are render times but I can always rent Ghz's online for some animations,and upcoming 6-core nehalem will be enough for static images,right?


I was also "cooking" him for Realflow but when i mentioned price they elegantly decided to ditch few scenes that could benefit from it :).

#28 Fastbee

  • Regular Member
  • 1,658 posts
  • C4D Version:16 Studio
  • Location: USA

Posted 24 July 2009 - 03:17 PM

I was playing with indigo and Fryrender. Have not tried maxwell, but I will talk about my limited experience with the other two.

Fryrender takes forever to render anything in comparison to indigo and can be confusing with all the settings it has. The material system seems very extensive as there are a ton of settings for each material. Fryrender RC 5 does look impressive from the video, but who know how it will actually pan out.

Indigo has the plugin called Cindigo. This is very well done as it can take materials already made and does an OK job of converting them. I am still trying to figure out exactly how the material system works, but feel I am closer then I was after spending the same amount of time with Fry. Indigo is also free and seems to have a very friendly message board. Even though it seems faster then Fry it still can take a long time for glass and see through stuff. See their challenges to get an idea of how long the renders take.

If money is no object I would go with Maxwell or VRay. Maxwells 2.x version looks amazing and VRay seems fast for the quality it has. Although I have not seen a big difference myself between AR3 and VRay renders. I am a total noob with VRay and a relative noob with AR3, so maybe when I learn how to use VRay better the quality difference between VRay and AR3 will be huge.

1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users