Jump to content

Sign in to follow this  
ambitions

New render engine advice

Recommended Posts

Hi there,

 

I'm a bit in a dilemma, I'm currently working with C4D R20 (Physical render) on a new iMac Pro. It works very well but we notice that we can often use extra render power.

Well we are looking to buy a render slave that could help us with that. This would also mean that we would have to switch to a third party renderer so we can make optimal use of the CPU and in the future of the GPU.

It is important that we can also use the power of the iMac Pro to the full. I have spoken to someone who is specialized in making such render slaves and he advises me to buy a renderslave with the latest 32 core AMD video card in combination with V-Ray.  I'm not very familiar with the technical specifications myself but I feel V-Ray is a bit behind when compared to renderers like Redshift/Octane/Arnold. I also have the idea that the tutorial offer of this engine is much lower.

 

Can someone please help me and give me advice or share his experiences with working with the V-Ray engine.

I would like to hear it, thanks in advance!

Share this post


Link to post

I think he meant the 32core threadripper 2990WX CPU (not video card).

For around 3000 euro you can build a render node with a Cinebench score of 5000.

This is really great value.

Building a render node with Xeon processors with similar performance you would need a dual processor machine that costs more than twice that.

This way you dont have to switch to a third party renderer and can keep rendering in Physical Render.

With Team Render you can combine the CPU power of your iMac pro and the render node.

You will be able to render 3 to 4 times as fast as you do now.

Share this post


Link to post

Some people love vray, but I don't.  For me it's super hard to work with due to the time it takes to view what the final render will look like, then once you do get it looking good you can still get flickering in the GI when doing an animation if your settings are not just perfect.

 

Cycles can use CPU or GPU and is free if you are ok exporting to blender.  For GPU Redshift or Octane are good.  For CPU Corona for c4d is fast and free for now.  Cycles is the best flexibility if you use xparticles.  The GPU render engines should get a 6-8x speed boost once they code it to use the Tensor Cores in the new Nvidia RTX cards.  You would also need an RTX card to get the boost.  Wheather you decide Cycles, Redshift, Octane, or Corona they are all great choices.  I'm sure you won't be sorry with any of them.

 

With some recent tests it seems Octane has a better transparency depth possible over Redshift.  Redshift does have a very impressive way of calculating caustics.

 

In Cycles make sure if you are getting fireflies to try turning off reflective and/or refractive caustics, and if that does not work Clamping Direct and Indirect to 10 each.  This means pixels will be clamped to 10x brightness which is still a lot.

Share this post


Link to post

Corona and Arnold work really well on a Mac and they are fast and CPU based. Vray has issues, can give beautiful renders. Most GPU renderers use Cuda technology to work and work best with Nvidia. Some of them claim they also work with AMD such as Cycles4d (no need to export and it is really a very good renderer supporting CPU as well), but I find using the AMD card for GPU rendering is very buggy! And only works in Prorender (I think Indigo also works with OpenCL but I don't know if anyone uses it).

 

Corona is great for photorealism, but surreal is good as well. Arnold is not really physically correct but absolutely fantastic.....Both are easy to learn.

Share this post


Link to post

if you're mac based +1 for Corona. 

What sort of work do you do though? That may define what suits best (some arch-vis guys avoid GPU renderers because of memory limitations for example)

Share this post


Link to post
  • Topic Author
  • Thanks all for the responses. It's very informative and I will have to figure out which is the best solution for us. If I have to describe my work, it is actually very different and all-round. Sometimes mograph, sometimes logo animations, product visualizations, character animations or even interior design. This can be both in animation sequences and still image visuals.

    Share this post


    Link to post

    Another vote for Corona. The only negative is that it hasn't shipped yet, BUT you can use the beta right now for FREE until it ships. They say January is the target for version 1.0. It's fantastic and amazingly fast. All CPU based, so that Threadripper works great with it (see Shawn Astrom demo it here). One nice thing about getting a strong CPU system is it speeds up everything you do, not just when you need to render a 3D image. Something to think about.

     

    One thing to note about GPU render engines is that they can't render all effects, whereas Corona is a 100% physically accurate engine. I own Cycles 4D, but it's just too slow. I'm on a Mac too and I tried Cycles, Arnold, Maxwell and Corona. I bought Cycles because it was cheap, but have left it behind for Corona. I've never used an engine that gave me such nice results, with such little effort. It renders amazingly fast, even on my old, slow Mac Pro Trashcan™.

     

    The people that make V-RAY bought Corona. Not sure why or what that means in the long run, but it's interesting.

     

    The other thing I like about Corona is you get more render nodes which is great if you have a small farm to render with.

    Share this post


    Link to post

    Another +1 for Corona.  I use it on Windows and Macs.  Large machines and small machines.  Think it's the best and easiest to work with and learn.

    Share this post


    Link to post
  • Topic Author
  • Thank you all, my first experiences with Corona are very positive! To be continued! ;-)

    Share this post


    Link to post

    Join the conversation

    You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

    Guest
    Reply to this topic...

    ×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

      Only 75 emoji are allowed.

    ×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

    ×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

    ×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

    Sign in to follow this  

    • Recently Browsing   0 members

      No registered users viewing this page.

    ×
    ×
    • Create New...