Jump to content

Daveman

New Member
  • Content Count

    1
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

2 Poor

Profile Information

  • First Name
    Kamal
  • Last Name
    M.
  • C4D Ver
    R20.026 Studio
  • CPU/GPU
    R1700 / GTX 1080
  • Location
    Earth
  • Interests
    All things Motion Graphics!
  1. I hear a lot of buzz regarding Redshift, especially about how similar it is to Arnold and how much faster it is. So I decided to make a simple comparison between Redshift & Arnold. I'm currently using an overclocked Ryzen R7 1700 (1700 CB) and a single GTX 1070 OC for my main rig. I was thinking that If redshift is really that good, maybe I can sell most of my team render PC and just invest in more GPUs, so here we go. I tried to get the result as close as possible, both lighting and noise wise. For the exterior shot, the render speed is pretty close. I only use a basic 80% grey with no reflection material for both Redshift & Arnold. OK, so all is looking good for both Arnold & Redshift, the render speed is quite comparable except for the interior shot. But of course, this is all just regular shot without Motion Blur & DOF. So let's take a look at the next comparison. I have to crank the AA on Arnold to 16 just to get the same Depth of Field quality as Redshift! Incredible! Just like in the DOF shot, I have to crank Arnold's AA to 16 just to get a similar quality compared to Redshift. This is incredible, Redshift is quite a lot faster when Motion Blur / DOF is used. Oh and I removed some of the Redshift watermarks to avoid image attachment limit. Wow, I didn't expect Redshift to be this good. Although Arnold is still my preferred renderer, I can't wait to use Redshift sometime in the future and do all my DOF & Motion Blur right inside C4D instead of faking it in post.

×