finalrender is out.

[Dogzilla]

All jokes aside now, I say power to all render engine developers. As long as there's choice there's competition.

I've used a bucket full of different engines and all have their good and bad points in terms of my use and demands.

The days back on the Delphi forum were great due to the close and educational conversations which would run between VRay users and Brazil users, it rarely degraded to a mine's bigger than yours debate.

[GoncaloP]

Good point

[flipside]

I like the things I see in the screenshots of stage1, but I like it too much here to go back to fr.

[Psy]

i dunno, i'll toy around with it and get back to you on whether its good or not.

[marklazaro]

all I want to see is rendertimes, dont you agree?

[Da_elf]

yup

[RErender]

I'd settle to see some images from real users, A few days now and still nothing on thier board except some old beta images...

[marklazaro]

Some interesting reading material. Got the link from the FR forum

http://www.kicrea.com/articles/index_us.php3

I would highlight this conclusion made by author. Very honest I must say.

" Personnally, I think that some aeras (mtd, tbaker, 3dmblur) need enhancements, specially regarding speed, but Stage1 v1.0 lay of some serious foundations toward a high-end renderer, and Cebas have now to confirm with regular updates and a serious support."

So, after 1 year of development they only have a foundation.

Regards,
Mark

[Long John]

you mean 1 year of EXTENDED development!

[Da_elf]

atleast that guy seemed to give a more accurate account of the fR features than to just say everything was awsome. they compaired thei MTD system to vray displacement saying its no where near as good as vray yet. So its good to see someone write an article and not kiss up to the people they are writting about

[Long John]

it´s the typical thing with cebas.

you render the example scenes and think "wow thats fast".

but then you take and you notice that is not even near to production quality.

so crank up the settings and you have the same speed you get with vray for a good quality.

the hyper GI engine was praised as non+ultra for animations and now its only to give animations "a kind of GI" look. how often edwin tell in the video that we should not compare it to the real GI engine.

vrays MTD seem to be MUCH better then fR and faster.

but they have improved the workflow and interface a lot.

[stephan_MA]

but we all have to admire fr s1 users for the render element support of frs1..

but i´m sure vray will have this in one of the next builds..

hopefully!!


regards
s.wolf

[marklazaro]

you render the example scenes and think "wow thats fast".

but then you take and you notice that is not even near to production quality.

so crank up the settings and you have the same speed you get with vray for a good quality.

heres an example of this. The same guy who wrote the article posted an animation of Sponza. He says each frame was rendered in 1 minute on a Dual 2ghz machine using stage 1.

http://www.kicrea.com/architecture/a...onzaAtrium.wmv

you be the judge of the quality.

regards,
mark

[metroberlin]

looks okay. and 1 minute per frame ist quit fast. but for me it looks "washed out" without depth and contrast. don´t know if it´s the video or the rendering of stage 1. but hey, it´s not bad at all.

[marklazaro]

i agree, washed out is what it is, especially the surfaces lit by direct sunlight.

Theres some noise on the ceiling . .