Tweet
MrPoofe wrote:
I recently rendered a scene (several hundred thousand unique polys) competing against a Vray user, rendering the same scene, who boasted Vray's speed and quality over Brazil. Not only did my Brazil render look far better as stated by third parties, I rendered it in 4.5 minutes, compared to his 11.5 in Vray. And yes, Zeboxx is right--photons will speed things up.
I recently rendered a scene (several hundred thousand unique polys) competing against a Vray user, rendering the same scene, who boasted Vray's speed and quality over Brazil. Not only did my Brazil render look far better as stated by third parties, I rendered it in 4.5 minutes, compared to his 11.5 in Vray. And yes, Zeboxx is right--photons will speed things up.
I wrote:
and there was a competition between brazil, fr, and vray month ago on the finalrender forum.
brazil was the slowest (3 times slower then vray) and doesn´t look better.
so what does it proof?
if you have enough time to tweak the photon map brazil can be fast.
but when you keep in mind the average time you need to find the right photon mapping parameters for brazil you will be much faster with vray and it´s easy to setup irradiance mapping.
i really like the irradiance mapping from vray because its so easy to setup and it looks good out of the box.
photon maps on the other side are much more difficult to setup (at least for me ).
but i challenge you!
try to render this scene with brazil and please post your settings and system specs.
i had no success coming close to vrays rendertime for the same quality.
and this is a simple GI example.
http://www.vrayrender.com/download/scenes/cloister.zip
and there was a competition between brazil, fr, and vray month ago on the finalrender forum.
brazil was the slowest (3 times slower then vray) and doesn´t look better.
so what does it proof?
if you have enough time to tweak the photon map brazil can be fast.
but when you keep in mind the average time you need to find the right photon mapping parameters for brazil you will be much faster with vray and it´s easy to setup irradiance mapping.
i really like the irradiance mapping from vray because its so easy to setup and it looks good out of the box.
photon maps on the other side are much more difficult to setup (at least for me ).
but i challenge you!
try to render this scene with brazil and please post your settings and system specs.
i had no success coming close to vrays rendertime for the same quality.
and this is a simple GI example.
http://www.vrayrender.com/download/scenes/cloister.zip
as result on my posting i got these replys:
ihavenofish wrote:
oh look, its a scene with 1 light and no textures. just like i make everyday in feature film production. i'm so excited.
/me shakes head
oh look, its a scene with 1 light and no textures. just like i make everyday in feature film production. i'm so excited.
/me shakes head
zeboxx wrote:
I'm currently out from the hotel and will be off to dinner soon, but for what it's worth.. yes, it took about a minute, and rendered in 8 minutes on my laptop (yes, that's single CPU).
To be honest, I'm not sure what bores me more..
These challenges, or those who insist that they are valid quantifiers for a renderer's capabilities.
These 'challenges' show little to nothing about the renderer at worst, and a bit about the artist's abilities at best.
You say that you are having problems with photons, and can get things setup in V-Ray, and then challenge others to do this in Brazil r/s. That doesn't sound to me like any request for assistance to learn. If anything, it is a troll post. Your last reply, specifically, is entirely a troll post*
Normally I follow the advise "Don't feed the trolls", but at some point I think I should make it clear to users that this is the SplutterFish forum for SplutterFish products (and legacy unofficial support for blurbeta plugins) and their users.
When a user asks for comments and critiques on an image, it is expected that the help is in the form of advise other than "Get a different renderer!". If a user appears to be posting such replies consistently, without particularly contributing, eventually one of the admins may restrict their access. This is not censorship, we're all for open discussion about renderers. But inflammatory and troll posts are not part of this open discussion.
I'd type more on this, but we're off to dinner.
I'll finish with saying that this particular 'challenge' is pointless in showing users what a renderer is really capable of, workflow, etc.
I do know that if anybody is serious about this challenge, one of the first things they'll notice are :
1. The files uses all specific materials, even though a Standard material should suffice. I'll assume this is from an old version of the renderer, but if not.. ouch.
2. The scene itself, though nice, has several meshing errors. It's difficult to work with in any renderer.
3. There's an irradiance map error in the top-left.
4. There's anti-aliasing issues on the bars beside the door on the right.
I'll let other users have their say on the above points - All I will say is that each renderer has its perks, and I'll leave it up to the end-user to decide which renderer they would like to use on their own experiences.
* See : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_troll
Your post qualifies for points 2, 5, 7 and 9
I'm currently out from the hotel and will be off to dinner soon, but for what it's worth.. yes, it took about a minute, and rendered in 8 minutes on my laptop (yes, that's single CPU).
To be honest, I'm not sure what bores me more..
These challenges, or those who insist that they are valid quantifiers for a renderer's capabilities.
These 'challenges' show little to nothing about the renderer at worst, and a bit about the artist's abilities at best.
You say that you are having problems with photons, and can get things setup in V-Ray, and then challenge others to do this in Brazil r/s. That doesn't sound to me like any request for assistance to learn. If anything, it is a troll post. Your last reply, specifically, is entirely a troll post*
Normally I follow the advise "Don't feed the trolls", but at some point I think I should make it clear to users that this is the SplutterFish forum for SplutterFish products (and legacy unofficial support for blurbeta plugins) and their users.
When a user asks for comments and critiques on an image, it is expected that the help is in the form of advise other than "Get a different renderer!". If a user appears to be posting such replies consistently, without particularly contributing, eventually one of the admins may restrict their access. This is not censorship, we're all for open discussion about renderers. But inflammatory and troll posts are not part of this open discussion.
I'd type more on this, but we're off to dinner.
I'll finish with saying that this particular 'challenge' is pointless in showing users what a renderer is really capable of, workflow, etc.
I do know that if anybody is serious about this challenge, one of the first things they'll notice are :
1. The files uses all specific materials, even though a Standard material should suffice. I'll assume this is from an old version of the renderer, but if not.. ouch.
2. The scene itself, though nice, has several meshing errors. It's difficult to work with in any renderer.
3. There's an irradiance map error in the top-left.
4. There's anti-aliasing issues on the bars beside the door on the right.
I'll let other users have their say on the above points - All I will say is that each renderer has its perks, and I'll leave it up to the end-user to decide which renderer they would like to use on their own experiences.
* See : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_troll
Your post qualifies for points 2, 5, 7 and 9
why is it that vray user seem to be more interested to get the best out of the renderer and try achieve good results and don´t fear the competition?
if i had asked this question here im sure someone would have posted scene settings that show me how to get a better rendertime.
instead of calling me a troll.
Comment