Fstorm render

[Donfarese]

We have a lot of users using RT GPU for production, both stills and animations and they are very happy with the results, finding RT GPU the best solution or their case. But of course users should use whatever suits them best for the particular task.
Otherwise, the team got even bigger, we are doing the opposite of on hold .

Best,
Blago.

Good to hear Blago, we just couldn't get it to do what we needed for animation with large amounts of geometry
.

But on the other hand, it's easy to see how much noisier it is in the darker areas
.

Best regards,
Vlado

Yeah like I said it's weird, vray is cleaner in darker areas, but also it's cleaner in darker areas than it is in lighter areas itself. But redshift is quite a lot cleaner in lighter areas

Despite the very obvious GI bounce AND secondaries intensities clamping.
Is this RS 2.0?

I don't know about that, I had the bounces set the same I'm pretty sure. Not in front of the computer right now. I also put it up for no clamping. But it is 2.0

Don't get me wrong I loved RT but in the past two projects it couldn't handle the jobs so we switched. I'm not one of these people that switch and go back and trash there previous render, I'm just giving my experience with both. On a side note we are still using vray adv for some projects.

[^Lele^]

But on the other hand, it's easy to see how much noisier it is in the darker areas

Despite the very obvious GI bounce AND secondaries intensities clamping.
Is this RS 2.0?

[vlado]

After uploading the renders I noticed the Forum downgrades and scales down the images, so it's hard to see how much cleaner the Redshift render is in the lighter areas.

But on the other hand, it's easy to see how much noisier it is in the darker areas

Best regards,
Vlado

[savage309]

We have a lot of users using RT GPU for production, both stills and animations and they are very happy with the results, finding RT GPU the best solution or their case. But of course users should use whatever suits them best for the particular task.
Otherwise, the team got even bigger, we are doing the opposite of on hold .

Best,
Blago.

[Donfarese]

Very cool test, thanks for sharing.
Bump maps look different in the different render engines. We have the problem that we have two engines under one name and when comparing them there are differences. I agree we have to improve on that and we are actually working on it.
The grass often seems greener in the other garden, but I think that for the same time RT is cleaner and better (like with more GI bounces) in general. But I am also (very) biased .
Being involved in the dev process I can assure you that we are working hard to make things better. Having your feedback helps a lot to keep on right the right path. Feel free to send such here or directly to blagovest.taskov@chaosgroup.com

Thanks,
Best,
Blago.

Thanks Blago, it's good to hear you guys are working on RT. Seemed for a while like development was put on hold or something. I just used Redshift for a complete rendering test on a project, next we will be using it on an animation. Would be nice to have Vray RT as an option, but right now in production for us that is proving not so.

Also just as a note, Please check bump mapping again, I'm not talking about looking different, I'm talking about just not looking or acting right at all. I started a few threads about it in the past.

[savage309]

Very cool test, thanks for sharing.
Bump maps look different in the different render engines. We have the problem that we have two engines under one name and when comparing them there are differences. I agree we have to improve on that and we are actually working on it.
The grass often seems greener in the other garden, but I think that for the same time RT is cleaner and better (like with more GI bounces) in general. But I am also (very) biased .
Being involved in the dev process I can assure you that we are working hard to make things better. Having your feedback helps a lot to keep on right the right path. Feel free to send such here or directly to blagovest.taskov@chaosgroup.com

Thanks,
Best,
Blago.

[Donfarese]

Could you please add a quick test with Vray RT as well?

Here is a test between Vray RT and Redshift. Couple of things to know first, one Redshift only uses 93% gpu on main display card (Sometimes drops lower) so you can use your computer still, Vray was at 100%. Also the quality of the Redshift render looks better to me, although weirdly enough the vray render is cleaner in the dark areas even compared to itself in the light areas. Hard to set each exactly the same for rendering. I love Vray RT but it really doesn't compare to Redshift, Vray RT lacks a lot of features and doesn't render a lot of things correctly like normal maps and bump maps, and I find it a little clumsy at times, taking long to load a render or crapping out. Vray RT really needs to catch up. Don't get me wrong Redshift has some things to work on also, but at the rate of it's development it won't be long.

After uploading the renders I noticed the Forum downgrades and scales down the images, so it's hard to see how much cleaner the Redshift render is in the lighter areas.

[joconnell]

Just a thought. Maybe, big ticket productions get a lot of things free. I could imagine that software and hardware are giving in exchange for a mention. You know, the rich pay far less for things than the poor. This could be why they used FStorm.

Hmm, a lot of the big studios I know make decisions about software because they don't get anything for free. They might get preferential support because they're buying 100 licenses of something or 1000 render nodes but the cost of the software is a huge factor. One place I know looked at vray versus a gpu based solution to take into account interactive lookdev stuff but then their average shot production cost including render license cost and render node cost, production features of the renderer and how quickly they can get a frame out with the standards that they need. There's loads of different factors!

[glorybound]

Yes, whichever. I couldn't image why a big budget would not go with V-Ray. All these others seem good, but none seem to have anything over V-Ray, other than price.

[jstrob]

Just a thought. Maybe, big ticket productions get a lot of things free. I could imagine that software and hardware are giving in exchange for a mention. You know, the rich pay far less for things than the poor. This could be why they used FStorm.

you meant "Arnold"

[glorybound]

Just a thought. Maybe, big ticket productions get a lot of things free. I could imagine that software and hardware are giving in exchange for a mention. You know, the rich pay far less for things than the poor. This could be why they used FStorm.

[jstrob]

Just as a thing, I just finished working on the new star trek film and it was interesting to see how a film that big is put together. On an asset similar to the bits you're seeing in gravity, you'd have a team of maybe 15 or twenty people working on the space station model for about a year. Likewise the characters would have had a massive team working on them for quite a while using very, very heavily layered shaders which are almost impractical for a small studio to render. The typical render node in one of those studios might have 64 or 128 gigs of ram and they're happy to let a single 2k frame run for 12+ hours. A betrand benoit scene or even something like grant warwicks current still life has been worked on for weeks and weeks - it doesn't matter that much about the renderer you use, it's the talent of the artist and the amount of time they've got to refine things!

Yes you're absolutely right that a movie like Gravity is not good example to compare renderer. They would have use V-Ray and probably could have get the same result with much less load on the render farm (saving a few millions in hardware).

and very interesting insight about your work on Star Trek. i worked a bit on some movies too and I didn't really to spend a year on a small detail that no one will ever notice and that's why I prefer working in advertising for TV, youtube or or short movies.

[Nicinus]

Just as a thing, I just finished working on the new star trek film and it was interesting to see how a film that big is put together. On an asset similar to the bits you're seeing in gravity, you'd have a team of maybe 15 or twenty people working on the space station model for about a year. Likewise the characters would have had a massive team working on them for quite a while using very, very heavily layered shaders which are almost impractical for a small studio to render. The typical render node in one of those studios might have 64 or 128 gigs of ram and they're happy to let a single 2k frame run for 12+ hours. A betrand benoit scene or even something like grant warwicks current still life has been worked on for weeks and weeks - it doesn't matter that much about the renderer you use, it's the talent of the artist and the amount of time they've got to refine things!

That's just the thing, most of us (I would assume) don't have that kind of resources and need as effective tools as possible.

[joconnell]

I was not not impressed enough by Arnold (maybe except the movie "Gravity")

Just as a thing, I just finished working on the new star trek film and it was interesting to see how a film that big is put together. On an asset similar to the bits you're seeing in gravity, you'd have a team of maybe 15 or twenty people working on the space station model for about a year. Likewise the characters would have had a massive team working on them for quite a while using very, very heavily layered shaders which are almost impractical for a small studio to render. The typical render node in one of those studios might have 64 or 128 gigs of ram and they're happy to let a single 2k frame run for 12+ hours. A betrand benoit scene or even something like grant warwicks current still life has been worked on for weeks and weeks - it doesn't matter that much about the renderer you use, it's the talent of the artist and the amount of time they've got to refine things!

[Nicinus]

That's what I thought Also, Redshift is much better if you ask me.

Could you please add a quick test with Vray RT as well?