Tweet
My first impressions of lavina:
extremely impressive! the environment hdri load times are blazing fast and makes is so easy to light a scene. The .vrscene loadtimes (in my case up to 600mb) is also surprisingly fast. The framerate/renderquality is unbelievably good (rtx 2070 in my case). It is extremely liberating to do detailed lighting in realtime and one just know that hq shots will look just like the viewport only less noisy. It saves so much time being able to try out lighting directions and areas of shadows vs light in such good quality as Lavina.
I do dr with gpus on network computers. Its actually faster to export a large vrscene to my local drive, open lavina and load the vrscene than it is to launch a render with vray gpu in dr mode.
my wish list.
- support for uvchannels other than channel 1
- some kind of warning that the gpu is running out of ram. I can run lavina in real-time no problem but big scenes often crash when i attempt to do hq snapshots.
- better integration with max. In my opinion its very obvious to compare Lavina to Enscape. I know that Lavina is pure raytracing but Enscape (I believe it's underlying tech is unreal engine) has some really impressive rtx features now.
Its just sooo easy to use Enscape while developing an architectural design and im seeing companies using enscaperenders/photoshop visualizations in architectural competitions now. Imo you really should consider making the workflow just as easy between - say max and Lavina - as between sketchup and Enscape. Lavina seems strikingly close to being a better alternative to enscape.
- tilt/shift camera options.
- ability to set focal length on fullframe as an alternative to field of view.
- Ability to create lights inside Lavina (perhaps a better option would be live-updates when working in max)
extremely impressive! the environment hdri load times are blazing fast and makes is so easy to light a scene. The .vrscene loadtimes (in my case up to 600mb) is also surprisingly fast. The framerate/renderquality is unbelievably good (rtx 2070 in my case). It is extremely liberating to do detailed lighting in realtime and one just know that hq shots will look just like the viewport only less noisy. It saves so much time being able to try out lighting directions and areas of shadows vs light in such good quality as Lavina.
I do dr with gpus on network computers. Its actually faster to export a large vrscene to my local drive, open lavina and load the vrscene than it is to launch a render with vray gpu in dr mode.
my wish list.
- support for uvchannels other than channel 1
- some kind of warning that the gpu is running out of ram. I can run lavina in real-time no problem but big scenes often crash when i attempt to do hq snapshots.
- better integration with max. In my opinion its very obvious to compare Lavina to Enscape. I know that Lavina is pure raytracing but Enscape (I believe it's underlying tech is unreal engine) has some really impressive rtx features now.
Its just sooo easy to use Enscape while developing an architectural design and im seeing companies using enscaperenders/photoshop visualizations in architectural competitions now. Imo you really should consider making the workflow just as easy between - say max and Lavina - as between sketchup and Enscape. Lavina seems strikingly close to being a better alternative to enscape.
- tilt/shift camera options.
- ability to set focal length on fullframe as an alternative to field of view.
- Ability to create lights inside Lavina (perhaps a better option would be live-updates when working in max)
).
Comment