Brute Force as Primary

[voltron7]

I have a question regarding the Brute Force being used for primary bounces.
I have usually used IR map as primary so was used to being able to reduce the IR map as the image size grew. Is there a similar way to cut time down
to increase image size for the Brute force approach?
( oh yeah, I'm using Brute force/Light Cache)
I have the scene set up now so it looks good at about 900x___ pixels, but it takes around 30 minutes! So, should I forget about this if this rendering has to be 3000 x 2400 pixels? Any suggestions are really appreciated, just wanted to check before I do anything too stupid!

Thanks, JR

[Morbid Angel]

brute force means slow. No way around it. Thats why there are irradience map and lightcache
Sorry I dont think you can improve rendertime from brute, by tweaks, not by a lot anyway.

[voltron7]

Thanks Morbid,

As I've been testing, your comments seem true!
Now it's saying the scene will take about 12 hours!
Sometimes this may be okay, but others, I guess I'll stick to IR Map...

Thanks

[arobbert]

Sounds like maxwell!

[Morbid Angel]

Sounds like maxwell!

brute force is a form of path tracing. So yes it will take very long time.

[voltron7]

Yes, like MW, but at least it isn't as noisy, lol

[paulison]

12 hours seems resonably fast to me for brute force. Ive had scenes of around that resolution that have taken 24 hours + and that was using IR+LC with barely acceptable antialiasing so i guess it is really scene dependant. would be nice to do some comparisons in relative speed difference from a small scene, medium scene, large scene, large scene with lots of glossies etc etc

[pixelstudio]

what would be the benifits of using brute force or irmap ? can a higher quality be obtained using brute force? i guess it's more exact when use have enough samples and such ?

[Clifton Santiago]

Depends on how you define higher quality. The lighting solution will be more correct than IR or LC, but might be noisier...