vray and corona

[Morbid Angel]

This has been discussed many times before. Vray like any other renderer is just a tool, its up to the artist to utilize it. Its all about how to get there easier/faster. In terms of flexibility I think vray is one of the most mature render engines out there. While corona can do interior/exterior renderings, there will be a lot of short comings, when it comes to things like particles, fx, pass ids etc. The only real way to get all of those features implemented is to have the renderer being worked on for many years getting user's feedback and building tools based of of that.

Imho it terms of light transport (the look of gi/lighting) vray does pretty well and other engines do compare (like Vlado already posted). I think the beauty of images actually comes more from textures and shaders, then the lighting (light is also important of course).

if you look at any of your favorite images you will see the amount of texture detail is enormous, which most generic renders lack because it also takes a lot of time to create/set them up. And a final touch of course in post, adding that nice effect of volumetrics, depth, noise, abberation etc all the natural effects from camera ultimately make the image look great.

[glorybound]

My two cents.

V-Ray 3X has been, for me, a game changer. Now, I don't need to mess with V-Ray seetings, at all. The only thing I change is the dynamic memory (would be nice if that was automated like in Solid Rocks), and I change progressive to adaptive. I was contemplating going Corona, however, V-Ray 3X convinced me to stay.

[vlado]

Here are some renders with materials; these are a bit more ambiguous.

First are two renders with min ray intensity disabled in V-Ray and min sample intensity set to 0.0 in Corona; apart from the different reflections and slight color tone differences, the two renders are quite close. These should be considered "correct" images as MRI/MSI are biased controls and enabling them can change the result quite a bit, as you will see below.


Next are two renders with min ray intensity set to 20.0 in V-Ray and min sample intensity set to 20.0 in Corona; these are the default values for both engines. Note that in V-Ray, enabling MRI kills the fireflies but keeps the image mostly the same. On the other hand, in Corona, MSI does kill the fireflies, but all alters the image brightness and color tone quite a bit as well.


All images rendered for the same amount of time.

Best regards,
Vlado

[Morbid Angel]

the floor reflection looks a bit strange on the left image, is that corona?

[vlado]

the floor reflection looks a bit strange on the left image, is that corona?

The reflection models are different; the V-Ray ones are Blinn, I'm not sure what they ended up in Corona, probably GGX.

Left images are V-Ray, right are Corona.

Best regards,
Vlado

[Morbid Angel]

yeah aside from the floor reflection it looks very similar.

[glorybound]

How about times? I found V-Ray to be much faster.

[vlado]

How about times? I found V-Ray to be much faster.

Well, they all rendered with progressive rendering for the same amount of time. But you can see that the V-Ray ones came out cleaner.

Best regards,
Vlado

[mitviz]

yes the vray ones are coming out faster with progressive and very similar to the corona images as well, what version of corona are you using?

[vlado]

yes the vray ones are coming out faster with progressive and very similar to the corona images as well, what version of corona are you using?

The latest demo on their website; 1.3 I think?

Best regards,
Vlado

[mitviz]

ahh, i was using the 1.4 version with the new adaptive settings and the integrated denoising levels, well i am turning denoising off

[vlado]

When they release 1.4, I will have to redo the tests, I guess. Btw I turned off adaptive sampling in V-Ray too for this test. In any case, you asked about lighting distribution and GI, so adaptive sampling won't really change that (it should only affect noise levels).

Best regards,
Vlado

[mitviz]

kool, the 1.4 versions have been out for some time now, but the latest build gave me some FTH errors and all my max files ended up corrupt so had to switch to vray for the interiors and redo the work so i guess they have issues over there now so its why its good to have both

[padre.ayuso]

I don't see a point of having both unless you have to interact with others that use Corona or VRay? I mean, if they both do the same? Not sure, what are the advantages of having both other than being able to exchange files? By the way, now that I have your attention, does anyone have or know a script that would change Corona files into VRay? Just like the guy from Corona that came up with the material/lights converter from VRay into Corona? I happen to every now and again get files in Corona and have to change their materials and lighting.

[vlado]

The regular V-Ray scene converter has some functionality to convert Corona stuff to V-Ray, but it may not work for the latest versions of Corona; we will need to update it.

Best regards,
Vlado