Yep Definitely want to smack you - It’s similar to syntheyes written by russ anderson, it’s a far less slick website than pf track or boujou - the guy is a 3d tracking programmer, not a web developer. I’d rather he spent time making the program better than making a fancy site. Maxwell and the next limit crews site are great but they’re the worst company I’ve ever bought a program from, if you’ve an issue with perceived professionalism with vray from its website then I’d say you’re looking at the wrong things in choosing a renderer. The guys haven’t bothered updating the site because it doesn’t matter to them - people are buying vray for its sheer force as a rendering engine which is down to the guys concentrating their efforts where it counts.
V(lado)ray - I don’t think anyone knows how he programs the thing, answers all the questions etc - just to make it even more annoying he’s very healthy looking too - god knows how with the pace this thing develops at…
Renderers are hard. Vray isn’t even the hardest one so resign yourself to the fact that if you want to get good at something you’re going to have to put the effort in. The material itself is also a really simple one to use - there’s so little to it but you don’t really need much more else. I do agree though that the documentation is light in terms of getting results and hopefully there should be a few more artistically focussed learning materials coming out. As regards the evermotion stuff, vray has evolved a lot over the years so assets from earlier versions will probably have settings that are overboard for what vray needs now.
You’ve gotta put more effort into your complaining too so people will take you seriously
It’s by far the best part of the program - there’s a tonne of great information on here and some really helpful people - unfortunately there’s a lot of different ways to use vray so there might be some conflicting methods until you get a better sense of what workflow is best for yourself.
To be quite honest…i think people should be completely familiar with the products before any complaints rain out. I’ve seen some really talented people do things that i have considered impossible. I’m sure Vlado and the boys are amazed sometimes at what VRay can do…and they wrote the damn thing. I’m going to just say waht everyone else has said…practice it…know it…and your mindset will switch to what its capable of…rather then what you think it is incapable of…
Having said that…read this:
…and then read it again and again and again! Then go and buy Chris Nichols video tutorial on Speed vs. Quality and you will be just fine…oh yeah and practice and ask questions around here!
I’m slightly annoyed that noobs are complaining about Vray not being easy to learn. How much time are you spending learning, reading, practicing? I have been learning Vray little over a year, and I have found it very easy to pick up, much more so than Brazil and some others. Yeah having some presets would be nice, but its not difficult to read the help file, look on here, and then you can make your own materials, and save them as presets. Chaos are not here to write the software, and provide lazy noobs with a “pretty render” Btn.
You should not complain about the difficulty in learning the software if you are not prepared to commit the time to understand it. Its not brain surgery, its you being bone ideal. All the information to learn to an advanced level is found on here, and the DVD’s mentioned, and the help files.
Asking stupid questions like “Tell me how to make a good render with Vray, while I sit on my arse and ****?” is not going to win you any friends on here. People spend the work lives learning things about the software, they are not going to spill there knowledge to you for nothing if you have not made the effort first!
Anyway, back to my quite, none work related Sunday morning!
I wasnt trying to get you all worked up, I was merely trying to say that I’m frustrated that my stuff is not as good as yours. As far as putting the effort in, well you have no idea how much effort I’ve put in to VRay and how much I’ve fought with one of my clients for more than a year to stick with VRay and not use MR. My family already complaing I’m in front of the computer too much. I work out of the “garage” as well by the way, and since my stuff is not in my opinion as good as yours, yes I consider myself pretty good, for an amateur. But I feel I can not call myself a true professional if my stuff can not get to your high standards.
So I was complaining because I’m frustrated (please excuse me). I’m completely self-taught and been doing ArchViz on and of for 11 years, last 4 or 5 years full time and as I say completely self-taught. I never had a mentor untill now that I’m on this forum and speaking to you great guys. I’ve been struggling with VRay for 2 years now. Spending my time to try and get as good as you guys. I do appreciate any and all help and comments I can get, including the bad ones. Seems I’m a slow learning concerning VRay.
Again sorry to have offended any1 here, including Chaos.
Thanks Bobby
This stuff seems very usefull
Now if only I can find tutorials and proffesional help from these people that wrote it! I’m kidding! Thanks for the reply, thanks to all the clever people that write these great scritps
after been away a couple of days, I was just trying to catch up with the thread and stumbled across this one. kind of hard to be taken seriously, especially if the argument about vray being physically sound is based on these statements. I mean, are you having a laugh?
of course in the real world there’s diffraction, and bloom and flares and all that, but no renderer out there simulates those effects while rendering, this doesn’t mean it’s less physically accurate then others. renderers such as maxwell does simulate diffraction of light based on aperture and obstacle maps, but as a post effect applied to full float outputs. otherwise what you get are very bright solid objects which look like whitecards.
Yeah actually, I am. All of these renderers with their “physical accuracy” are a joke. My whole point was vray’s over-complexity of stuff by trying to follow physically accurate models. Give me a renderer that just makes features available in a straight-forward manner without requiring you to work within some kind of hindering bounds.
Simply put - you’re not going to get that currently in a Production (work) environment. No fast render can provide that to you. Settings would be WAY too high.
If you want that, you can try Fryrender - but then again you’ll be waiting a couple days before your rendering is produced at a resolution acceptable for some companies.
Or you can try and learn Vray like the rest of us had to - and get pretty good results once you understand how to operate it.
Instructions (make pretty render) are not easy I’ll admit, but you really have to take the time, read, and experiment.
Some of the algorithms and optimizations that V-Ray uses require materials and lights to behave in a physically accurate way (e.g. the light cache, path tracing, photon-mapped caustics, combined sampling of specular highlights and glossy reflections of lights etc). These will not work if the materials and lights do not follow physical laws.
Your concept of a perfect render engine seems to me a bit of a paradox. If you were actually given a button “make pretty rendering,” how hindering is that? You are given no control of the output so how can you even call the resultant artwork your own? Now on the other end of the spectrum, traditional hand-rendering is bounded only by your skill, which makes the medium infinitely less hindering but at the same time infinitely more complex.
I personally feel that VRay sits very well as a happy medium in this scenario. You don’t have to put a lot of time and effort in to get a good result, but there is a great amount of potential to be unlocked if you have the desire and patience.
Personally I think you’ve all fed the troll enough.
We all know how much time and effort we put into learning our tools, and obviously this is going to be a daunting task for newcomers, but material presets are only “good” for a short time (A bit like peeing your pants to keep warm), then you need to customize them all the time.
I’d actually like the possibility to add a “viewing only” sub set of features to the vray materials, so one could add non physically accurate things, that look great, but don’t mess up the calculations (like edge translucency\rim effects, and more specular controls). These would maybe pose a problem when seen in\through reflections\refractions, but in most cases they should be pretty safe.
Anyway, back to the topic. There is no point in trying to talk sense to the OP, as he clearly shows rather limited knowledge on these matters. He might come to his senses in a few years though
Having features available in a straight-forward manner is inherently hindering. As has been said, to just plug in and go would result in the question of who is actually producing the work, let alone allowing oneself a moment of self-congratulation for a job well done.
Oh yeah, long-time reader, first time poster and all that…
- It’s similar to syntheyes written by russ anderson, it’s a far less slick website than pf track or boujou - the guy is a 3d tracking programmer, not a web developer. I’d rather he spent time making the program better than making a fancy site. Maxwell and the next limit crews site are great but they’re the worst company I’ve ever bought a program from, if you’ve an issue with perceived professionalism with vray from its website then I’d say you’re looking at the wrong things in choosing a renderer. The guys haven’t bothered updating the site because it doesn’t matter to them - people are buying vray for its sheer force as a rendering engine which is down to the guys concentrating their efforts where it counts.
