I will begin a new Work for a client…It’s about a 5 mn movie for a real estate project.
i never use it before so do you think it’s could be dansgerous to use Vray 1.45.7 Adv for this work ?
Thank you
hi
well the lates version is 1.45.8 !! .. use that if you are going to the beta for the first time.. im using it in production now for some time with little problem…
Natty, I think you ment to say 1.46.08. But I agree, it is a very stable version so far.
Tony
the 1.45.70 is not too stable to a work with a near deadline!
I tried with it and with direct computation I got irrad map calculation (i don’t know with wich parameters I didn’t give them to vray) and when the GI solution was ended during render I got an error message (unhandled exception error with the render stop)
That’s my experience with the 1.45.70 on an exterior view with and hard scene (high polycount)
Maybe you should get to know it a bit before you jump into a new job.
I would also add that you can as long as you are aware of the potential risks and issues and can cope/work around these.
Also depends if you are the type that blames every crash on the software or if you can accept some of the blame yourself and go back and fix it 
Natty, I think you ment to say 1.46.08… yes i think your right …DOH
there are some reason not to use it:
1.) Refraction and transparents are much slower (up to 4 times longer rendering). Meaning you will get troubles using RPC or Speedtree etc..
2.) You can’t take old settings. Meaning, you have no chance to start in 1.09 and then go to next version (well it works, but it produce troubles with longer rendertimes)
3.) No features: Beside some GI tricks and the Channels there is no real killer feature in the new Version.
4.) Buggy… well don’t have to explain this.
regards,
robert
there are some reason not to use it:
1.) Refraction and transparents are much slower (up to 4 times longer rendering). Meaning you will get troubles using RPC or Speedtree etc..
2.) You can’t take old settings. Meaning, you have no chance to start in 1.09 and then go to next version (well it works, but it produce troubles with longer rendertimes)
3.) No features: Beside some GI tricks and the Channels there is no real killer feature in the new Version.
4.) Buggy… well don’t have to explain this.regards,
robert
I wont argue about points 1,2, and 4, but about 3 your wrong. Theres are a ton of features in the beta that aren’t in 1.09 version. From someone who uses the beta at home and 1.09 at work, I can tell ya that just the fake speculars and lightmapping make the beta worth a try. Thats just a tip of the iceberg.
I’ll take1, 2 and 4
1. In some situation this may be true, but have you tried glossy refraction and SSS man they are fast now! if you have to many trees do what the big boys do and split them out of the scene and render a new layer…
2. Well this is a fact of life, 1.5 will not fix this you are going to need to update your technique sometime, glad I spend my time learning how the new stuff works not crying about it.
4. Been using 1.45 and now 1.46 in production all along, really haven’t had any issues that could not be handled. Again that learning not crying thing…
beta is beta for a reason.
use at your own risk…i personally would never use beta software for something a critical as rendering, so its v1.09 for me til they offically release the new build. 
at the end of the day its up to you, but its not finished software and dont you think with everyone clamering for the new build vlado would release it if there still wasnt some issues that they are working out?
I suggest that you don’t use it for a new project at first. Make a test project for the new build, preferably an old scene and try all new features try to get a similar result in a similar time. Be aware that materials should be build from ground up to avoid any conversion issues. the beta is quite different (especially with settings) from 1.09. When you have no pressure, it is nice to find all the new things (lightmap, new material options, improved displacement, etc)
Hm, the fake speculars is nothing else then the standart specular. And well, we have standart materials for that. And, the much better, shellac material, that is do to Vray slowness in transparenz a little to slow.
The Lightmap, well nice, but I can live with irradiancemap and an allmost bug free (Ok, joking) Vray 1. 09.
If you have a relaxing job then it’s different of course…
robert
Well
as allways in life, there´s trouth in all arguments.
it realy depends on you.
myself i would never go back to 1.09. the real killerfeature is the lightmap in my oppinion. i rendered l-map previews of a 7 million polygon interior with about 300 lights in about 2 min in pal.
it isnt so much the speed that counts. its moreover the workflow improvements that count i think.
Also fake glossys are nice and robert, as i think much more relistic as the standart fake highlights of max standartmaterials are. nevertheless i would love to see more control on highlights (think of the zaunershader in finalrender)
very big scenes can be rendered with vrayproxys with dozens of millions of polygons. another killerfeature. and of course the passes in the vray framebuffer.
but you are also right, i never would start go in with a critical job. better use a smal funny testproject and work out slowly the new features.
Tom
Theres are a ton of features in the beta that aren’t in 1.09 version. From someone who uses the beta at home and 1.09 at work, I can tell ya that just the fake speculars and lightmapping make the beta worth a try. Thats just a tip of the iceberg.
Hm, the fake speculars is nothing else then the standart specular. And well, we have standart materials for that. And, the much better, shellac material, that is do to Vray slowness in transparenz a little to slow.
The Lightmap, well nice, but I can live with irradiancemap and an allmost bug free (Ok, joking) Vray 1. 09.
If you have a relaxing job then it’s different of course…
robert
the difference with the speculars obviously is that now you DONT have to use standard mats all the time, which can cause a speed hit, as opposed to using vray materials.
Long ago I HAD to switch to the the Vray beta version because I could not render a very large scene in 1.09.
In 1.09 Vray has no dynamic memory management which caused breakdowns in my case. So I switched to the beta version and did the job.
There are indeed some problems and errors. But I had those problems with the 1.09 version too (or even more).
Mirko
I very much recommend sticking with 1.45 rather than 1.46 until all the bugs are ironed out. We had two huge projects this week with very tight deadlines, and 1.46.80 caused huge huge huge problems. It took 7 machines over a day to render a 700pixel image - nothing special it in at all, no displacement, only a few lights etc. We had to re-install 1.45.70 and start all over again because stuff was just not working properly.
I think this is a classic example of “sod’s law” - When it matters, nothing we tried would work properly. Everything stopped working - strips through backburner would not recompile even though all the strips had been rendered, some backburner servers would just hang and crash, it was an absolute nightmare. I just can’t wait for a stable 1.5.
I very much recommend sticking with 1.45 rather than 1.46 until all the bugs are ironed out. We had two huge projects this week with very tight deadlines, and 1.46.80 caused huge huge huge problems. It took 7 machines over a day to render a 700pixel image - nothing special it in at all, no displacement, only a few lights etc. We had to re-install 1.45.70 and start all over again because stuff was just not working properly.
I think this is a classic example of “sod’s law” - When it matters, nothing we tried would work properly. Everything stopped working - strips through backburner would not recompile even though all the strips had been rendered, some backburner servers would just hang and crash, it was an absolute nightmare. I just can’t wait for a stable 1.5.
my point exactly. even if the build seems stable in everyday use these things can arise. no software is bug free, but the less bugs the less likely they will pop up 12 hrs before a deadline.
I have just completed a few hi-res images and animation with 1.45 and it has been fine, even thought the model was massive.
There have been some bugs mainly with the G-Buffer not rendering images over 2000 pixels which was a pain but it worked out eventually.
There are some aspects to 1.45 which have been incredible, mainly the VRmesh. Without this, the whole project would have been impossible.
The golden rule is not to change software during a project - if you do, many bugs will surface.
n
We just finished our first project with Vray 1.46 and Max 7, bothe used for the first time. The reason was Max7 related, but after we found the the lightmap was usefull to do a very quick GI (and we absolute no time) we did it!
Well, one point was stressing interrupting the lightmap calculation with ESC caused max to crash… damn bug!
On the other lightmap is a very low and not really usefull GI if you need to produce a detailed GI. Irradiance map is still unbeatable and even if try to do the same with lightmap you get to the same rendertimes. I think it’s ok if you have nearly no bounce ligth and need to render animation.
But still it’s not a finished thing as it turns out to be flicker very much with refraction materials.
Another thing is: You can’t go back to Vray 1.09… That’s it!
robert
thank you very much for all your answers