I prefer buckets for final, i find it more predictable. Maybe is just an illusion though, since u have a certain noise threshold in progressive, but im old school hard to try new things
If you don’t need to see the intermediate results and you need maximum performance for a given noise threshold, it would be best to go with the bucket sampler. It tends to work better with DR as well.
For tests, or when you are not sure how long the render will take, the progressive sampler is more convenient.
Vlado, does progressive produces the exact same results with the same noise threshold on buckets? Can it be used for final production instead of buckets or its purpose is more like fast look developement? thanks
I use progressive for stills and buckets for animation. We’ve got an animation rendering at the moment thats taking about a week, we went with bucket because 1hr progressive doesn’t give uniform results.
This is specific to Phoenix only and is something for the Phoenix guys to fix. Phoenix deliberately turns off some optimizations for the progressive sampler in order to provide faster feedback.
It also cleans up alpha channel matte shadows a lot better.Is this in 3.50? We specifically made some improvements there; 3.40 did not look at the alpha channel at all.
Bucketed is progressive by the bucket.
Besides Phoenix, and the lower usage by end of rendering due to too few pixels (that’s the “hanging bucket”, in bucket money. Not something specifically down to progressive rendering at all. Its solution lies elsewhere.), what should be made more reliable?