rotten42 Posted October 4, 2007 Share Posted October 4, 2007 I've been looking to migrate from Lightscape to a different render engine. I know most people say go to 3D studio. From an outsiders perspective it looks like a pig of a program to get to learn. If I understand correctly you can get a stand alone application for Maxwell. How does it compare to Max: 1) difficulty to learn 2) Render Quality (Actually I've already seen that it turns out some nice photo-realistic stuff) 3) render times I would primarily need a program for rendering....maybe form video down the road. I do achitectural interior work most of the time. Any advice would be great. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Administrators Jeff Mottle Posted October 4, 2007 Administrators Share Posted October 4, 2007 No matter what, you are going to need 3ds max as the modeler/animator, unless you are thinking of something like C4D, which is less commonly used, but still powerful. Maxwell, V-Ray, finalRender, fryRender, Brazil are all 3rd party rendering engines that plug into 3ds max. Max comes with mental ray, so if you do not want or do not have the budget, max on its own is pretty powerful for doing everything. Having come from Lightscape and then switching to max years ago, I can tell you that no application is going to be a streamlined, as fast or elegant as Lightscape. You just have to resign yourself to the fact that your workflow will slow down as a result. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AJLynn Posted October 4, 2007 Share Posted October 4, 2007 But if he's using Lightscape, he already modeling in some other program, which can probably export something that Maxwell Studio can import. That said, Maxwell Studio isn't much fun either - I think it makes render setup tasks more cumbersome than setting up in something like Max, and it ties your whole workflow after modeling to Nextlimit. Also, Maxwell is particularly slow at interiors because of the amount of calculation involved in propagating the lighting. I'd recommend you take a good look at Cinema4D. It just got an Autocad importer update, it's fairly inexpansive and very stable and easy to learn, and I've found it just as powerful as Max for most arch vis stuff. Its Advanced Render module is pretty easy to use and has good shaders but its GI system isn't up to the level of mental ray, Vray or finalRender. Fortunately it does have Vray and finalRender available. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manta Posted October 5, 2007 Share Posted October 5, 2007 I think we need to know what program you are using for modeling now... A couple things to think about are (1) Modo or (2) Viz + fryrender combo I've been seeing some incredible stuff coming from Modo with its native renderer, also people say that modeling with it is a dream... And Viz, most of 3ds max, without the high price, and fryrender which has pretty much all the features of maxwell and vray put together... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Devin Johnston Posted October 8, 2007 Share Posted October 8, 2007 The render times and quality of Maxwell Studio are the same as they would be for any of its plugins because they are simply exporting the 3D data directly to the Maxwell render engine just like Studio does. It would be easier to learn than 3D Studio since all you’re doing is setting up materials and lights and all the modeling can be handled in your current application. Just don't expect it to be as fast as Lightscape, my experience has been that it's at least 5 times slower than any GI or Radiosity based solution when doing interiors unless there extremely simple. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adehus Posted October 8, 2007 Share Posted October 8, 2007 You can get really nice results from Maxwell, but you pay dearly for them in render time. In my recent experience, on an 8 core machine, exteriors render out in about an hour to 8 hours (1600x1200) but interiors can take 20-60 hours depending on the lighting. If you're thinking towards doing animations (which is what I assume when you say 'video'), I would seriously advise against Maxwell. I've seen a couple of nice animations done with it, but unless you have some SERIOUS computing horsepower, forget it. I occassionally use Maxwell (though only becase I was sucked into the pre-order deal) but I personally wouldn't buy it now, or recommend it for professional work to others... at least until the rendering speed becomes much more reasonable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Devin Johnston Posted October 8, 2007 Share Posted October 8, 2007 If you're thinking towards doing animations (which is what I assume when you say 'video'), I would seriously advise against Maxwell. I've seen some nice animations done with it (yeah you Devin!) but unless you have some SERIOUS computing horsepower, forget it. I mean, like, FORGET IT! Very very true. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AJLynn Posted October 8, 2007 Share Posted October 8, 2007 I don't know. You could use a stil frame Ken Burns pan technique and make iPod video Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rotten42 Posted October 9, 2007 Author Share Posted October 9, 2007 the path seems pretty clear.....I'm going to have to blow the dust of of my wallet and get the Max/Vray package. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AJLynn Posted October 9, 2007 Share Posted October 9, 2007 Get a demo of Viz with mental ray and try that. If you're trying to replace Lightscape with a newer render engine, a Max+Vray package may be $2500 in overkill. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rotten42 Posted October 9, 2007 Author Share Posted October 9, 2007 I'm into overkill. I always thought the Max route was the way I would go. It was just that I kept seeing some nice quality images in Maxwell so I thought I'd inquire. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Devin Johnston Posted October 9, 2007 Share Posted October 9, 2007 Maxwell can and will produce the best images you've ever seen, the key is time and speed and you'll need a lot of one of these if your going to use it in a production environment. Unfortunately the guy’s at Next Limit don’t think either one of these is a negative, when people ask if Maxwell is going to get faster the official response is just buy faster hardware. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rotten42 Posted October 9, 2007 Author Share Posted October 9, 2007 Maxwell can and will produce the best images you've ever seen, the key is time and speed and you'll need a lot of one of these if your going to use it in a production environment. Unfortunately the guy’s at Next Limit don’t think either one of these is a negative, when people ask if Maxwell is going to get faster the official response is just buy faster hardware. that's not a good attitude. Makes you think how long they will last with that kind of thinking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manta Posted October 10, 2007 Share Posted October 10, 2007 that's not a good attitude. Makes you think how long they will last with that kind of thinking. I'm surprised they've lasted this long, it's probably Realflow that's keeping them afloat...I don't think they have much competition there... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AJLynn Posted October 10, 2007 Share Posted October 10, 2007 They market well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nic H Posted October 10, 2007 Share Posted October 10, 2007 ^ yep they do indeed, very slick attractive advertising, esp when compared to vray's 'drab' marketing/advertising Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now