LightScape???

[STRAT]

hello there ppl

 

just after some info really.

 

i've been rendering my work with viz and cinema 4d for ages now, and never used lightscape.

 

i wouldn't mind purchasing it but im not sure weather there's a demo available or not.

 

so please can you guys just advise me on things like ease of use, render speeds, stability, userbility etc.... (especially render speeds)

 

thank you

[Jeff Mottle]

i wouldn't mind purchasing it but im not sure weather there's a demo available or not.

 

I'm not sure abou that either but your dealer should be able to det you up. Without authorization the software will work for 15 days.

 

ease of use

 

The learning curve on LS is pretty steep, but if you do the tutorials once or twice you should be pretty comfortable and there is always both this and the Discreet Lightscape forum. I modeate both.

If you were to get one on one training you would be up and running in a few days for the basic stuff and another few days for the advanced stuff.

 

render speeds

 

The Raytracer is about 20 times fatser than that in VIZ or MAX. Depending upon your scene VIZ could be fatser in some cases, but if you compare GI, then Lightscape beats VIZ hands down in speed most of the time.

 

stability

 

I've put at least 6000 hours in to LS and only raely have I run into any problems. There are a few known bugs that have and never and will never be fixed unless Lightscape goes open source, but other than that I'd say it's pretty solid.

 

userbility

 

Coming from VIZ you will probably want to tear your hair out every now and then, but the interface itself it pretty basic and has nowhere near the level of features of VIZ.

 

You should also know that Lightscape can not to complex materials, including bump maps. You basically have a procedual noise material and diffuse materials, with transparences and alphas of course.

 

If you have any other specific questions, just let me know.

 

thank you[/QB]

[Wojciech Klepacki]

Hello

Jeff, if You mind I would like to ask You some questions. I’ve got some experience in MAX. Now it is time to pick up decision which software to use: Lightscape or ViZ 4. I’ve just familiarized whit You previous opinion about Lightscape, but I do still have some doubts. Probably You are wondering why have I ambiguity but please understand me. I live in country where the condition of architect is different then in Canada for instance. In most cases I have to complete the rendering fast (very fast in point of fact) and there is no time to experiments and special modeling techniques. Especially I do not have redundant time and my client can’t wait any longer to receive finished work. I model very fast using AutoCAD solids or Rhinoceros 3D, but when I think that in Lightscape I have to do complex model using AutoCAD faces… Hm, I can’t afford myself for such extravagance. Why? Because, I have to complete also plans, sections, etc, etc, and there is no time to waste. Besides I know MAX enough. Considering this I would like to use something fast in rendering and I wouldn’t like to give up the profits of solids modeling. I saw some works in ViZ4 and I’m finding them sufficient. I will be very appreciating if You would like to help me.

Wojciech Klepacki

P.S.

Please, be understanding because my English is not perfect.

[Francois]

Lightscape renderings...

 

Hi. I do architectural renderings a lot, I bought LS a while ago. I model 100% in Rhino3D and use their Flamingo renderer. Yes LS is a very fast raytracer, but It seems soooo difficult do set up scenes and adjust everything. It feels like riding a bicyle with square weels... I find it very tedious, especially coming from Rhino wich is the ultimate user friendly software. There is some amasing work done in LS, Still the best I've seen so far. But when deadlines come, I still go back to Rhino and Flamingo. I'll keep working at LS thought. Eventually I guess It will be easier.

 

That whas just my oppinion

 

Francois

Canada

[Jeff Mottle]

Hi Wojciech,

 

Yes you are correct that lightscape does work better if you model for Lightscape using faces. While there are a few tricks for modeling for Lightscape using other non face modeling packages, you may get some artifacting and problems that can not be overcome by any other method than to model using faces. I personally have always done all of my modelling in AutoCAD for that reason. Perhaps some others can relate their experiences with other modelers and Lightscape. I know most do not use AutoCAD.

 

Although I'd love to say switch to Lightscape, if you are already comfortable in the MAX (VIZ)environment, I'm not sure you would like the switch to Lightsape considering that it will not be developed any futhur, and that VIZ now supports GI and can use many other 3rd party renderers.

 

It doesn't sound like you have the time to learn a new workflow. If you get VIZ you will only have to learn the new GI techniques and if your in a bind you can always revert to traditional lighting methods that you used in MAX.

 

Hope that helps make you decision easier. On the other hand Lightscape is a fraction of the cost of VIZ.

[STRAT]

cheers for the advice there

 

just a couple of things then -

 

i too have extra tight dead lines and using software like brazil is still too slow. i use vray, brazil etc.. for personal work, but need speed for projects, so i've chosen Maxon's Cinema 4D XL 7.

 

i was reccomended this by a friend and havent looked back since. it have the fastest radiosity engine on the marget and make gi rendering a complete reality for dead-line work.

 

but it's not got the best results i've ever seen. bit like VIZ 4 gi stuff - very impressive, but lacking something.

 

now imho LS is the best gi/radiosity renderer out there, and i can probably justify the extra rendering time to acheive much nicer results.

 

i actually quite enjoy learning new software and working methods, and being a 10 year veteran of autodesk products and various gi renders i fear this should be relatively fast for me to learn.

 

my main concern is speed tho. you told me LS has a fast raytracer but what about it's radiosity engine? is this fast too, or will i be waiting till the cows come home? so how slow or fast is it then. can you point me at some examples pls?

 

also, did i read somewhere that LS cant yet use backrounds?

[Francois]

To Strat.

 

Could we see some architectural work you've done with Cinema 4D 7. Out of curiosity.

 

Francois

[Arnold Gallardo]

I;'d say that LVS's radiosity is pretty fast considering we now have +1.X Ghz machines or even +2.X Ghz machines much less Duals. LVS felt slow when I was using my old P100 or a PII 266 which I used with LVS way back. LVS is even faster when using the LSRAD (command prompt) because it is not burdened by the GUI (LSCAPE). It can handle >2 million polygon loads and maybe more depending on your RAM/HD.

 

I personally though am forced to use LVS with LW5.6 for most of my work because I can optimize each irregular polygon face and even convert triangulated geometry into quadrilaterals which helps speed up the radiosity processing. I do my final renderins in LW however. Although I also have used it with MAX/VIZ, I prefer the way it interacts with LW specially since the MAX/VIZ interaction, the rad shading is limited to the diffuse channel in MAX/VIZ.

[STRAT]

thanks A.G.

 

Francois - have a look here, cinema 4d stuff -

 

http://www.cgarchitect.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=4;t=000020

 

and

 

http://www.cgarchitect.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=4;t=000019

[Jeff Mottle]

Hey STRAT,

 

The Radiosity processing is pretty fast in my opinion. In many cases probably not as fast at getting initial results in VIZ4, but by the time you tweak all of the settings in VIZ4 to reduce artifacting, I still think that it could be done faster in LS. This is also assuming a clean model (read - not thousands of small triangles and bad meshing_. I don't typically do large polygon models. All of my work is usually between 5000 - 50000 faces. This is not becuase of a lack of detail but because of *very* efficient modelling specifically for Lightscape. For these models it typically takes 5 - 20 minutes for radiosity and about 15-20 for a 3000 x 2400 render.

 

Some examples of SMED work here: http://www.cgarchitect.com/gallery/galleryList.asp?searchStudio=SMED+International&searchChecked=2

 

To give you an idea the image I posted here: http://www.cgarchitect.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=4;t=000018 took 23 minutes to do the radiosity and 6 hours to render out a 12000 x 9600 render. Again this model is very efficient and if I remember correctly has about 100,000 faces.

 

As for backgrounds you can not render one unless you are in the GUI. Batch mode has no way to do this. I usually just comp mine in anyway. I am speaking of the ability to place a background/environment map like yo do in MAX/VIZ. You can however still use skydomes or planes. This work very well too.

 

Hope that answers your questions.

[STRAT]

thanks jeff, it sure does answer my questions. at that high res you talking about that is pretty fast rendering which ever way you look at it. shame autodesk dont produce demos of it.

[alexandre]

just a question: didn't they include Lightscape into the new viz ( the one called AutodeskViz, I think it goes by the number 4) ?

that should solve many of your viz vs ls dilemmas since all you'd have to do is upgrade your viz and enjoy both worlds

[STRAT]

unfortunately no. the new VIZ4 is different than lightscape. they are still 2 separate apps.

[Jeff Mottle]

Suppose I should have mentioned that that was on a single processor AMD 1900+ MP (Lightscape is not multihreaded.)

The RPC content in that image was rendered out in MAX and comp'ed in Photoshop. Because the resoltuion was so high I had to render it out in 4 pieces. Each piece took about 4 hours. In other words 16 hours in MAX on 2 processors!

I was shocked that it took so long. I just imported my geometry from Lighstcape assigned everything a Matte/Shadow material and renderer the RPC content with raytrace shadows. Needless to say you know why I don't use MAX in production at SMED. I'd be there forever waiting for the thing to raytrace.

[STRAT]

obviously no RPC interface for lightscape then

 

so how does it work? do you set up materails in max/viz and import into LS, or does LS have it's own material library?

 

does it support opacity/alpha mapping for trees and so forth?

 

i saw that image before. nice comping job btw.

 

i like the architecture too. dont take this the wrong way, but it looks more like a scanline job than a gi job:/ not much noticable radiosity to justify LS. but i still love the image.

 

anymore info on LS would be nice.

 

also, can you use normal lights or (as with viz 3's ls interface) do i need specific ls lights?

 

thank you again

[Jeff Mottle]

obviously no RPC interface for lightscape then

 

That't correct

 

do you set up materails in max/viz and import into LS, or does LS have it's own material library?

 

You can do it either way, but Lightscape does have its own "Material Editor". Material are fairly basic in Lightcape and most materials made in MAX/VIZ will not import.

 

Lightscape supports: Procedural bump and noise, although limited settings, difuse color, trasparency, alphas, blend (diffuse color with bitmap), IOR, and a few other material properties to control shininess etc.

 

does it support opacity/alpha mapping for trees and so forth?

 

also, can you use normal lights or (as with viz 3's ls interface) do i need specific ls lights?

 

Lightscape supports Point Lights, Area Lights, and Linear Lights (IES as well). I think most lights come in to Lightscape from MAX/VIZ, although I'm not positive because I've never done it. I always setup my light in Lightscape.

 

There is lots to know in Lightscape, so just ask the questions and I'll try to answer.

[alexandre]

dear strat,

 

i wouldn't like to interfere in what seems to be a private discussion between you and jeff, but my knowledge ( and that of my reseller, too) is that autodesk has aquired lightscape and has thus included its technology into the new viz; lightscape continues to exist on its own for obvious reasons.

 

take a look at the product page on autodesk's site and judge for yourself

[STRAT]

alexandre - no prob. any please join in

 

Lightscape is Autodesk's anyway and since viz 3, a lightscape setup option has been available within viz, and Viz 4's radiosity engine is based on lightscape's, loosely, but totally re-written and optomised. lightscape still exists as a stand alone package (as you say) but is still more comprehensive and 'better' for a more realistic radiosity/gi render.

 

the two have very different rendering engines. they are

not the same. this is what im after from lightscape, not the viz compatability, but the lightscape superiority on the rendering front.

[alexandre]

dear strat,

 

well, anything that suits you as long as you don't give up cinema 4d

 

it seems we're the only ones to use it !

[STRAT]

give up cinema 4d? never!

 

took me long enough to convince my boss to buy it.

 

i prefer lightscapes rendering quality, but then again it's basically only a renderer. one day soon perhaps.

[matt_vinoir]

well there's no doubt that even though audesk tells us that lightscape is in viz 4, the image comparison tells a different story. Not too much in it but enough eh!

 

Well if someone can convince me that there is a way to solid model in viz or vectorworks which i use and to import into lightscape effectively, i might be sold. Lightscape is soo much more intuitve than viz 4. Wizards guide you though GI rather than manual fumbling through. A slight problem with lightscape is that you can't go back one you have created a ls model i believe.

 

Alexandre is right though, our resellers are convinced that viz 4 can produce virtually the same images and quicker. to be honest somone is scared to own up asto which is best. I'm dying to find out soon as i need to get going on using radiosity in my renders!!!

[Jeff Mottle]

well there's no doubt that even though audesk tells us that lightscape is in viz 4, the image comparison tells a different story.

 

I guarantee that nobody at Autodesk will tell you this (at least not the guys who are working on it), but resellers on the other hand are a different story. While VIZ 4 does have Radiosity, it is not the same as what is in Lightscape. Differnt algorithms, different methods, differnt everything.

 

Alexandre is right though, our resellers are convinced that viz 4 can produce virtually the same images and quicker.

 

Yeah I've seen some funny stuff come from VIZ resellers. Unless you know that they really know their stuff and have used both Lighstcape and VIZ in production, I'd take their speel with a few grains of salt. I suppose this applies with any resller of any software though.

 

to be honest somone is scared to own up asto which is best. I'm dying to find out soon as i need to get going on using radiosity in my renders!!!

 

We'll we are still using Lightscape, and until things get faster and VIZ support the transition from Lightscape better, we will continue ot use Lightscape. I'd like to be able to switc, but for us just doesn't makse sense in our workflow.

[matt_vinoir]

cheers jeff, i just had an email from strat and he is saying the same thing. The images are nice with viz but it's that gorgeous less harsh, don't

take it the wrong way, pastelly tone that comes with lightscape.

 

As i asked strat, i'm worried about the solids modelling. if i model in vectorworks, the add extra model parts from rhino and bring it all into viz 4, can i then export it into lightscape and add materials etc doing the radiosity with lightscape? will i find any problems with the model, speed etc?

[STRAT]

basically if it works in viz it'll work in LS