LC vs. QMC

[dynaman]

this is kind of in continuation of the "confused" thread...

 

i've seen a lot of people saying that the combination of IM / LC is faster for calculating GI. i haven't found this to be the case, but i'm wondering if maybe i'm doing something wrong?

 

in most of the scenes i've worked with so far, there have been very few glossy reflections, and in almost all cases i have found IM / QMC to be quite a bit faster. the only time i found LC to be faster was in one scene that did have a few glossies, and in that case it helped to use LC to calculate interpolation.

 

is the only advantage to light cache in situations where you are using a lot of glossies? or am i maybe missing something that would help with speeding up the light cache calculation?

[Thablanch]

If you do use the default qmc settings in a simple scene, it can be really fast.

In a exterior scene, light comes from everywhere, it is a question of preference, I guess.

 

For complex interiors, glossies, not a lot of direct illumination, lots of geometry or not square rooms ( yep, i'm doing airplanes, so round interiors = crank up theses settings..) there is no comparaison in speed. Plus, you will not have to fight against grain/noise from qmc. For me, to get the same result from qmc that I am from LC, rendertimes would be at least 30-50% longer.

 

Plus, in preview mode, LC is great, in just a few secs, you can get an idea of what it is going to look like.

 

So, I'm not saying it is better or worst, I do use QMC for all of my exteriors, but it is a question of workflow...

 

What is great: Vray allows us to use wich one we like best

[bayvan]

LC is better than QMC especialy for interiors and faster. LC emittes infinite ammount of rays wich gives you the chance to lower the settings and get faster renders than the QMC but with the same if not better quality. You just have to play around with the settings and you'll see for your self.