3D Tools for architects

[mattclinch]

cat's pyjamas.. everytime.

[alrawli]

Bee's knee's or if its really good in our office its the 'bee's bawz'

[RobNJ73]

Wildebeast's Tasty Treats?

Ocelot's hang-a-lots?

Giraffe's Carafes?

[manish_mv]

Hi everyone I am a architectural visualisation manager in a reputed company. whatever i m going to say now is completely keeping in mind architectural visualisation need only.

 

I ve been using both the rendering engines for many years ( approx 4yrs)

 

I started with MR first of all tried to do a lot of things sometimes i do get the results. then i started trying vray. Vray is something really standouts as i saw its light cache (called light map at that time) gi engine. later i realised that light cache has its limitations then i started discovering vrays materials they were very good and yields results really very fast especially its reflections and refractions then i continued using it doing lots of great job for around two years. I was really happy with the output doing as much as 40 different renderings. I got really hands on all of its lights, raytracing, irradiance, QMC, antialiasing, displacements, etc. and did all of the optimisations for different-2 situations. So it is true Vray is really something we can call professional for architectural works.

 

Now on the other hand Mental ray is completely different as per its internal calculations lighting and GI techniques and uses also for example rendering a million trees using opacity maps is much much faster in mental ray as compared to any other rendering engine used for architectural purpose. when i got quiet comfortable with vrays output is i tried to do one interior bathroom rendering using mental ray because MR had then just come up with its special architectural shaders did a bit more fight on setting up lights and other stuffs and started taking some test renders and mind it results were unbeatable the way the GI behaves in mental ray is really appreciatable. yeah even timing wise it is considerably faster than vray if the kind of quality output we try to build in it. Then i realised that it is something we shud never miss to learn about then time came to do bit more on it so my latest development on it is a fully working steel plant on the shore of an ocean.

 

It is true that there are comparatively much higher number of vray users because it is bit easier to learn (in my opinion) and work on. but mental has its own concepts of working especially its approach to GI calculations i.e. photons plus final gathering which is very much close to the real world distribution of light gives much better results.

 

so in my opinion with the proper knowledge u can generate much better output using mental ray and vray is easier to learn and gives good results in less time.

 

It is worth giving a trial to MR possibilities

 

thanks

[Devin Johnston]

results were unbeatable the way the GI behaves in mental ray is really appreciatable. yeah even timing wise it is considerably faster than vray if the kind of quality output we try to build in it.

 

Just how fast is "considerably faster", Vray is hands down the fastest engine I've ever used and it's hard to imagine anything is faster. I always disliked these subjective comparisons because there is nothing to compare the results against, and it's hard to imagine even if MR is faster that were talking about anything more than a few minutes. That goes for the quality comparisons as well, someone who knows what they are doing could create a masterpiece with scanline, it's all about how good the operator is when you’re talking about these things.

[conrad8]

cat's pyjamas.. everytime.

 

Vray is the Cat's meow

[Nic H]

results were unbeatable - considerably faster .

 

the words of a mislead man

[Tommy Burns]

I think he's right MR is faster at calculating reflections, raytracing. The company I'm in at the moment has two of us that use max. I use MR and another guy who is excellent uses Vray but some of his rendering times are just off the wall 8 hours for a still. I don't think I've ever needed more that 1.5 hours. I did render a scene using VR and MR both ended up looking the same but the MR scene took 10 mins and the VR took 50 mins?

This was about two years ago now but thats why I stuck with MR and it has got alot better since then although i'm sure Vray has aswell.

MR is really worth a look at nowadays it really is fast and I also think easy!!! even for beginers

[Devin Johnston]

Tommy, would you say that you know MR or Vray better? It's very easy to have very high render times with Vray unless you know exactly what your settings do. This is why comparisons are so hard to do, if you are very good with one program and can get great results with it but not so good with another you shouldn’t expect to get the same results. I've seen great renderings from both engines and in the end it's really about which program you prefer because they will both give you the results you’re looking for.

[Juan Altieri]

we keep on trying to discover the best "universal" tool, and we dont consider that the best tool depends the artist behind it, the way of work, the hardware etc,

i allways say he same...

if you just know wich is better for you, use both and learn!, after this you will know it by yourself...

[Mario Pende]

Has someone tried rendering 3 or 4 scenes with Vray and MR, then compare them, compare time spend on settings and rendering.

Its not that hard to do!

[Nic H]

but really why bother?

these threads are stupid, so many people are hung up on software and what other people are doing its detrimental to their work.

[Tommy Burns]

Tommy, would you say that you know MR or Vray better? It's very easy to have very high render times with Vray unless you know exactly what your settings do. This is why comparisons are so hard to do, if you are very good with one program and can get great results with it but not so good with another you shouldn’t expect to get the same results. I've seen great renderings from both engines and in the end it's really about which program you prefer because they will both give you the results you’re looking for.

Hi Maxer

I would know MR a lot better yes but I showed a guy in here how easy and fast it was now. He was very good at Vray but he did agree that MR was faster and he actually converted to MR. I think they basically do the same thing and it is good to have two as they seem to try and out do one another and that can only be good for us guys. Really the best thing about MR is that you don't have to pay for it and if someone is only starting out it makes sense to use free software (as long as you are using max) Then when you make loads of money you can buy whatever you like:p

[Ky Lane]

scanline

[sutcac]

I just wanted to put in one more plug for Kerkythea with the full admission that it is the only renderer I have used extensively at all, after dabbling with the VRay demo. I have had very good results with what I think was a fairly short learning curve. I can't believe it is free. Have donated twice and intend to more. The main drawback is that since it's free, tech support is limited. For example, I have been using their beta SU exporter for several months which opened up some great possibilities for use of plants with clip maps but also has a major, annoying bug which has yet to be fixed.

 

I would post the link to my render/animation page for some samples but I need to have 10 posts before they will let me post a link, so that's part of the reason for this post too. Along with the reminder at the top to post something since I haven't visited here in a few weeks. Man, talk about pressure to post!

[WAcky]

scanline

 

SHHHH!!! They'll catch on!

[aram]

I think he's right MR is faster at calculating reflections, raytracing. The company I'm in at the moment has two of us that use max. I use MR and another guy who is excellent uses Vray but some of his rendering times are just off the wall 8 hours for a still. I don't think I've ever needed more that 1.5 hours. I did render a scene using VR and MR both ended up looking the same but the MR scene took 10 mins and the VR took 50 mins?

This was about two years ago now but thats why I stuck with MR and it has got alot better since then although i'm sure Vray has aswell.

MR is really worth a look at nowadays it really is fast and I also think easy!!! even for beginers

 

this is why i stuck to MR aswell, render times with vray were just ridiculous, and im very impatient

[Nic H]

vray?

[Ky Lane]

vray?

 

Never heard of it.

[RobNJ73]

Never heard of it.

 

It's two better than XRays.

[WAcky]

Pen and paper?

[manish_mv]

it's all about how good the operator is when you’re talking about these things.

 

 

I sincerely agree to this statement. but the same artist can do a better output using advanced tools if he tries to learn it. No lighting artist wants to stick to scanline rendering if his work is appreciated otherwise hes not an artist but an operator like what you mentioned in your statement.

 

You made me to review my statements and see what i did wrong and i found out that whatever i said had nothing controversial. I have made around hundred interior spaces out of which 10 percent are done in MR rest in vray now what i have realised is that mental ray gives better result when you do night interior scene which is normally the toughest scenario to light up one can easily make a day scene beautiful in vray but harder to do a night scene and it takes a lot of render time too. whereas using MR you can get much beautiful results faster than vray provided you know the mental ray concepts because it is tougher to learn MR.

 

I saw ur work link and ur work is good but in some interior scenes you cud have done better using MR. It is a suggestion not a comment.

 

thanks

 

www.coroflot.com/manish_mv/3d_visualisation

[jinuj]

hi

[innerdream]

Not one vote for Modo? I really love the way the renders look, even more so than Vray. Go to the Modo Gallery and check out the work.

[beestee]

Not one vote for Modo? I really love the way the renders look, even more so than Vray. Go to the Modo Gallery and check out the work.

 

I am a long time max/vray user, but I have to say that modo and c4d have both caught my eye in recent years. I just have not been courageous enough to try jumping to another modeler

 

In many instances it is probably easier to go with the consensus because there will be a lot more peer support. Depending on your determination however, if you do go with the road less traveled you will most likely come out with a more unique and appealing style as a reward for the effort of learning a less used package.