Don't hate me - which renderer advice.

[theNoodler]

Hello.

 

I didn't know where to post this, so feel free to move it if this is not the best place. Also, I know this question has probably been asked to death, but I really am stuck.

 

I've been working in 3D for a fairly long time, however I've been 'over the hill' as it were, in the land of not at all photo-real and not at all arch viz. Aside from working on games where we don't need to worry about render engines, I've always passed the stuff I build onwards through the chain of people, the finished render would come out of Renderman and land on my desktop, and that's as much as I would know about it.

 

Now I've decided to do some arch viz and I'm dumbfounded by the choices of render system. I own Maya, Modo, Cinema 4D and XSI. I never played well with 3DS Max. It seems most of you are using VRay, normally with Max? Is there a reason for this? I've read all the reviews and sales blurb but I'd like an honest reason from a daily user. I see Mental Ray is slowly coming back, the last time I used it I had no end of problems with artefacts, flickering, crashes, and render times in the days not hours. What about Maxwell?

 

The sort of work I'll be doing to start with will be replacing existing buildings with new ones, photo real, the standard kind of thing. I'll also be doing very quick sketchy stuff, but Modo, Piranesi and/or Photoshop can handle that.

 

Any pointers, advice, or rants about software welcome.

 

Kind regards.

 

N.

[kippu]

well most of the people usually use 3dsmax and that is why the rest of them also use it , because it is easy to move the files around .... and why they use vray is because in the beginning vray just blazed around the other renderers with their speed , image quality and their customer support .....and it still is great now .,

as to why they are shifting to mental ray now is because it is free and they have matched upto vray in their ease of use and speed of render ,along with the proxies and the other goodies

so if you were to start now and are thinking of 3dsmax then i would just go along with mental ray and not miss anything ... but since you own maya , xsi and cinema 4d , you can just use any of them to get great renders because i have seen all of them produce great results , in the end it just comes down to you

i think i have not been of much help

[acjwalker]

I have used lightwave and xsi in the past. I personally model in max and autocad and use Vray to render. Vray seems to be one step ahead of mental ray. I would say try and pick up max as it is industry standard, if not stick with cinema 4D (get vray with it).

[DavidR]

Mental ray is great for a lot of things, but it's still photon-based, and it isn't as good as Vray for scenes where an interior is lit only with ambient (exterior) light, like an airplane interior. it really comes down to the kind of scenes you work with. As a Max user, I'd say it really comes down to mr or Vray for 90% of users. I like mr because it's free, integrated well, has tons of shader types, Max uses it for it's advanced viewport lighting/shadows, and there's a huge knowledge base. I like Vray because it's got incredible support from Vlado (others can only DREAM about this kind of support!), they fix problems ASAP, they add useful features constantly, you only pay for it once, you will get upgrades between Max upgrade cycles, all features are exposed (unlike mr, where some are hidden, such as glare, or not exposed -eg: GPU final rendering- by the licensee, aka Autodesk), and there's a huge knowledge base. That's 2 pretty good choices, not to mention the others, like finalRender, Maxwell, Fry, etc.

Edited December 22, 2009 by DavidR
addition of material

[aaronrumple]

I use Vray for dependability and speed. Those are the qualities that keep you profitable.

 

There are plenty of very good rendering systems out there. All that you mention are very capable.

[XKP]

well from my personal experience it always seem to be either:

 

Maya and Mental Ray

 

or

 

3DS Max and VRay

[theNoodler]

Hello.

 

Thanks for the advice. What about Maxwell? I'll see if I can get a demo of VRay for Maya.

 

Merry Christmas.

 

N.

[DavidR]

Maxwell is great, maybe the best quality possible to date, but it's slow compared to other renderers. It has awesome features like multilight, but it's not typically going to be your 1st choice for day-to-day work, esp. if your deadlines are like mine. I think it's a viable choice when you have the time, like maybe a shot for your company brochure, etc, where you could let it render for as many days as is necessary. I have Maxwell at home and at work, but I use Vray for all production at work, and mr or Maxwell at home. Also, Maxwell is so easy to use that you'll learn nothing about rendering from it, so if you end up in an office using mr, Vray, etc., you'll be totally screwed.

[AJLynn]

Ignore Vray and Max unless you intend to collaborate with people who use them. Maya or XSI with mental ray or C4D with Advanced Render (new version) or Vray for C4D or Modo and its renderer are all as capable as Max and Vray (except for where Modo is lacking in animation).

 

The reason we mostly all use Max is that we've always mostly all used Max. It's also got some features for using files coming from Revit, and it used to be the only one with decent Autocad import but that's not really true anymore.

 

The software is not important. The important thing is learning about architecture, and how to model, texture, light and photograph architecture. How architecture is marketed and how to position yourself in the market.

[jackb602]

Since you already have Cinema, I would start by upgrading to C4D 11.5 if you haven't already. The new Advanced Render is a huge step forward from the previous system. And once you start working with it, you may find that you don't really need Vray. Vray still has some substantial advantages over AR, but it's not as clear cut a difference as it used to be. In short, I think Vray is so popular because it gets you to the best possible result in the shortest amount of time. Maxwell is pretty much the opposite, producing beautiful results that can only be considered fast relative to geological time.

 

Jack

[STRAT]

as Andrew says, the software is just a tool - each is as capable as the next these days. it's the artist that uses them that makes them sing

 

pick something you're used to, or something you traditionally like and lean to, then learn that.

 

I personally use C4D and Vray.

[hechangcg]

hi.I think Maxwell can get great results but the time to render sometimes put it out of contention.

For Mental Ray and Vray,Vray is easy to use much texture and use little time than MR to get rendering.In China,few of us use Mental ray to do render.

[theNoodler]

"Maxwell is pretty much the opposite, producing beautiful results that can only be considered fast relative to geological time."

 

That made me chuckle.

 

I have purchased VRay and upgraded Maya. Looking at how long things are taking to render I will most likely spend my remaining budget on some CPU's.

[aaronrumple]

Ignore Vray and Max unless you intend to collaborate with people who use them. Maya or XSI with mental ray or C4D with Advanced Render (new version) or Vray for C4D or Modo and its renderer are all as capable as Max and Vray (except for where Modo is lacking in animation).

 

,..for me it doesn't matter if it is Max and Vray or C4D and Vray. If they had a standalone linux Vray, I'd probably use that - as modeling and rendering are separate things for me.

 

All modeling is done in Revit. Way faster for modeling architecture than anything else out there (and you get CD's to boot.) Vray is my engine of choice for materials/lighting. The workflow of Revit to Max works pretty well.

[Nic H]

you will be an outcast unless you use max/vray/mentalray

 

seriously

 

there is a reason everyone uses these products.

[aaronrumple]

you will be an outcast unless you use max/vray/mentalray

 

seriously

 

there is a reason everyone uses these products.

 

Na. I have a Modo guy sitting right next to me. I still talk to him.

[cianmcgrath]

you will be an outcast unless you use max/vray/mentalray

 

seriously

 

there is a reason everyone uses these products.

 

That's a fairly narrow minded statement.

You either have a talent for arc viz or you don't.

Having Max over Cinema 4D / modo etc wont make a difference.

 

It's about what works for you.

 

Cian.

[Nic H]

yes i agree completely...its not the tools its the talent etc.

 

but try getting a job in an established studio if you can only use c4d?

unless they are willing to retrain you on their time (unlikely as a freelancer)

 

thats when there is going to be a difference. if you plan on working by yourself forever and never employing anyone then yes - go ahead!

[Crazy Homeless Guy]

It is easy to say that it is the artist that makes the difference, but it is also the tools. You need the right tool for the right job. This is true of all professions, not just arch viz.

 

The best thing to do is to search for a tool that fits the type of work you want to do, yet is still flexible enough to expand. Since we are talking about MR/Vray/Maxwell...

 

Advantages of each engine as I see it:

 

Maxwell.. it is a very accurate light engine, very nice materials.

 

Vray.. it pushes light very fast throughout a scene, and can handle heavy geometry very well.

 

Mental Ray.. very flexible and sophisticated materials, and 3rd party programmers writing sophisticated shaders.

 

Disadvantages of each engine as I see it:

 

Maxwell.. Painfully slow.

 

Vray.. Lacking behind the others in materials.

 

Mental Ray... Lighting solution are not as sophisticated and nice as the other two listed.

 

You can throw things like Fry, and Lightscape in there also, but neither is going to be perfect in all areas.

 

I often categorize the importance of different aspects of arch viz. They go something like this...

 

1) Model

2) Light

3) Composition

4) Materials

5) Texture

 

I list model first because it is the basis for all of the others, without a decent model, you are in trouble from the start. The next tier is light and composition. These are almost equally important, and really, you can't have one without the other.

 

The final tier is Materials and Textures. These are on bottom because I can have a white matte model that is composed, and lit beautifully. Even with no materials it is often able to communicate the design idea. Actually, it is not that uncommon to receive requests for images that are no more than this.

 

Now, the opposite, ...a well textured model will look flat without beautiful composition and light. It will not communicate what you are trying to get across as effectively. At least in rendering as we tend to use it. You can certainly create beautiful images that are flat, but you better be a darn good artist to pull it off.

 

So, ....if someone were starting in Arch Viz, I would recommended Vray, then Mental Ray, then Maxwell. I say this because Vray seems to offer easier speed and flexibility in terms of pushing light throughout a scene. You can push light quickly with Mental Ray, but I would say that the distribution, and subtleties of the light coming from Vray are better.

 

Now, there are non implemented lighting solution for Mental Ray (Irradiance Particle) that I feel might provide a nicer lighting solution than what Vray does, but they are not full supported. Meaning, you will have to go through a lot of hoops to get them up and working properly. It is not push button.

 

But the fact that you can get them up and running in Mental Ray gives you a little insight into how Mental Ray works. Mental ray is really more of a platform for rendering, whereas Vray is more of a turn key solution for rendering.

 

As far as Maxwell. I would stear clear of it a this point. You will be tempted by its beautifully balanced light and materials, but the speed is painful. Arch Viz in and industry where you need to be able to turn things around quickly. Waiting for images to finish is not exceptable. Design iterations happen so quickly that you will be waiting for the Maxwell image to finish, and the design team will already have made several changes.

 

So, ....stick with Vray or MR is your best bet on tools at this point, but I would still recommend Vray over MR because it is still more of a turn key solution than MR, even though MR is heavily implemented into Autodesk products.

Edited December 23, 2009 by Crazy Homeless Guy

[Derek Forreal]

my 2c is that it also depends on whether you'll be working for yourself or will be looking to work in a studio. if it's the latter then i agree with those 'pushing' Vray - Max and Vray is probably the way to go.

 

but if you're generating your own work, then i suggest you fire up your copy of modo and get stuck in!

 

i bought modo a few months ago and i have to say it's a joy to use. the render quality (imho) is as good as Vray and the preview render is just great.

 

modelling is also light years ahead of Max (even though the snap and alignment tools still need work). i only work on stills though. animations may be a completely different kettle of fish...

Edited December 24, 2009 by derekforreal
edited to add

[hechangcg]

So, ....stick with Vray or MR is your best bet on tools at this point, but I would still recommend Vray over MR because it is still more of a turn key solution than MR, even though MR is heavily implemented into Autodesk products.

 

Hi.I cant more agree with you.your suggestion is really perfect and constructive.

[3dresource]

If you work in architectural vizualizations you should use Vray, do doubt. Fast and simply.

 

_________________________________________________________________

 

3dresource.eu 3dresource - free 3D stuff for download - Vray ifnormations.

 

.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Edited December 24, 2009 by 3dresource