Price of V-Ray Stand Alone Version?

[mauarduz]

Mr. Nichols,

 

It is all VERY clear now, I appreciate your response very much, thanks a lot in the name of all the rookies.

 

I have another question, :op, in architectural viz, we need not much more than GI and a few things here & there, not as much sophistication as motion pictures, etc. So the slight delay when "submitting" the render could be an inconvenience as aditional waiting time aside from the GI calculation and the rendering propperly, for us who need quick single images and work in most cases against the chrono, don´t you think ?

 

Thanks again for your time

 

mauarduz

 

(don´t mind me bad english)

[Christopher Nichols]

The time is dependent on two things the size and complexity of your model and how good the software is at creating RIBs (or vray files or whatever). Have you ever rendered a really complex scene in MAX? You know that time when the status bar says "Preparing mesh"? That is where it would most likely be writing the render file out. That process may be delayed anywhere from 3% to 50% longer... that is my best educated guess.

 

Lets say I am rendering a scene for a big movie which involves a lot of robots for example. The scene is very complex. I may have to wait for 10 to 15 mins for the ribgen, but the render time is more like 1 to 2 hours, so it is all relative.

 

Also keep in mind that I have no idea as to how Vray will be implementing its standalone version. What I present is simply the most logical way based on current pipelines. I would be completely counter productive to have a separate program with its own GUI.

[mauarduz]

thanks very much mr. nichols

[GaryR50]

The vray file will be created within max.

 

Then you STILL need MAX. That's my whole point. VRay is useless without MAX. Whether you call it a "stand-alone" or a plug-in, the situation remains the same; i.e., it's of no use to anyone who doesn't already have MAX.

 

Gary

[rivoli]

VRay is useless without MAX.

 

as a renderer vray would be useless without something to render i'd say. i think the whole point is that a renderer is a renderer, that's what it's supposed to do: render. it always will need a scene to render, an object, a sphere, a cube whatever you want. if it was capable of producing scenes and animations it wouldn't be a standalone renderer, but a standalone 3d package like max, maya, xsi. i can't actually see your point anymore, in a production pipeline vray will stand all alone at the "making rendering" point, but it will still need a scene to render. this scene will be created with any other software you like and then converted into a file vray standalone will be able to handle. you should try to download pixie or aqsis and a shader tool just to see how a renderman compliant renderer works. that will give you a good insight into a typical standalone renderer process.

[Christopher Nichols]

I think I get Gary's point. He wants to go directly from whatever progam he is using to model which is probably NOT MAX as it is with a lot of people, and render it in a package that is NOT MAX. He is most likely only using MAX to render, and is using a 3rd party render on top of that. OK... so that means that if your modeling software could interface with a third party renderer (the way that max does), it could easily interface with Vray, in the way that I outlined for you. If FormZ could support alternate rendering engines, a plugin could easily be written for FormZ to interface with Vray. Once they DO... as I stated, it is easy to write a plugin for that package since vray core is standalone and not tied to the modeling package as it currently is with MAX. SO, either ask whatever software company does your modeling package to add support for third party rendering, or upgrade your modeling software to something that does.

[mauarduz]

how would "stand alone" affect the price ?

[GaryR50]

Pretty close, Chris. I'm using SketchUp as my modeler, and exporting in 3DS format to whatever renderer I find that can do GI and doesn't cost a fortune, basically. I had hoped the "stand-alone" version of V-Ray was the solution I'm looking for, but your descriptions of how it works have suggested maybe I should look to something like Cinema 4D or (if it can be found anywhere) Lightscape. Can you tell me where I might find Lightscape. The Google search I did takes me to a page on Autodesk's site, where the best info I can get is a list of local dealers; no price and no online ordering seem to be available, and there is a come-on to upgrade to Viz, which is a bit pricey for my needs.

 

P.S.: You were right on track, at first, then veered off course when you supposed I am using MAX at all. No, I don't use MAX; I don't HAVE MAX, and I don't want MAX.

 

Gary

[GaryR50]

as a renderer vray would be useless without something to render i'd say. i think the whole point is that a renderer is a renderer, that's what it's supposed to do: render. it always will need a scene to render, an object, a sphere, a cube whatever you want. if it was capable of producing scenes and animations it wouldn't be a standalone renderer, but a standalone 3d package like max, maya, xsi. i can't actually see your point anymore, in a production pipeline vray will stand all alone at the "making rendering" point, but it will still need a scene to render. this scene will be created with any other software you like and then converted into a file vray standalone will be able to handle. you should try to download pixie or aqsis and a shader tool just to see how a renderman compliant renderer works. that will give you a good insight into a typical standalone renderer process.

 

Rivoli, of course you have to have something to render. I'm not saying you don't. You guys are looking at this from the perspective of someone who has never rendered a scene ouside of some Renderman compliant environment, apparently. We who have spent years doing 3D renders of DXF, 3DS and OBJ models in such applications as Bryce, Truespace, Amapi, Carrera, etc. don't go about it the same way you do. In all of these ray tracers, you can render an imported model from ANY source, and there is NO direct export to the renderer from the modeler. There is no "pipeline," as you call it, and the two programs don't interface with each other at all. You guys are accustomed to using high-end modeling and rendering environments in which the renderer is not a separate application capable of functioning completely imdependent of the modeler. You're using a plug-in, in other words. I don't have to do that to render a SketchUp model. I can simply save it as a DXF, 3DS or OBJ file. Then I can import that file into whatever renderer will read those formats, and render it. Period. Of course, the difference between this and the more complex scene data that is needed to do GI rendering seems to call for the sort of Renderman-compliant applications that you're accustomed to using. Just don't assume that every renderer is like the ones you use, because they're not.

 

Gary

[Christopher Nichols]

The Google search I did takes me to a page on Autodesk's site, where the best info I can get is a list of local dealers; no price and no online ordering seem to be available, and there is a come-on to upgrade to Viz, which is a bit pricey for my needs.

 

P.S.: You were right on track, at first, then veered off course when you supposed I am using MAX at all. No, I don't use MAX; I don't HAVE MAX, and I don't want MAX.

 

Gary

 

Sorry I don't want to use MAX, but as of right now, that is the only way to use Lightscape. Lightscape is no longer being made, and was intergrated into MAX/VIZ. The radiosity solution inside MAX is basically what lightscape turned into. How good that integration is another story. Cinema 4D is probably you only solution, since you seem to be a mac person. I would also suggest Lightwave.

[GaryR50]

I have a PC, Chris. Lightwave's a bit pricey, but I'm looking into Cinema 4D, as it does have some semblance of a GI provision. Thanks for putting up with my questions/rants.

 

Gary

[rivoli]

of course you're right gary, not every renderer works like prman. what i was assuming, following christopher guess which i find quite likely, is that a standalone version of vray will problably have its own file format to work with. prman and rib are good examples to keep in mind, but i'm not saying vray will be a command line renderer, it may be having a gui or it may not, i just don't know. in terms of exporting and importing files, having to do with another format (beside 3ds, dxf, obj), say something like rib, should not make any difference as long as your modeler (more likely a plugin) is capable of producing it. one may consider that vray, like brazil or fr, is a very easy to use renderer which not require any particoular knoledge to be mastered. this means that you can control a bunch of parameters almost effortless, in fact people tend to look at a third party renderer as if it was capable of producing wonderful images just hitting a button. an essential command line renderer would problably not fit the needs of people who do our work, like me or many others, and don't want to get into any programming issue.

[Dan J]

Gary,

 

Not to long ago there was someone on the forum offering the last version of lightscape and it was very resonable. Jeff might know some more, but you will have to wait until he returns from the 3D festival. Did you look around on some of those bidding sites?

[GaryR50]

I could probably find it on Ebay, Dan, but I'm not an auction fan. The price stated is never what you end up paying - unless no one else bids, that is. Unfortunately, my Google searches haven't even unearthed a copy for sale on Ebay, let alone anywhere else.

 

Rivoli, yes, that's the whole crux of the matter; SketchUp only exports in DXF, OBJ and 3DS. No RIB. Fortunately, Cinema 4D reads 3DS, which is one reason why I'm considering it. Another is that is has radiosity and global illumination capabilities. As soon as I figure it out in the demo version, I may decide to buy it, as it appears to be the best bet for my needs.

 

Gary

[bjornkn]

Gary,

SketchUp actually do export in RIB format, but unfortunately only on the Mac version:confused:

http://sketchup.com/plugins/

[GaryR50]

Well, Bjorn, I guess that's "payback" for giving us PC users EAP, right?

 

Gary

[Santiago Molina]

Hi Gary, Hi Bjorn, hi all

 

I think it´s a matter of asking atlast to offer some kind of translator to vray.

For your purpose you need to translate 4 important things

 

1. Geometric info. Very Easy, since it should be the same as the info in sketchup.

2. Camera information. Including position, target position and focal length

3. Material information and uv mapping. That´s tricky in my opinion, since sketchup´s material editor only edits color and transparency. There is no control of specular shininess, ior, diffusion, etc. A workaround would be a way to link sketchup material names to vray specific phisically based materials. So when loaded in vray glass, for example would become phisically correct glass.

4. Lightning information. that is even trickier since sketchup only works with daylight. One way I can think of, is to define light as a material, once applied in skp, vray would translate it into specific light sources. (That´s the only way i can think of defining light without a GUI)

 

Ithink you should also look at radiance also, besides randerman, for an example of how vray standalone could work. With the right translator, it works flawlessly and produces beautiful images, without it, it is near to impossible to use.

 

Artlantis, that´s another issue, since it was designed with simplicity in mind, not photorealism. Lightscape was, and still is one of the best radiosity rendering engines. And it has a GUI, where you can define lightinig and material properties. If you can get your hands on a copy, try it. The main drawback is you have to be very careful with your modelling. And, another thing, don´t let anyone tell you that lightscape was integrated in max. Autodesk bought lightscape to kill it...

[GaryR50]

Those last two items are why I think we'll always require a 3rd party renderer, Santiago. Unless SketchUp ever incorporates raytracing, we'll always need something else that can handle materials and lighting appropriately. I don't believe SketchUp ever will be a raytracer, though; not without ruining its chief attributes; i.e., ease of use and speedy modeling. However, if a plug-in of some sort could work, it might not hamper SketchUp's main functions, since the raytracing functions would still occur outside SketchUp.

 

Gary

[Santiago Molina]

Maybe if sketchup offered something like lightworks as a plugin (as an option). It may not be the best solution, but offers most of the functions many people ask for (raytracing and (i think) some kind of radiosity) Design workshop offers that option(although it ships with a very old version of lightworks) and has an interesting approach for defining lights (as materials). I personally don't like lightworks too much, but it may be enough for many people who ask for a raytracer, without compromising sketchup's simplicity.

[GaryR50]

Yes, sounds like Lightworks, or something similar, would be the best way of incorporating raytracing in SketchUp without really incorporating raytracing IN SketchUp, itself. I think that, as long as the raytracing function is outside SketchUp, itself, that would work. The two could simply communicate with each other, and this wouldn't entail any complex commands that couldn't be part of SketchUp's simple interface. It would also relieve SketchUp of the system burdens of being a raytracer.

 

Gary

[pushkin]

does anybody know about RS-MR by Artvps ??? is it better than Vray stamd alone?

[flossy]

i waiting 4 tis lolz..

[creasia]

I just found this today...

 

Look for the IDX Renditioner on the IMSI web site for Lightworks rendering in SU.

 

http://www.idx-design.com/IDX/IDXRenditioner/IDXRenditionerGallery/tabid/714/Default.aspx

 

Man this is an old thread...

Edited January 5, 2009 by creasia