Maxwell VS Vray VS Mentalray, 3ds VS Rhinoceros

[alewoke]

Hi guys

 

I'm new here, nice to meet you.

I have been doing architecture renderings with rhino+maxwell for 1 year with decent results but I'm still not sure if this is really the best solution.

Some people told me that it's better to render from 3ds instead of rhino, and maybe using vray or mentalray instead of maxwell.

 

What do you think?

 

Why everyone prefer 3ds instead of rhino?

 

Byeee

[farzad_moshiri]

Hi

You can achieve "nice"(90% real) results with V-Ray in a short time, but "great"(99% real) results with Maxwell in a long rendering time.

So it's your choice and based on your needs to choose a biased rendering engine like V-Ray or an unbiased one like Maxwell :

1) I need extremely real results, so I pay as much time resource as needed. >>> Maxwell

2) I'm looking for the most efficiency in terms of time/quality. >>> V-Ray

 

And keep in mind that it takes much more time to learn V-Ray in comparison to Maxwell; cause of V-Ray's too many parameters.

I surmise that for someone new to biased rendering engines, V-Ray's the best and Mental Ray is practically out of question now.

[Francisco Penaloza]

I am sorry but I do not agree with Farzad, each software has good and not that good.

Rinoceros it is very strong on modeling and for some reason lately very used in architectural industry.

3d max is the 2000 pound gorilla, full features, modeling, animation, particle system, rendering and more.

If you are an architect that only need to do rendering for presentations, rinoceros with a good rendering plug in will be more that enough. No need to spend $$$$

You need to lear all the pros and cons of your software and how to enhance you rendering with photoshop work, to make it look professional,there tons of tutorials on this mere website. And others related.

If you are planing in become a 3d artist, 3dMax is a great start, then will discover other great 3d apps that will fit better your workflow.

[M V]

The program and method does not matter. It all comes down to the artist. Look at what Vyonyx can do with just Photoshop.

 

http://vyonyx.com/tutorial07-rendering-architectural-interior-in-photoshop/

 

My point is that no software is better than the other. I have seen amazing work come from V-Ray and Maxwell and I have also seen crappy work from both engines. Its the artistic eye and talent of the person behind the screen that makes great renderings.

Edited April 2, 2013 by valerostudio

[Chris MacDonald]

I am also a firm believer in the fact that it's down to the artist. I've seen some absolute abominations produced with VRay, Mental Ray and Maxwell.

 

My renderer of choice is VRay, and I've chosen it over Mental Ray for my own reasons - but that isn't to say Mental Ray isn't good, because it is actually just as capable as VRay. Really you need to choose one, learn it and only then when you look at what the others have to offer will you genuinely understand the feeling of "oh wow, I really need that feature from render engine x".

 

Honestly, no render engine has it ALL. There are features of both Maxwell and MR that I'd love to see in VRay, and vice-versa.

[easy3dsource]

I agree with Joe about the importance of the artist; technology changes quite rapidly, and with all these advancements you constantly hear about some hot new software that claims to be the "make awesome" button.

 

That being said; it is worthwhile to look at the pros and cons of the different software combinations you've described. I'm a huge fan of Rhino, but have the mentality that you should use the right tool for the job.

 

Rhino is great for architectural design; the level of precision you can achieve with it is amazing, and Rhino's nurbs are phenomenal. This makes it great for designing projects that are more organic, and if you use grasshopper you can do a lot of great parametric stuff as well.

 

3dsMax is great for all the capabilities it offers (as francisco mentioned), but due to it's lack of "precision" I personally hate using it as a design tool. However, all of its features make it great for visualization, especially if you're visualizing a project that you didn't design (it's pretty good about importing a variety of model types).

 

As for the Maxwell vs. Vray conversation; Maxwell is as close to it gets to having a one-click solution to getting a great rendering, but the trade-off is the amount of time it takes to create a presentable image. V-ray has a much higher learning curve, but once you get the hang of it you can crank out Maxwell quality renderings in a fraction of the time.

 

Your personal goals might help dictate what software is right for you; if you're looking to do a lot of architectural design, stick with Rhino (and take the time to learn Vray, although it's not as good for rhino IMO). If you're looking to do only arch-viz, you might find yourself working more effectively with 3dsMax + Vray. I honestly would never recommend using Maxwell unless you've got nothing but time on your hands, or you're too lazy to force yourself to learn Vray

[Stephen Thomas]

3dsMax is great for all the capabilities it offers (as francisco mentioned), but due to it's lack of "precision" I personally hate using it as a design tool.

 

I've heard this comment a few times recently on here. Why do you think modelling in 3ds max is not precise? I don't understand why not when you can input measurements to fractions of a millimeter and use snaps etc. What is it you think is missing?

[matthewspencer]

For ease of collaboration with others, and for how large the community is, there's no beating VRay.

 

Maxwell is a much more specialty product, really. There are various people and companies for whom Maxwell is an incredible tool, but I personally don't think it suits the workflow of archviz. Maybe if you work for dbox and you've got a while to make something perfect for 1 World Trade Center, it'd be good to use.

 

Personally I am in fact a Maxwell user but most of my projects aren't archviz.

[easy3dsource]

I've heard this comment a few times recently on here. Why do you think modelling in 3ds max is not precise? I don't understand why not when you can input measurements to fractions of a millimeter and use snaps etc. What is it you think is missing?

 

For me, it all comes down to the "flow" during the design process. A lot of times when I'm designing I'm still "sketching" in 3d space. Rhino's flow is more conducive to this. For example: I can start drawing a line (snapping to another object or not), then while still determining the other endpoint of the line, I can input the exact length I may want that line to be, then snap it in the general direction of another object, or some arbitrary direction. I know 3dsMax has keyboard entry tools, but I've never found them to be very useful in this same regard.

 

Another example; when rotating an object, I start the rotate command, select the object, select the pivot point, then a reference point, then use my cursor to determine the final angle of rotation. In 3dsMax, rotating an object and changing its pivot point are two separate functions that I find aren't very intuitive.

[bindunarayan]

A good architect can come out with some simply outstanding renderings even with limited or potentially weak resources. So, it really doesn't matter whether you use Maxwell, Vray, Rhinoceros or 3DS, if you are good at your work, and have the capability to deliver as per your client requirements.

[Gary Brown]

One (or two) other consideration...

Are you looking to use this for personal freelance use or are you looking to get in with a firm to do this kind of work? If you are looking to get in with an architecture firm I would focus on learning 3dsmax and vray. That seems to be the most widely used. If you are working on your own I would stick with what you know (Rhino and maxwell) and focus on improving your skills. If you aren't getting results you are happy with then I would focus on learning the physics of light and how they interact with objects (this will help to better understand maxwell and help you create more believable materials), study photographers works, read/watch as many tutorials as you can possibly find, and prcatice. The best way I have found to learn is to hunt down photographs of very simple scenes and try and match that as closely as possible. Doing this, will force you to grow.

 

Also, ask yourself what your ultimate goal is. If you are planning on only doing still images then all you need is rhino, maxwell, and definitely photoshop. If you are thinking you want to get into animation/film then I would go with the program that has the greater toolset to accomplish that, 3dsmax/vray.

 

For myself, I am an architect and do viz on the side, mostly stills. Occasionally i do animations and once in a while combine it with live action. I use 3dsmax/mental ray. I would love to move to vray but our firm wont pay for it. I've never used Rhino but that's only because I needed the scope that 3dsmax provides and I'm lazy and don't like taking the time to learn new software. I occasionally use maxwell but not often. I find texturing much more versatile in 3dsmax with its parametric capabilities.

 

I disagree with Alexander and his comment on the accuracy of 3dsmax. I have been using it for 10 years and have never felt that I couldnt produce something accurately. I think Alexander's concern comes back to workflow and what you are used to.

[louishjelmslev]

Just to throw in my 2 cents.

As you'll see with a bit of a search, this topic is arguably the most common topic in visualization. The trend goes like this: the first few replies are sincere, and try to help. After about 8 or so replies, one eventually gets to the response "it's not the render engine, it's the render artist", or "they're all capable, it's what you do with them."

Now, this isn't fundamentally wrong, but I personally don't think this really helps the OP.

I'm assuming you already understand that the biggest engines/platforms (i.e. the ones you've mentioned in your original post) are very capable indeed, and rather than asking "what's the best?", it's more of a matter of "what's particularly popular for an industry?, for a project type?, etc."

So with that said, what you're really doing is taking a poll, and thus, I'm here to give my opinion on the matter. Reason being?, because I wish someone would have told me their experiences, as personal as they may have been.

Like many here, I've been visualizing for well over a decade, having worked originally with Maya on Irix. Most of my work is in architecture/environments, both photo-realistic and diagrammatic.

 

I personally feel that Rhino and 3Ds DO NOT replace each other, meaning you can't replace one with the other. I'm not saying it's impossible, I'm just saying it's very difficult, to the point where it would be counterproductive). Case in point, you can set up renders in Rhino, but it camera control and composition aren't as well tuned as in Max. On the other hand, Rhino is hands down the most convenient modeler (for industrial design/architecture) for concept to pre-construction. At the construction stage, you'll have to resort to more CAD-oriented software, with the understanding that BIM seems to be the way of the 'future'.

Therefore, I personally model in Rhino, then composite the scene in Max. Another plus in using Max for a Rhino user is that A LOT of symbols (purchasable 3D models that are already textured) are available in Max compatible formats. For big jobs (in other words, big budgets), this can really be a time saver.

 

Now, moving on to Maxwell/Vray/Mental Ray.

A genuinely feel that at least 75% of rendering veterans would agree with at least 50% of what I've stated so far , however discussion of render engines is typically A LOT more divisive, so again, I say this as MY OPINION ONLY.

 

So, firstly, take Mental Ray out of the equation. Don't get me wrong, it's great, but in terms of production-efficiency within industrial design, it simply doesn't have the support and interest that the other two engines do. As far as the technology goes, it's definitely up there, it's just not developed toward industrial design (as much).

 

Now, Vray vs Maxwell.

As some have stated, the general difference is that Vray needs 'more work' for the final image to look good. On the other hand, Vray tends to render more quickly, given that it doesn't even 'try' for accuracy (it 'tries' for light compensation, for a kind of 'Vray look'). That's a good thing and a bad thing for Vray. Just to repeat, exceptional Vray renders tend to look like "exceptional Vray renders". Personally, I feel like the Vray look is getting a bit tired, as new users are replicating rather than improving the techniques they learn from DVD's and other tutorials.

 

Therefore, I prefer Maxwell. True, sampling levels (the 'graininess') need to be rendered through for a good bit of time, but honestly, with a bit of time management, not so bad.

 

One final matter to discuss...

Over the last few years, I've been noticing that my clients are increasingly wanting "kind-of photorealistic" rather than fully photorealistic. Even they are getting tired of the ultra-realistic rendering, and they're typically developers and architects. The consequence of this?... MORE PHOTOSHOP!!!

Seriously, after you become an intermediate renderer, the most important thing for improving still images is what you do in post.

 

In sum, my workflow:

Rhino + 3D Max -> Maxwell -> Photoshop