Newbie Workflow Q and render engine quandry

[billcooper2]

Hi all,

 

I've been modelling rough outs in Revit and bridging over to Sketchup for detailing, and finishing my renders as NPR mainly in Piranesi and PS/Painter for some years. It's time for me to break into photo-real. I yearn to see those glossy reflections and smooth glass curtain walls.

 

My workflow question has to do with the fact I have been using revit/s.u. for my modelling chores, and then finishing in raster with great success in my area of specialty because I mainly work in loose digital watercolor. But I have a "feeling" I would be better served if I took the plunge head-long into 3ds design (or max) because I have reservations about sketchup. Whether or not those reservation are valid or fair is unknown to me, because I don't know if S.U. is capable of producing as "nice" a model as 3ds (or even Maya which I would also be willing to learn) in the realm of photo-real. I am also wondering if I can still rough-out my models in revit and then import into max to finish them off (no texturing in revit, I am aware of the ugly plasticky look) because I am also a residential designer, and I create all my cd's from my revit models, rough or detailed.

 

I realize that my limitations now are my own, and that I have allot to learn before I can be good at anything, but I am wondering if I, as an example, purchase v-ray for sketch up now, just because I know sketch up, will I kick myself in the a$$ two years from now, and realize I should have gone with a workflow into and through 3ds from the start, while at the beginning of my learning curve?

 

Also, is v-ray really the end all be all it seems to be? And I'm not only talking quality and speed, but is it the most widely supported in terms of available support entourage, trees, etc?

 

I'm intrigued by the RT (?) type engines, but it seems like they have allot of detractors.

 

I also wonder if some of you would dare to opine and comment on how you might do it if you had it all to do over again, in terms of which package combinations you would choose. Like I said, I have 3ds, Maya, available to me in addition to s.u. and revit, but I am also very intrigued by C4d, and many others.

 

Finally, I'm a solo practitioner, and value an artistic approach and eye in my world view. Production speed is not my primary concern, but perhaps as I mature it could become so?

 

I know I'm asking for opinions, and that is allot to ask, and I'm also not sure if this topic has been beaten to death here, and forgive me if it has, but I truly am alone in my region, and have no peers to turn to for advise.

 

Thanks in advance for any words of wisdom. It will be greatly appreciated.

Edited November 22, 2013 by billcooper2

[CliveG]

My 2c worth here is probably not going to be as valuable as some of the uber experienced folk on the forum but as I'm sort of newbie to the quest for photo-realistic work, whilst at the same time, having 30 years of 3D CAD experience (go figure), I see some parallels.

 

Couple of observations.... don't give up on your current skill-set because they could still be a really valuable asset to you and work well in conjunction with your new direction. There are a lot of guys out there producing PR work, however there is something that separates the top quality practitioners from the rest of us and that seems to be - them, their eye, their artistic skills. A lot of the technical aspects and the tools they use come a distant second or third in their ability to produce awesome work. They're going to produce top quality work with a blackboard and chalk. It sounds like your current skill-set is perhaps more artistic and, to me, that is a very valuable commodity and could separate you from the rest of us (in a good way). Perhaps you're niche may be artistic interpretation of PR rendering....

 

Because I had so many years of experience with AutoCAD churning out 3D work I was the same as you initially, looking to incorporate this into the workflow of Max / Vray modelling. It took six months or so, but I weaned myself off that, because, no matter my speed in AutoCAD I found (others may disagree) that it wasn't worth it, there seemed to be too many incidents of things just not making the transition well and having to be remodelled in MAX, to the point I just said "sod it" and now work entirely in Max. There certainly a lot of folk who seem to incorporate SU in their workflow very successfully. If I had my time again, I may have gone that route myself. But for simplicities sake and as an old fart not wanting to re-learn too many pieces of software, I gave up on incorporating many different pieces of software and just concentrate on learning MAX / Vray combo. Likewise I avoid deeply involving CAD in my model production (I'll trace then unload my CAD) and spend the rest of the time in MAX, Oh and of course post.

Edited November 22, 2013 by CliveG

[Scott Schroeder]

Production speed may not be your concern, but it will be your client's concern. It's tough to get gigs as it is when you are relatively new to the area, being slower than the competition can hurt your chances. However, once you can establish yourself then you can be a little more flexible on your production time. I should note that I'm talking about at least a full work week, 5 days, slower than a normal person. A few hours to a few days, that's not that bad.

 

RT just isn't there yet, not for architecture. For product viz, it's awesome.

 

SketchUp itself isn't bad. The reason why it gets such a bad rep is that it is easy to use and pick up, so a lot of people adopted it without first learning proper modeling. What happened was a large portion of the user base developed incredibly bad habits and put those awful models out to the public. The thing you have to watch out for when going from X to Y software is the changes. If you get a change, you have to go back to the other program, make the changes, re-export, re-import, and re-do materials if the import process doesn't keep them or you've modified them in the other software.

 

Vray is great, so is mental ray. Corona is gaining an insane head of steam. If you are starting out, I'd say look at either Mental Ray as it's incorporated into Max or even Corona as it's free. Unless you have extra money, I might stay away from Vray from a purely capitol point of view.

 

You also should be aware that great rendering is not just about what software you use or what rendering engine did it. It's about your artistic eye, your knowledge of the core fundamentals of traditional art. Lights, color, material properties, composition, etc.

[billcooper2]

I want to thank both of you for your valuable insights.

Very interesting points to consider.

 

Clive, you are absolutely correct. I have my eye pointed squarely at some form of hybrid rendering workflow. What, at this point, I have no idea, but the beautiful thing about any art form, once you get past the rudiments, then into or beyond mid level proficiency, the art will find you and reveal itself. So I will, later than sooner, attempt to weave the two mediums together.

 

Hey Scott, can I ask you, if money was no object, would you still recommend Mental Ray and or Corona over V-Ray? And is Corona gaining steam in a segment the community of proficient or practicing artists?

 

Also, just out of ignorance, I don't understand why RT would be o.k. for product viz (gatoraid/bayer aspirin?) but not architecture. Arch is too complex?

 

Thanks again guys.

Edited November 23, 2013 by billcooper2

[Scott Schroeder]

Yeah, you are correct about architecture being too complex for RT for now. There is a good article by Jeff Patton on the subject; http://jeffpatton.net/2011/04/why-iray/

 

I think Corona is gaining steam because it's really similar to Vray in terms of ease of use. It took me all of a few hours to feel really comfortable with it. I come from a very heavy Vray background and when I had to learn Mental Ray to teach a class, it took a lot longer to really feel comfortable with Mental Ray.

 

If money was no object and I had to choose Vray or Corona, I'm not sure what I would choose. I'd probably buy a big ass render rig and go with Corona. If I had a good computer that I couldn't upgrade for a bit, I'd probably go with Vray.

 

I won't fully comment on Vray until I really have time to test out 3.0. Let's just say I'm still not fully thrilled at them going per node network rendering costs now but that's for another thread. Ultimately, Vray or Corona would depend on your pipeline. Vray still has the advantage of wider online rendering support and you can really tweak the engine to get a decent amount of quality in a short time. Though Corona is quite fast and you can always stop the render a little early and clean the left over noise in post with a program like Neat Image.

 

Check out Juraj's work with Corona and keep an eye out for his write up in using it in a production environment. http://www.behance.net/gallery/Icelandic-coastal-house/12273735 and http://corona-renderer.com/forum/index.php/topic,2018.0.html

[billcooper2]

You've given me a lot to think about, and some very compelling links. I absolutely love Talcik's renders.

 

Thank you very much for sharing your insights.