ceballos Posted November 21, 2004 Share Posted November 21, 2004 Hi all Just got Maxwell Render and i said to my self , this is going to be easy. Well....after hours and hours trying Maxwell, i come up with this image. Took about 2 hours to render this image with a Dual Xeon 1,7 Ghz, with 512 Ram. Maybe time to upgrade...hehe Im not impressed with the speed..., and i think they are giving the priority to the lightning feature, not the speed, in this version In this scene i have 5 teapots, 1 teapot that emitts light in the corner (why teapot, dont know) and 4 material , gold , glass, plastic and aluminium to the others teapot. And then the noise problem . Maxwell will be cleaning the noise level as long as the render progresses in time, so if i set the rendertime to about 4 hours , the noise in this image is gone. I hope :-) Well, im just a beginner ,so i have to study more about this render Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ernest Burden III Posted November 22, 2004 Share Posted November 22, 2004 Just got Maxwell Render and i said to my self , this is going to be easy. Well....after hours and hours trying Maxwell, i come up with this image...(why teapot, dont know) Thank you for posting your results, especially the time. It's a nice image. And teapots are just 'what you use', it's the law. You did the right thing. I hope the Cinema4D version of the Maxwell alpha is done soon, I'm thinking I would risk the cash to try it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pixelperfectg Posted November 22, 2004 Share Posted November 22, 2004 Ahhh, cool post. Indeed thank you for sharing your results. I'm considering the purchase too. The actual light distribution looks good. I'm digging the dispersion on the glass too. Nice test. Post more! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Nelson Posted November 22, 2004 Share Posted November 22, 2004 I wonder if you could post your scene that you are using so we can compare it to other renderers? The lighting looks pretty good but 2 hours IS a long time for such a simple scene. I especially don't care for the grain - its a lot easier to add noise to a rendering than take it out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ceballos Posted November 22, 2004 Author Share Posted November 22, 2004 Hi all Thanx for the comments. Ill post the scene later today. Im doing an interior scene as well , will post it tonight ceballos Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slarsson Posted November 22, 2004 Share Posted November 22, 2004 Instead of starting an new thread, i will post my first maxwell test here to, if it's ok? /Sören Larsson Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jucaro Posted November 22, 2004 Share Posted November 22, 2004 the teapot scene was 2hours. I wonder how long that took. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rivoli Posted November 22, 2004 Share Posted November 22, 2004 thanks for sharing your tests and results, i think there's a lot of people here interested in maxwell. to slarsson: i'd really like to know pc specs, rendertimes and scene setup, and, if you don't mind sharing your thoughts, what you think about the renderer, even at this early stage of development. thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ramon Aranguren Posted November 22, 2004 Share Posted November 22, 2004 Well i've seen the Maxwell webpage and i'm amazed, but you can see the same kind of work in vray's and brazil's pages, i think they all have potential to develope high quality images, now it's a timeframe war, I don't know about that poker quote, but I think it's worth to "pay to see" but they should release a free testing version like vray does, this lars image looks very nice, just like the mental ray Vs vray thread, maybe the lucky ones that have maxwell could do something likewise, I say vray 'cause i think is the fastest one out there yet! ain't it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dapeter2 Posted November 22, 2004 Share Posted November 22, 2004 Can you post an image/explaination of the interface? I'm curious how it works with MAX... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ceballos Posted November 22, 2004 Author Share Posted November 22, 2004 Slarsson: very nice, did u do something with the noise., eks. with noise killer program?..or how long did u set the rendering time , what spec? ceballos Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slarsson Posted November 22, 2004 Share Posted November 22, 2004 thanks for sharing your tests and results, i think there's a lot of people here interested in maxwell. to slarsson: i'd really like to know pc specs, rendertimes and scene setup, and, if you don't mind sharing your thoughts, what you think about the renderer, even at this early stage of development. thanks. The spec Dual p4 2,8 and it rendered for 8h in 832*1000.... there is some stuff made in post but no noise reduction. But one have to remember this is alpha1 so there is for sure more things to come, but i don't think you should buy maxwell for the speed as is And i have just used maxwell this weekend, so i have probebly missed something, but i realy like it and i'm sure i will use it alot more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Johnson Posted November 22, 2004 Share Posted November 22, 2004 I want to see interface folks.. Can any of you post pictures of an interface? Chris Johnson Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ceballos Posted November 22, 2004 Author Share Posted November 22, 2004 Ok. Here is some screenshots Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jasonkey Posted November 22, 2004 Share Posted November 22, 2004 thanks for the screenshots. we'd all love to see more images and render times too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Johnson Posted November 22, 2004 Share Posted November 22, 2004 Ouch Ceballos Looking at your system scale, I'm wondering if that's why you have so many problems. You have it set to 1,000,000 max units equals 1 Meter!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I would fix that if I were you, for I bet Maxwell requires everything to be in correct physical units. Could you set up that scene correctly and rerender that same scene and post some more results? Chris J. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dapeter2 Posted November 22, 2004 Share Posted November 22, 2004 thanks for those screenshots... I think I may actually give it a try - it may be unuseable for animations, but I really like how the stills end up. Does it come with it's own material type? I'd imagine it's somewhat close to what Vray's material is... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Asim Harbas Posted November 22, 2004 Share Posted November 22, 2004 Software:Inspirer Trianglesize: 1% Processing: 10 min. Rendering: 14 sec. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ceballos Posted November 22, 2004 Author Share Posted November 22, 2004 Ouch Ceballos Looking at your system scale, I'm wondering if that's why you have so many problems. You have it set to 1,000,000 max units equals 1 Meter!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I would fix that if I were you, for I bet Maxwell requires everything to be in correct physical units. Could you set up that scene correctly and rerender that same scene and post some more results? Chris J. hehe...i know. I see that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ceballos Posted November 22, 2004 Author Share Posted November 22, 2004 Inspirer Processing: 10 min. rendering: 14 sec. What render did u used? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ric_535 Posted November 22, 2004 Share Posted November 22, 2004 What render did u used? he use this http://www.integra.co.jp/eng/products/inspirer/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick Eloy Posted November 22, 2004 Share Posted November 22, 2004 Well, folks, I guess speed isn't really the key feature here. Of course, this is a very early alpha stage, and people don't master the soft yet, but these times sound really, really out of question (at least for our deadlines). But we have to remember that long ago Splutterfish released a demo version of Brazil that turned out to be a lot slower than the commercial version (or so they claimed to be). Meanwhile, more tests are what I personally expect to see. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PiXeL_MoNKeY Posted November 22, 2004 Share Posted November 22, 2004 But we have to remember that long ago Splutterfish released a demo version of Brazil that turned out to be a lot slower than the commercial version (or so they claimed to be).If you are refering to the 0.4.53 pubtest and prior versions, then you are mistaken. These never were intended to be a demo or beta of the actual shipping version, contrary to what alot of people believed. Instead it was a public release to test some core brazil features through a larger audience than just the clients. Now Brazil Rio is a different story it is a size and network render limited version of the full product. Beyond the those limitations it is the full product. On the subject of speed with Maxwell I don't believe their intent was to make the fastest renderer on the market. Instead they are going for the niche market that need physically correct renders at the cost of speed. Maxwell is an unbiased renderer. Unbiased means that with sufficient render time the rendered solution will always converge to the correct result without the introduction of artifacts. For more information on the Maxwell roadmap and images of the currently available plugins in their host apps visit: http://www.maxwellrender.com/ > Product -Eric Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Nelson Posted November 22, 2004 Share Posted November 22, 2004 Sounds like something that would be more useful for product viz. instead of arch. viz. It could possibly be a great alternative to actual studio photography. There are so many things that are easy to fake with architectural renderings, it seems like speed will ultimately be the most important element....for me anyways. But don't get me wrong, I love the idea of simplicity and accuracy in a renderer. Sometimes Vray can be a pain trying to optimize it to get a good balance between speed & quality. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick Eloy Posted November 22, 2004 Share Posted November 22, 2004 If you are refering to the 0.4.53 pubtest and prior versions, then you are mistaken. These never were intended to be a demo or beta of the actual shipping version, contrary to what alot of people believed. Instead it was a public release to test some core brazil features through a larger audience than just the clients.Actually, Eric, these were not my words, but Splutterfish's words. Long ago (and I mean like 2 years or so) SF's CEO posted in our forum saying that the demo version available was intended to be a lot slower than the shipping version. I really don't remember her name, but she said that we couldn't "take any conclusions from the demo available (in their website), because it's extremely slow when compared to the final version", or something like that (the whole thread was taken off because it quickly became a flame). At that time, nobody understood why they would call it a demo, then... Anyway, of course it's nice to have a painless rendering engine, but I personally think we still have a long way to go before we see something that suits our needs (speed+quality) AND is simple to use. But that's just me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now