Andronikos Posted November 24, 2004 Share Posted November 24, 2004 For those of you who know Vray, this is 1st & 2nd bounce set at 1, and using the default color mapping values. Timmatron did you use Irad. map for 1st and Global Phot. for sec. bounces? what irradiance map preset did you use (if you used a preset) 8min is ultra fast! Lighting is not so good but nice caustics and you are right the phere shadow is wrong.. maybe if you use a fall off at the Vray Refraction mat will fix that... thanx for testing ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Nelson Posted November 24, 2004 Share Posted November 24, 2004 What I'm thinking is that theoretically, you can create a light bulb or tube, apply a light emitter material to it, and stick it into your fixture. Maxwell should be able to simulate the distribution based on the actual construction of the luminaire. This is what happens in real life. Anyone want to try that? I think you can kind of do that in Vray now Fran. In the latest builds we have the Vray light material - its very simple since it only has a multiplier value. I'm not sure how "real world" it is since I haven't tested it with anything of real size like a fluorescent tube, but you can get decent results from it. This is one I started to make to try to re-create the original Maxwell test render. But then I got off track & just started playing with the light material. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Nelson Posted November 24, 2004 Share Posted November 24, 2004 Timmatron did you use Irad. map for 1st and Global Phot. for sec. bounces? what irradiance map preset did you use (if you used a preset) 8min is ultra fast! Lighting is not so good but nice caustics and you are right the phere shadow is wrong.. maybe if you use a fall off at the Vray Refraction mat will fix that... I used Irad. map for first and lightmap for second. Used high preset for IRmap and 1000 for lightmap. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andronikos Posted November 24, 2004 Share Posted November 24, 2004 I used Irad. map for first and lightmap for second. Used high preset for IRmap and 1000 for lightmap. what Vray version do you have? Lightmap? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Nelson Posted November 24, 2004 Share Posted November 24, 2004 Yea lightmap has been in the latest 1.45x builds. It's VERY fast, especially when you just want to do quick test renders. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kunstraum.tv Posted November 24, 2004 Share Posted November 24, 2004 to be honest, i think this kind of discussion comes at least one year too early. at the moment for me maxwell is a great "toy" with a great potential in the future. i love to play with maxwell, but it´s far from being a productive tool. to compare vray with maxwell at this point is absolutly wrong. of course vray is lightyears ahead now. but remember how vray began just a couple of years ago. maxwell has a very instresting basic idea and i like it even in this early stage.....but of course we still use vray in our production. everything else would a suicide. but i have a good feeling about the development of maxwell, this is the reason we bought a license. and....i spent more money on more useless things...like e.g. the whole star trek dvd collection...give our spanish friends some time..and maybe someday you really can compare it with vray or fr or me...etc etc Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kunstraum.tv Posted November 24, 2004 Share Posted November 24, 2004 of course i meant "mr" (mental ray)..and not me Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andronikos Posted November 24, 2004 Share Posted November 24, 2004 check your e-mail... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andronikos Posted November 24, 2004 Share Posted November 24, 2004 check your e-mail... sorry wrong post dif. forum guys...lol I hope that too! Lets see! Vray 1.5 is comming + Vray.exe too - Brazil Stand Alone and FR ST2 so let see and wait... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Nelson Posted November 24, 2004 Share Posted November 24, 2004 Ok one last test for now. I brightened the default material, changed color mapping to HSV Expo. and increased the render settings. This one took 27 minutes, but I think the quality shows. Still have those 2 ugly artifacts, but I'm sure its just something in the model. I still think the lighting in Maxwell was nicer because it showed more color variance coming from outside, but I bet you could simulate that with HDRI too. I WORK NOW! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fran Posted November 24, 2004 Share Posted November 24, 2004 I can try explain a bit more plz... what do you mean by stick it into your fixture".? Oops. Sorry about that. It means "put" or "position", like putting a light bulb into a table lamp or a fluorescent tube into a linear light fixture. "Global Illumination" is a general term for any algorithm that simulates light and takes into account all sources of light. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ernest Burden III Posted November 24, 2004 Share Posted November 24, 2004 This one took 27 minutes, but I think the quality shows. Nice work, Tim. No grain in the Vray image. I figed I would try it in Cinema, no good results. I have not been able to get anywhere near the smoothness of yours, or the time. I'm not even sure if Cinema can do the indirect caustics. I will have to try it on a simple model. Direct worked in this scene with a light in the room, I'm just not seeing any on bounce. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ramon Aranguren Posted November 25, 2004 Share Posted November 25, 2004 to be honest, i think this kind of discussion comes at least one year too early. at the moment for me maxwell is a great "toy" with a great potential in the future. Well I think this is the simplest truth about maxwell, the good thing is that they've started with the right foot here, other companies have already made the toughest part (develope render engines this far), and that's why I think the process for maxwell will be faster, the thing is that if we are the final user, we should be the ones evaluating the product, though the offer is very tempting, I feel like investing in stock market, but with less benefits, anyway about production tools, the major part of the clients never want to pay for a lifelike render (high rendertimes), sometimes this quest for the photoreal render is more to feed our egos as artists than a professionalism question, either way what i'm more concerned about is the photometric feature, not because you can set up a scene faster, but 'cause you can study real scenarios for real life. Ahh this maxwell guys should ask to all of you professionals out there, what you want, how do you want it, and what ideas you have, since they're comming out with an alpha version, I think they want something like... when you buy a house in preconstruction phase, you are always allowed to make changes to the design, this will ensure a "perfect" product! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andronikos Posted November 25, 2004 Share Posted November 25, 2004 http://ixor.gr/maxwelltest/maxwell.htm updated with dif. rerndering engine benchmarks! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
morbid Posted November 26, 2004 Share Posted November 26, 2004 1. They automatically ensure that the "alpha" testers are serious professionals and not just some hack who wants to render monsters and make unproductive comments about the product. aehh sorry, but not all in the CG industry are doing boring arch stuff. i can make interiors in no time but i like to see how many arch modeller can do good looking chars. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IC Posted November 26, 2004 Share Posted November 26, 2004 Chars? What the hell is that supposed to mean? I take it you mean characters(?) It's not what we do! Did you miss Kunstraum's post above. His modelling and rendering would compete with anything in the CG industry, as would the work of many here. Stick to CGTalk if you think archi work is boring. No-one else here does. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andronikos Posted November 26, 2004 Share Posted November 26, 2004 he means characters... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rivoli Posted November 26, 2004 Share Posted November 26, 2004 i can make interiors in no time but i like to see how many arch modeller can do good looking chars. interesting comment, thanks for sharing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ricardo Eloy Posted November 26, 2004 Share Posted November 26, 2004 aehh sorry, but not all in the CG industry are doing boring arch stuff. i can make interiors in no time but i like to see how many arch modeller can do good looking chars. Unhappy with your comment, I'm afraid. Wrong place to do that. 1) Arch stuff is so boring you actually took the time to register, read and post a comment on our "boring" arch stuff forum. 2) Each one to each's own. If you can make interiors in no time, good for you. But next time, save this kind of comment to yourself, alright? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
STRAT Posted November 26, 2004 Share Posted November 26, 2004 lol we can all make interiors AND characters in no time too, but how many can make them sing? as you say, how many arch modellers can do a good looking char? far point iyho maybe, but then how many char modellers can do a good interior compaired to the guys that frequent this place? swings and roundabouts. they're 2 different subjects. none is either better or harder than the next. i suggest you take this topic to another site somewhere. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ernest Burden III Posted November 26, 2004 Share Posted November 26, 2004 At first I thought he meant 'chairs'. Yeah, it's hard to model good chairs, I'm terrible at it. Characters? I suppose I would work on that, but I cannot find anyone who wants to employ me to model orcs and estrogen-soaked femme. Besides, I grew up on fantasy art, it was all drawn and painted and most of the digital stuff doesn't cut it. Drawing still works pretty well. So there is the point of distiction between the ever-exciting world of amateur obsessives who seem to have no end of time to spend on their models, and those that make a purchasing decision for software on whether or not you wait 120 mins for a decent render because you have a deadline and impatient client. Commercial work is often boring, but it's less-so than working in McDonalds. I know, a few people DO have jobs modeling orcs and dragons and such, but it isn't very many. Someone with really good character skills is much more likely to be employed to model fake humans for commercials--boring stuff like architectural interiors. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ceballos Posted November 26, 2004 Author Share Posted November 26, 2004 Maybe i should rename the title of this thread to.....?????.......:-) Well , we are almost up to 100 post in this thread, in 5 days,... good job everyone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ceballos Posted November 26, 2004 Author Share Posted November 26, 2004 i want to be the first one. 1 to go Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ceballos Posted November 26, 2004 Author Share Posted November 26, 2004 yeahhh....100 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fran Posted November 26, 2004 Share Posted November 26, 2004 At first I thought he meant 'chairs'. Yeah, it's hard to model good chairs, I'm terrible at it. That's what I thought he meant too! I can model a really good chair if I have the specs. But you know, when I need a nice little ogre or a full-figured archer to go into one of my scenes, I'm hopeless. At least now I know who to consult. 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