Revit Vray vs 3DS Max Vray

[K M]

So now that Vray is coming to Revit, I was wondering if anyone has had any experience with the Revit Vray beta that has also had experience in 3DS Max as well. I am currently learning how to use 3DS Max so that I can use Vray but now that it is coming to Revit (which I have used for years) is it worth continuing to learn? Or do you think 3DS max will still produce the best renders?

 

Thanks

[Justin Hunt]

We briefly tested it in the office and were pleasantly surprised. it worked rather well, good enough for design development. Its a good replacement for mentalray. The material translation is good and its fast.

 

It wont replace Max for higher end work though, mainly because of all the plug ins like forest pack etc. Of course there are some things that Revit will never be able to do (like sim cloth) or is just too painful to model or animate.

[Scott Schroeder]

We tested it out as well and the material library loading from Max worked better than expected. Though at the time you were limited to basic material set ups, ie no blends or multi-channel masking. Which is fine, you don't need that in Revit anyways.

 

They talked about this on the CGGarage podcast. Vray for Revit is never intended to replace high end Max renderings. Vray for Revit is simply there as a bridge for the, "I just want to see this in 3D" need in SD and DD phases. Then when you are ready for the high end renderings, the translation is easier as you are already in the Vray system.

[K M]

Thanks heaps for the feedback guys! Ill definitely keep learning 3DS Max

[John Dollus]

Vray for Revit is never intended to replace high end Max renderings. Vray for Revit is simply there as a bridge for the, "I just want to see this in 3D" need in SD and DD phases.

 

Odd. I didn't read this bit in the Vray for Revit marketing material. "Purchase the new Vray for Revit for not quite producing renderings that don't quite meet the expectations of the market"

 

It's absolutely intended for final renderings. The 'just need to see in 3d' is completely satisfied out of the box with a competent Revit operator.

[Francisco Penaloza]

Odd. I didn't read this bit in the Vray for Revit marketing material. "Purchase the new Vray for Revit for not quite producing renderings that don't quite meet the expectations of the market"

 

It's absolutely intended for final renderings. The 'just need to see in 3d' is completely satisfied out of the box with a competent Revit operator.

 

Because nobody will sell you anything saying that. "buy this new car, it will be just fine to take you to your office"

V Ray by it self, is a killer rendering engine, it was a giant revolution in the rendering world no doubts; but this does not mean, just because you have V-Ray or use V Ray you'll get Bertrand quality instantly. And that's the point of all the publicity of Chaos Group, it is logical, they piggy back on incredibly talented artist, to sell their products.

 

But we all know the modeling limitations of REVIT and the time frame that "Drafters" have to produce everything in REVIT.

Can you do great renderings in REVIT Today, without V-Ray?, IRay could rendering works great, quality wise is very good. But how many people have the time to put all the details necessary to get a high quality image like we are used to produce in 3D Max???

I don't see any in this forum or any other Arch Viz forum.

 

I think for REVIT, the new Autodesk rendering will be more than enough, and when people start to use, they will love it, That's why by default V Ray in REVIT have way less controls.

 

At the end, it is good to have several options, but if you really want to learn V Ray, using the the REVIT version only will be limiting.