Is the render engine more important than the design?

[Fran]

I don't know if you guys have noticed this, but there's been lots of posts (on the Critiques Forums) with titles like:

 

- VRay house

- VRay Free first attempt

- VRay live out (this is my personnal favourite )

- MR FG Living Room

- and so on...

 

It seems to me like the render engine is becoming more important to these guys than the design itself. Is it so important that it's actually worth naming a project with the engine's name? The question is: are third party renderers slowly becoming a kind of plague to CG? I mean, people seem to value the renderer more than any design or artistic skills...

 

What do you guys think?

 

Tagging the topic title with the name of the renderer simply makes the topic title more informative and saves people from having to ask. For people who do the viz and not the design, the render engine is often the focus because it is their tool of choice.

[DelfoZ]

fran, you stole the words from my mouth

[cullen]

Personally I like to know what software and rendering engine a person uses. It doesn't bother me if it's in the title or in the post but it's nice to see what people are using to "help" them get to their final image. I completely agree that the image is only as good as the person that creates it.

 

I know that whenever I see an image that says v-ray I pay close attention to that thread. Why? Because thats what I use. I like to see the outcome of what other people using the same thing as me. The same reason why people that use MAX or C4D pay close attention to those posts.

 

I think that what we do is an art. The render engine doesn't give you the composition, the material coordination or the modeling. I still think that we should share our software and techinques though.

 

crw

[jackb602]

i didn't realize that cinema licensed the lightworks engine also. i use formz, and they license the lightworks engine.

 

Dear god man, don't even joke about that. Cinema absolutely does not use the Lightworks engine. For starters, Lightworks uses radiosity for GI while Cinema uses some form of photon mapping. I literally spent a couple of years trying to get good radiosity renderings out of FormZ and finally gave up once I tried the Cinema 4D demo. I still use FormZ for modeling, but going back to the Lightworks engine now would feel like a punishment.

 

I suppose this kind of gets back to the main point of this thread. I don't buy the argument that the tools we use are irrelevant. I do admit that one of my favorite and more humbling sayings is "the poor craftsman always blames his tools." And we certainly need to develop our skills and knowledge to produce our best work, but it seems perfectly reasonable to want the best tools possible to help you produce that work. In the case of the Lightworks rendering engine, that tool was dramatically limiting the quality of work I could produce. When I switched to Cinema, my level of skill didn't change, but suddenly I was able to produce more convincing renderings. I still have a ton to learn, but I'd rather devote my energy toward developing my skills than cursing the tools I use.

 

Jack

[IC]

I don't think the intention of this post was ever to assert that the tools used are irrelevant-merely that they shouldn't be the main focus of the viewer critiquing or admiring the images. (Unless there is a reason for this.)

 

VRay, FR and all the others are undoubtedly great engines but you can get great results from ArchiCad or Microstation if you know how to.

 

A novice shouldn't feel pressure to use any one tool.

[William Alexander]

Cinema absolutely does not use the Lightworks engine. For starters, Lightworks uses radiosity for GI while Cinema uses some form of photon mapping.

 

"RADIOSITY" is just that, rtm AR.pdf - p.5 C4D v8.5 "Radiosity simulates the natural behavior of light, bouncing rays from surface to surface........" Its raytacing based on mesh subdivisions- Accuracy, look at the little pretty dots during a prepass as they determine accuracy of the solution based on that subdivsion......

Not Photon light distribution where you change the nature of theorectical spheres of light being bounced around until they lose thier energy.

 

Yes Lightworks sucks in FormZ, now I know why there is no documentation in C4D about it.

 

Sorry I brought it up................ I just find it really funny how TurboCads rendering engine (lightworks 7.2+/-) behaves and renders just like C4D's..........hmmmmmmmmmmmm

[Ricardo Eloy]

Tagging the topic title with the name of the renderer simply makes the topic title more informative and saves people from having to ask. For people who do the viz and not the design, the render engine is often the focus because it is their tool of choice.

 

I completely understand that, Fran. And, as I said before, the problem is not the info itself. I often ask about the renderer myself. My point is that , to me, putting the engine right up there, in the title is like going to the movies and watch a movie called "3ds max - The Day After Tomorrow".

Maybe it would be a good idea to have a "standard info tag" to each post, with some of the minimum information about it. Something like:

 

title: Living Room

software: 3ds max - Vray - Photoshop

description: this living room was done in...

 

I say that because those are probably the most common questions asked here. So, if you only want to know tech specs, there they are. If you want to comment on composition and other artistic stuff, you can also.

[Devin Johnston]

I like that idea Rick; I think a tag with relevant info on the image would answer a lot of questions that almost always come whenever a good image is posted. I agree with you that the engine doesn’t make the rendering, I think people especially those that are learning are very interested in how these great images are created. I know when I see an image that was created by the engine I use; I make it a point to find out what settings were used, how it was set up, in the hopes that I can learn something I didn't know.

[Crazy Homeless Guy]

so... would the people be required to know to insert this information, or would there be a set of check box's or seperate block areas when starting a new post? right now, when you start a new thread, you have a title block to type in, and a message block to type in. i don't knwo if there is some way thru the foum software to set it up so that you have a title block, a software block, and the the descritpion block. and this would only be active in the WIP and Finished area. probably not possible. it yould probably be a sticky that described standard posting procedure, such as there is now.

[Christopher Nichols]

My point is that , to me, putting the engine right up there, in the title is like going to the movies and watch a movie called "3ds max - The Day After Tomorrow".

 

hehe... that's funny. Want to know why they put 3dsmax used for Day After Tomorrow? Since if they put nothing, you can pretty much assume that it was Maya and Renderman... That is what is used 95% of the time. So they need to point it out when ever it is used on film since it is so rare used on film. That will change at some point. Sorry... a little of topic.

[Frosty]

Yes Lightworks sucks in FormZ, now I know why there is no documentation in C4D about it.

 

Sorry I brought it up................ I just find it really funny how TurboCads rendering engine (lightworks 7.2+/-) behaves and renders just like C4D's..........hmmmmmmmmmmmm

 

As far as I'm aware, the rendering engine in C4D is based on code from Cebas... the guys that make Final Render. It is adapted code and not the Final Render Engine as they produce it. Although Lightworks is very popular as a licensed engine for rendering, I've never heard anywhere that it is used in Cinema.

[Ricardo Eloy]

so... would the people be required to know to insert this information, or would there be a set of check box's or seperate block areas when starting a new post?

Probably not. Gotta check with Jeff if there's such feature, but I see no problem on having a sticky explaining that. What you guys think?

[cullen]

That sounds pretty good to me. Even if it's just the first paragraph in the post I think It would be nice. Keeps from always having to ask anyway.

[Devin Johnston]

Sticky sounds good to me.

[archkre]

Fifteen years ago Ol'timers would've written something like this:

 

Rotring Museum perspective in Paris

Staedler habitational units

Caran d'ache Condo in Vienna

Sounds quit stupid, doesn't it?

[ecastillor]

I guess it would sound more like, water color house, or markers and color pencil building, and if it was posted on a site called "Arquitects representation techniques"...i guess it would not sound so stupid.

 

In my days at school there was this guy that was a master doing arquitecture renderings by hand, but he never told us how he did it or what he used, so I dont mind if the name of the software is mentioned when posting an image so I can learn from that. Still not as important as to name your picture after the software.