PDA

View Full Version : Why not?



silviotoledo
10-28-2010, 06:47 AM
It's available to Blender, Xsi, Maya, C4D, Rhino and Max and others

but not for lightwave :(


The question is:

Why not?


See: http://vimeo.com/user1337612/videos

http://area.autodesk.com/img/static/renderingr/vray/vray01.jpg

http://www.schoemann-unna.de/preview/vray/shell_house/07_p.jpg

http://www.cyborg-art.dk/Internet_Temp/american_house.jpg

http://pds16.egloos.com/pds/200910/29/88/a0100788_4ae9987453588.jpg

http://www.cat-a-pult.com.ua/temp/RM/RM_rainy.jpg

http://static3.evermotion.org/files/model_images/a1e927a614c354d22ca859e02086760c.jpg

3DGFXStudios
10-28-2010, 07:11 AM
The apples is a photo picture :D

silviotoledo
10-28-2010, 07:28 AM
Wow! So big eh! :)


he, he, he. It is! How did you discover? :)

biliousfrog
10-28-2010, 07:34 AM
would it make you a better artist if it was?

silviotoledo
10-28-2010, 07:34 AM
More V-Ray images:

http://www.purerender.com/gallery/index.php?p=gallery&l=en&g=1

silviotoledo
10-28-2010, 07:41 AM
If V-Ray is available for Lightwave?

No, absolutelly it will not make me a better artist but it will allow me to render photorreal images this way :)!

Sorry about big attaches ( I thought the forum code would reduce the image sizes )

and my question is only " Why not available for Lightwave? " once it's available for all the others, free ones like Blender included.

I guess that if Lightwave wanna back to the TOP applications must rescue what have been lost.

It would include several fine coders and 3rd party applicatios that have been created for lightwave originally, but did not got attention from Newtek and are now part of the TOP others.

Say as example, V Ray, Shave and Haircut...

3DGFXStudios
10-28-2010, 08:21 AM
It's just to perfect. To much detail going on ;) :D

Von Polygon
10-28-2010, 05:41 PM
Why not indeed.
However the image with apples is a photo though. Shot with Samsung compact camera if EXIF data is anything to go by.

Intuition
10-28-2010, 06:06 PM
Yeah, Vray... I am becoming an evangelical for the Vray maya combo. It is the huge L337;ness. ;D

Can you press a button and have instant photo real?

No. But if you can do a good material and texturing job Vray will reward you in spades.

I've used many a render engine and none compare to the speed and ease of setup that Vray has. Modo comes close but the shader tree knocks it down some notches due to organization problems in big scenes.

cresshead
10-28-2010, 06:19 PM
i'd sooner have arnold render available for lightwave, but yeh Vray is nice..

vray is available for

3dsmax
maya
sketch up
blender
cinema4d
rhino
softimage

bridge for: houdini

so no go for:
modo
lightwave

adk
10-28-2010, 06:28 PM
Yeah, Vray... I am becoming an evangelical for the Vray maya combo. It is the huge L337;ness. ;D

Can you press a button and have instant photoreal?

No. But if you can do a good material and texturing job Vray will reward you in spades.

I've used many a rrender engine and none compare to the sppeed and ease of setup that Vray has. Modo coomes close but the shader tree knocks it down soome notches due to organization problems in big scenes.

Heya Intuition,

Are you still testing Vray & XSI ? If so how is that combo progressing. I have a copy of XSI, that I won, that I might want to resurrect (assuming AD's policies actually let me). Vray inside XSI would push me over that edge I reckon.

jasonwestmas
10-28-2010, 07:32 PM
I don't get it, what's wrong with using K-ray for this kind of work?

Intuition
10-28-2010, 07:59 PM
Heya Intuition,

Are you still testing Vray & XSI ? If so how is that combo progressing. I have a copy of XSI, that I won, that I might want to resurrect (assuming AD's policies actually let me). Vray inside XSI would push me over that edge I reckon.

I haven't fired up Vray in XSi for a few months though I still check the beta forums and there is still regular activity.

Since we use maya here at DD I am happy to have the vray maya combo but you can't go wrong with XSi either and the Vray XSi combo is killer as well.

Vray XSi is so close to production ready but I think Chaos wants to get RT integrated in the render region and then it would be Vray 2.0 release for XSi.

I could do final work in Vray XSi atm because most of the features are there give or take a few integration ideas in XSi. Like the ICE stuff being renderable by vray is one I think they are working on.

Vray in Maya renders native maya fluids now so.. I could imagine Vlado hooking up the same idea in ICE. I just haven't seen it yet. We've been hogging all of Chaos's time here at DD during production.

Yet, Vray for Softimage is in a production usable state right now for most cases.
There are still some problems but overall I could complete most work in general. Just not an official release yet.

Besides Vray RT would be super sweet as the render region engine. Gives you the fprime feel.

adk
10-28-2010, 09:05 PM
Thanks for that info Intuition, much appreciated. I just figure if I have a copy of XSI I might as well put it to some good learning use while I re-familiarise myself with Vray. I did use it in MAX a while ago, while doing a course, but since then basically neglected it (mostly cause of my disdain for MAX).

That RT render region would definitely give it that FP feel. Something I'd really miss outside of LW. Guess I'll have to wait & see as to when it becomes available, which doesn't sound too far.

Plus given some of the buzz of late maybe even give Arnold a shot when/if it becomes accessible to the masses somewhere down the track.
Not holding my breath on that one tho. That would be "just a nice to have".

jasonwestmas - for me it's more a learning exercise. I still consider myself a hack but always keen to learn new things. Irrespective, I'm sure I'll keep plugging away with LW's native engine / FP / Kray as well.

Intuition
10-28-2010, 09:55 PM
Yeah, I am a software junkie and learning new software is as easy as plugging in a Legend of Zelda cartridge and solving the mazes. Each maze (3d app) gives you new weapons (app features) you can use on your quest (vfx glory). I don't see learning new software as a pain and then put it off. I actually like sitting there feeling uncomfortable because I don't know the keys and navigation. Then as I slowly learn each thing its like I am seeing a new idea. Each time giving me new ideas on how to approach solving creative problems. XSi was one of the coolest times in my 3d experiance. Really rigging properly, using amazing dynamics, fur, cloth, etc. Learned mental ray properly in XSI then was able to propagate that knowledge to maya and max later.

Definitely can recommend XSi. Its a real gem and both Vray and mental ray have great integration in XSi.

Also, if you get your XSi fired up then you probably can get on the Vray beta. Just send an email to chaosgroup about the XSi Vray beta.

Arnold would be really cool to use too. If I ever get my software grumbling hands on it.

Let me know if you have any XSi questions. I made an XSi basics and linear workflow in Mray vid a while back. Its basic but might get you past the first few steps quickly. Also, i3d tutorials has great stuff for XSi learning as well as Character in motion dvd which teaches nice rigging in XSi. I still haven't upgraded to 2011.5 to try lagoa in its final release form.

So much cool stuff in Softimage land... and that includes Vray. ;D

adk
10-28-2010, 11:24 PM
Thanks a bunch for the offer Intuition, very kind of you. First thing is to see if I can somehow upgrade from XSI to AD's Softimage. Man does that bring back some memories. Softimage was what I first learned at uni all those eons ago. Something tells me that getting an upgraded license with AD will be the hardest step in the process.

I'll definitely give you a holler if all goes well.

+ apologies on the temp. derailing of this thread

erikals
11-03-2010, 09:09 AM
well, kray is just as good in my opinion, so you might wanna go for that instead...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=896C8mmDjQs

but more importantly, you need to be a good artists, LW native takes you a long way... :]
playlist, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PFhtUlDsebE&feature=&p=36DAD32935586C03&index=0&playnext=1

  

geo_n
11-03-2010, 11:55 AM
would it make you a better artist if it was?

Actually before vray there were a lot of mediocre renders. Now those people who made mediocre renders make better renders and some even excellent renders in a few months.
Its nice to watch evermotion artist grow from mediocre renderers to excellent renderers in a short time with vray.


Yeah, Vray... I am becoming an evangelical for the Vray maya combo. It is the huge L337;ness. ;D

Can you press a button and have instant photo real?

No. But if you can do a good material and texturing job Vray will reward you in spades.

I've used many a render engine and none compare to the speed and ease of setup that Vray has. Modo comes close but the shader tree knocks it down some notches due to organization problems in big scenes.

same here. Ever since I used max 2 years ago and went thru mentalray, brazil, final render, vray is just easy to use with excellent results. Even with no nodes it doesn't seem to be the underdog of renderengines.
I like modo and the renderer is excellent but the shader tree....lol


well, kray is just as good in my opinion, so you might wanna go for that instead...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=896C8mmDjQs

but more importantly, you need to be a good artists, LW native takes you a long way... :]
playlist, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PFhtUlDsebE&feature=&p=36DAD32935586C03&index=0&playnext=1

  
kray is the only option for lw artist and some aspects of kray are equal to vray and some superior. When its better integrated into lightwave then we can finally say its as good as vray. One strong point of vray is not just archiviz, vray has excellent animated gi render speed using irridiance and bruteforce which is flickerfree like fprime but clean and no noise.

walfridson
11-03-2010, 12:25 PM
Hmm wouldn't vray have the same problems integrating to lw as kray?

geo_n
11-03-2010, 12:45 PM
Hmm wouldn't vray have the same problems integrating to lw as kray?

My main issues with kray is using passes for compositing which is not possible right now without proper alpha matt support.
light and object interaction need more control, no way to include or exclude light or objects from each other. I can live without no exr support or microdisplacements.
I dont think kray is unable to support or implement them just that they need more developers to speed up and update kray to have those features. If it was impossible then they would have said it.

Netvudu
11-03-2010, 07:46 PM
Silvio, I think you need to create a couple of Vray-oriented threads because we donīt have enough of them with those you are creating. I really reaaally want to read a lot more about Vray than I do. Thatīs the main reason I come to the newtek forums, to read as many Vray threads as I can. It just makes my day...


...Iīm being sarcastic!!! :p

erikals
11-04-2010, 07:14 AM
kray is the only option for lw artist and some aspects of kray are equal to vray and some superior. When its better integrated into lightwave then we can finally say its as good as vray.

...One strong point of vray is not just archiviz, vray has excellent animated gi render speed using irridiance and bruteforce which is flickerfree like fprime but clean and no noise.

...but isn't Vray darn expensive though?

a way to remove flicker in post, works quite well, a secret trick i'd say...
check 1m50s into this video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-zV7wHlPo38

 

silviotoledo
11-05-2010, 07:48 AM
This is the problem of democracy. We're talking V-Ray in the forum of NewTek and NewTek not threatened to ban me. He he he.

Just kidding. I think V ray for lightwave would greatly increase the number of wavers in the world and also think that Newtek lose a great opportunity not incorporating the K ray as a native.

Lightwave lost much space while closed in the last decade and competition has skyrocketed.

I really heavily on lihtwave development team, but they are not sufficient to account the advancement of technologies in the market time.

Autodesk has about 7000 developers versus 25 from NewTek?

Speaking of banning, where's Jim? Banned again?

erikals
11-05-2010, 11:40 AM
Jin Choung?... been out for a long time, not sure...

dballesg
11-05-2010, 02:41 PM
Autodesk has about 7000 developers versus 25 from NewTek?


I wonder where you get your statistics from :D

P.D: Maybe that's why 3D Max is so prone to crash, 7000 developers will introduce 7000 times more of bugs??? :devil:

Exception
11-08-2010, 01:52 AM
Plenty of examples made in Lw that have that quality.

We also have KRay (http://www.kraytracing.com) which holds its own against Vray, it's substantially cheaper, well integrated and can do several things which Vray can't.

It would be nice to have Vray as an option, but to say in L wyou can't make the same or better photorealistic imagery means you might not know how to use LW and/or Kray all that well...

Exception
11-08-2010, 01:57 AM
Such as...

silviotoledo
11-10-2010, 04:04 AM
Hi Exception

This first K ray image was discussed in another thread ( called Kray X V ray ) in comparison with the V ray version.

K Ray one is really nice. Looks like a Top 3D image, but the V ray one looks like a photo in real world.

Lightwave still have a lot of contrast ( what is also cool ) between dark and black areas althougth gamma correction is in use, actually.

I'm not saying the LW images are not usefull, I just say that, compared to V ray it's not so perfect as it appear.

The difuse distribution in K ray also looks like a retouched image in photoshop and in V ray it looks a little more natural.

Anyway, I would be so happy if I can do an image like that in K ray.


Silvio Toledo

erikals
11-10-2010, 06:50 AM
hm, cool  :]
interesting thread, reading...

http://www.newtek.com/forums/showthread.php?t=103695

  

erikals
11-10-2010, 07:27 AM
hm, looking at the large renders,
at first i thought Vray was Kray and the other way around...

i'd say they both have their things, one thing i noticed with Kray is that it is missing reflections from the chairs, so it looks more like the chairs are hovering over the floor (not so good)

i photoshoped an exaggerated example to show the difference between the original Kray render and my Kray edit... see below,... it should be fairly easy to fix in post by adding an additional render for the floor only though...

http://www.newtek.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=89826&stc=1&d=1289399223

jasonwestmas
11-10-2010, 07:57 AM
I don't think the reflections are missing erikals, they're just darker. LW/ Kray handles reflections differently. There are ways to fix that without so much PS more than likely.

erikals
11-10-2010, 08:14 AM
could be, i posted the link over at Kray forums, so maybe someone knows what's going on...
http://www.kraytracing.com/joomla/forum/index.php?f=3&t=2169&rb_v=viewtopic

Exception
11-12-2010, 03:36 AM
As interesting as the discussion over a single image is, I don't think it serves its purpose here. Kray and Lw are both infinitely more flexible and adjustable than Vray. With this freedom and power comes the fact that you need to have knowledge and experience to use it well. If you want photorealism, you will have to learn what that actually entails. Because, a good photo shot by a good photographer includes a host of techniques concerning light, surfaces, camera treatment and post processing that you cannot get out of a default render. It is very clear that most images posted of Vray as an example are renders made by people who know very well how the program works and also have a very solid understanding of photography and physics. Given the same level of understanding, you can make the same or better images with Kray and/or LW. There are plenty examples to show you.

The discussion about the chair is not so important because in LW/Kray you can adjust the image to look any way you want it to. In Vray you have a much more limited range of influence. That is not a drawback of Kray, that's an asset. And it seems to me that Kray is the exact reason why Vray is not available for LW.

No render engine, not Vray, Maxwell or other picture-perfect renderer will give you instant success. The idea that having Vray for LW will suddenly improve your render quality is founded on an illusion. If you have not tried using Kray properly, and have solid technical reasons for why Vray would serve your needs better than Kray, then it seems to me the request is just a wish to become better at visualization easily. No piece of programming will ever give you that, though.

And as I knew someone would say 'but this kray picture isn't like the vray picture', and because there is no reason to assume that vray is the 'correct' one... I included a photograph in my lineup of pictures as well. With the Vray examples, it was really easy to spot, even without mentioning. Has anyone found the actual photograph in my example list yet? :) Since nobody has mentioned it so far, I guess nobody actually noticed... :p

geo_n
11-12-2010, 05:09 AM
vray will give you instant success. :D atleast for studios I know and our studio.
scene setup time is easy and fast. rendering is fast and one node is equal to atleast a few nodes of other renderers. We only have 3 vray licenses and that's enough nodes to render on.
the images you posted, three of them were made by johny, the best lightwave archiviz renderer imho. look at evermotion. hundreds if not thousands of johnys over there.
I look at lw archiviz, it can't compare, too few to reach that caliber
sorry, if people think all renderers are equal, think again. an industry that is heavily favoring vray for 3dmax, maya, c4d, sketchup,etc is not wrong.
I will not hesitate to have vray in lw.

Arnold could dethrone vray as the general renderer in the coming future though.

MDSPECIFIC
11-12-2010, 07:24 AM
I would not compare V-Ray, K-Ray and LightWave native render I will just say that artists, specially LightWave artists must work little bit harder (including me) and they need bring to light what can be done in LW these days.
For me, V-Ray hysteria is something I am aware of, but I'm also aware that CG working people in 80% of cases use ZBrush and small of them use 3DCoat.
Why is that?
Again, why is that? And 3DCoat is now 300$.
ZBrush price?
How much is V-Ray?

For me V-Ray renders are not something 100% real or people should consider 100% realistic in CG context, that all about current CG users market and marketing.

In LightWave you can also make miracles, yeah even in arch viz sector, but only if you are willing and you know how. You know Alex Roman, well I don't see anything in his really impressive work what can't be done in LW these days. The Third & The Seventh (http://vimeo.com/7809605)
On top of that you have another step, that is post work. The Third & The Seventh Breakdown (http://vimeo.com/8200251)

Is it because we don't have enough quality tools or we simply won't learn them good enough or is it something else?

I think the point is: quality learning, exploring and smart use of available tools.

If they make V-Ray for LW fine by me, but until then I will pull maximum from LW.

At the and I was checking the current price for LightWave and yes, still 895$ including LW 10 upgrade.
Ridiculous low in comparsion with others 3D aps if you ask me.
Now someone will mention Blender, right? :)

Exception
11-13-2010, 08:08 AM
vray will give you instant success. :D atleast for studios I know and our studio.

Instant canned Vray success.


the images you posted, three of them were made by johny, the best lightwave archiviz renderer imho. look at evermotion. hundreds if not thousands of johnys over there.

Err, I just got them from a place where johnny happens to post a lot. What a silly argument. I bet you cannot distinguish which AI's of us have been made with Kray or LW, Maxwell or Vray. I have had as much trouble setting up large production Vray renders as I have setting up those with Kray or LW.


I look at lw archiviz, it can't compare, too few to reach that caliber
sorry,

I fear that has more to do with your ability to find them than their actual existence :). The idea that this number game works out between a huge amount of followers of 3DS and the likes, versus a LW market is misguided. Lw is a niche product, and actually happens to score quite remarkably high in the arch-viz department. Its drawbacks are in scene and coding structure (lack of parametrics and other tools important for large structures) and most notably NOT in render capability. The idea is that Core addresses these drawbacks, but it might be some time before that actually materializes. LW's success is mostly due to its remarkable render engine.

Kray expands these capabilities by providing code structures that allow the optimization of interior rendering, something quite specific, just as Vray does that for 3Ds. Nothing more, nothing less.


if people think all renderers are equal, think again.

Who thinks that?
Lw is a powerful, customizable tool, and Kray follows that mode. Vray is much more a fire-and-forget tool. You can do what Vray does with Kray but not the other way around. This is due to the structure of LW. No render engine slapped on there will change that. If you don't like the flexibility and diversity you get with LW, and the resulting complexity and decision making structure, perhaps another tool suits your needs better?


an industry that is heavily favoring vray for 3dmax, maya, c4d, sketchup,etc is not wrong.

Yes, because sketchup is so much better than LW in rendering. Ha. Apples and small pink flamingo's.


I will not hesitate to have vray in lw.

Go ahead, see if Chaos Group will be persuaded by your arguments. Meanwhile, those who have taken the (relatively small) effort to learn Kray are happily making images equally if not better than Vray and save a whole lot of money while doing so. By the way, when was the last new full release of Vray? They development speed seems to be inversely proportional to their profits.

erikals
11-13-2010, 08:33 AM
that's what's nice about Vray as far as i can see... "Instant canned Vray success" :]
...but to be honest that's very often good to have, to save a lot of time.

jasonwestmas
11-13-2010, 09:09 AM
that's what's nice about Vray as far as i can see... "Instant canned Vray success" :]
...but to be honest that's very often good to have, to save a lot of time.

It's all just a matter of taste and budget right? Kind of like cooking your own food. I try to avoid microwave prepackaged stuff myself. :) I suppose LW offers both which makes it so dang charming.

Elmar Moelzer
11-13-2010, 09:37 AM
Question is whether LW could not offer the same, e.g. if Rob and some of the other top artists got arround making some killer surface presets for LWs renderer...

geo_n
11-13-2010, 09:51 AM
Sorry Exception I'm not convinced. Looking at lw gallery including yours compared to vray gallery, only johny is able to match. Just being objective. There are very good renderers like otacon, Iain, etc but put them in evermotion and they are just pretty good.

Do you want to see sketchup renders from vray? You'll be surprised at the quality and how easy it is to setup.

Actually I would like to suggest the best of Newtek threads like what they have in other forums.


"Kray and Lw are both infinitely more flexible and adjustable than Vray." Really???
I hope you don't find using vray only in the coming years.
We all want to justify our software purchases, but please lets actually use the other software before saying one is infinitely more flexible and adjustable.

alexos
11-13-2010, 10:31 AM
I fear that has more to do with your ability to find them than their actual existence :). The idea that this number game works out between a huge amount of followers of 3DS and the likes, versus a LW market is misguided. Lw is a niche product, and actually happens to score quite remarkably high in the arch-viz department. Its drawbacks are in scene and coding structure (lack of parametrics and other tools important for large structures) and most notably NOT in render capability.

I agree, to an extent. One of the reasons why Vray images are so beautiful and yet so, as you say, somewhat standardised is the immense library of very high-quality materials they have at their disposal: textured, speed-optimized for the engine and basically drag-and-drop production ready. Something that, I believe, is almost entirely alien to the typical LW user - I think I have... oh... three standard materials in my arsenal? And the rest is all tweak, tweak, tweak, and tweak some more. Which admittedly can be fun and creative and whatnot, but from the Generic User point of view it can also be a major pain in the neck, especially when you're learning. So yes, we have more flexibility: but to a price, and the client doesn't always appreciate that anyway, which is why I've been asking for some serious presets for quite some time now.

Having said that... yes, K-ray is awesome: I basically don't use Lightwave's native engine anymore, except for quick mock-ups. But it does (for now) have some limitations - not-so-good contact shadows, huge memory needs... things that don't necessarily make a good image of course, but that, from the point of view of someone who has to churn out a dozen or so per week, still make it a little less appealing than V-ray. Then again, it's cheaper and still in full-steam development; so the future looks bright enough...

ADP.

jasonwestmas
11-13-2010, 01:22 PM
Canned success is more likely to be focused on physical accuracy, I feel Exceptions work is more about having control over an image, maybe he was trying to mimic reality but I really don't get that from his work. Stylized fashion show for architecture is more of the vibe that I get from Exception. I think Lightwave helps create his kind of work better.

jasonwestmas
11-13-2010, 01:24 PM
Question is whether LW could not offer the same, e.g. if Rob and some of the other top artists got arround making some killer surface presets for LWs renderer...

That is something to think about.

Exception
11-15-2010, 07:20 PM
Canned success is more likely to be focused on physical accuracy, I feel Exceptions work is more about having control over an image, maybe he was trying to mimic reality but I really don't get that from his work. Stylized fashion show for architecture is more of the vibe that I get from Exception. I think Lightwave helps create his kind of work better.

Spot on. Images are created to communicate a certain idea, or atmosphere. It's not about perfect simulation. Most of photography is also not about capturing the real (the 'real' in philosphy), but about creating a window into a certain place or situation.

I agree that the ease of use of Vray is something to think about, and may lead to good improvements of LW's workflow. However, the sheer necessity to create surfaces on the fly and continuously re-evaluate all aspects of the image is part of the working process that sometimes one is forced into before one sees the qualities of it. This is the reasons why many of the excellent lw artist have such a special feeling to their imagery. You can literaly see who made the image, rather than which software was used, mostly regardless of the content. One could argue that this by itself is the necessary process to achieve such quality.

For me this is the whole reason to use LW. We also have Vray and quite a few other tools, it just isn't conducive to the discerning artist's level and workflow of control.

I see the qualities of the Clarisse concept as much more beneficial for our workflow than the addition of yet another render engine. That said, it's not a question of either/or.

geo_n
11-19-2010, 08:10 AM
Canned success is more likely to be focused on physical accuracy, I feel Exceptions work is more about having control over an image, maybe he was trying to mimic reality but I really don't get that from his work. Stylized fashion show for architecture is more of the vibe that I get from Exception. I think Lightwave helps create his kind of work better.

Other renderers are very capable of doing any kind of render. Vray does everything since its an all purpose render and not a specialized render as people think.
http://www.evermotion.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=83511


vray doesn't just do picture perfect photoreal renders.
If this is not art then I don't know what is art
http://www.evermotion.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=83479
All 3d and done by two guys in 2 half months. Vray renderer has the most stable gi and best looking flicker free renderer that you don't need a degree in math or pull your hair out to handle the renderer. :D

jasonwestmas
11-19-2010, 08:43 AM
Other renderers are very capable of doing any kind of render. Vray does everything since its an all purpose render and not a specialized render as people think.
http://www.evermotion.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=83511


vray doesn't just do picture perfect photoreal renders.
If this is not art then I don't know what is art
http://www.evermotion.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=83479
All 3d and done by two guys in 2 half months. Vray renderer has the most stable gi and best looking flicker free renderer that you don't need a degree in math or pull your hair out to handle the renderer. :D

Actually I was arguing that Lightwave is more of a specialized render engine, not Vray. VRay clearly has it's strengths over Lightwave. . .
animated GI in particular. Specialization has it's strengths in the fact that it doesn't try to out-perform every aspect of 3D rendering, (Although with LW that is starting to change a little bit). Some think that is a weakness but I just find LW gets to that personalized touch faster than other render engines I have used. It's not a black and white issue, it's a speed verses flexibility balancing issue. The balancing act with personal STYLE is performed better with Lightwave. Of course I may be wrong in some cases but that's just how I see things at the moment.

Exception
11-19-2010, 10:20 AM
Other renderers are very capable of doing any kind of render. Vray does everything since its an all purpose render and not a specialized render as people think.

Yet you link only to PR renders. Vray is quite specialized and it is targeted towards a very specific area: easy fire and forget PR GI rendering. It's quite obvious and I don't think the makers will even deny that. It's not a cartoon render engine, motion graphics or special effects engine in the remotest sense of these words.

You show typical Vray renders. Vray caters exactly to Alex Roman style work, whose work also has a severe degree of post. I think you would have considerably more problems trying to show anyone doing anything like Khalid's work in Vray (http://www.muharraqi-studios.com/muharraqi_gallery.php?cat=CHARACTORS&id=42).

In any case, I've used both quite extensively at some point, and Vray has as many problems as Lightwave has, except they lie in a different area. For the experienced professional, it doesn't matter which one is used. Except that there' s more flexibility and control in LW, and it's easier to get flicker free GI animation in Vray over LW, which Kray for a large degree covers.

geo_n
11-19-2010, 10:40 PM
Yet you link only to PR renders. Vray is quite specialized and it is targeted towards a very specific area: easy fire and forget PR GI rendering. It's quite obvious and I don't think the makers will even deny that. It's not a cartoon render engine, motion graphics or special effects engine in the remotest sense of these words.

You show typical Vray renders. Vray caters exactly to Alex Roman style work, whose work also has a severe degree of post. I think you would have considerably more problems trying to show anyone doing anything like Khalid's work in Vray (http://www.muharraqi-studios.com/muharraqi_gallery.php?cat=CHARACTORS&id=42).

In any case, I've used both quite extensively at some point, and Vray has as many problems as Lightwave has, except they lie in a different area. For the experienced professional, it doesn't matter which one is used. Except that there' s more flexibility and control in LW, and it's easier to get flicker free GI animation in Vray over LW, which Kray for a large degree covers.

Check my youtube channel. The "samples" are all rendered in vray with character animation no flicker no hassle brute force, fastest renderer. They mimic final fantasy type renders and not photographic renders. It was easy to set up for us to meet super tight deadlines. In fact there was no setup, just switch to IRR and bruteforce, no tricks needed. No spinning lights, no lightrigs, no animated gi cache that takes longer to render, no ao fake radiosity, etc. :D
Check evermotion or cg talk cg choice and you'll see NPR renders that look like paintings. Non architectural and as varied as lightwave renders.

C4d motion graphics probably dominate the market and the renders are vray. The renders are as abstract and artsy and quality another level.

Its because vray has the most beautiful photoreal renders that people automatically think that's the only thing it does when in fact vray does it all. Its a general renderer. You've got a person here from digital domain saying vray is his preferred renderer than any renderer. Its not a fluke, vray dominates in most 3d software and studios that can afford it.:thumbsup:

Exception
11-20-2010, 09:16 AM
that can afford it.

I think that's pretty much the most significant part of the discussion. :)

You want Vray for LW, while you could just as easily use Vray for another package and use whichever part of LW you enjoy. If you have the money to buy Vray, that shouldn't be an issue.
Meanwhile, having experience in Vray, LW, Kray and quite a few other render engines, it's very obvious to me that Vray is quite specialized, and has less control. Just like Kray. They're focused on exactly the same thing, and have similar operating paradigms. There's nothing wrong with that. Seeing as most people agree that a BMW 5 series is a car, I see few people argue that it is, in fact, a mail truck. Different tools for different purposes.

In any case, you seem to be convinced that Vray is the best thing for everything at all times and in all contexts. So, what stops you from never looking back? What's your point?

jasonwestmas
11-20-2010, 10:30 AM
I guess the people that want VRay in Lightwave just don't want to learn a second package? Or what is it? If they're saving their pennies for Vray-Lightwave and they already own Lightwave wouldn't that put them in the casual user category? Not that there is anything wrong with that but it just seems like an overkill for a casual user.

Cageman
11-20-2010, 11:07 AM
Arnold for LW makes MUCH more sense than VRay for LW, imho.

geo_n
11-21-2010, 07:25 AM
In any case, you seem to be convinced that Vray is the best thing for everything at all times and in all contexts. So, what stops you from never looking back? What's your point?

My point was as a renderer, vray is not specialized at all and far from limiting. It does photoreal renders so well that people have a tendency to compare it to kray(speciailizing in gi still render).
or people assume it can't do artistic or npr render like lw(general renderer) like the ff.
http://forums.cgsociety.org/showthread.php?f=121&t=670201
http://www.evermotion.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=82616
http://www.evermotion.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=83157
http://forums.cgsociety.org/showthread.php?f=121&t=224737
Using vray with only vray lights and no gi, it is super fast to do renders like lw does with arealights. The difference is the AA is a lot cleaner and the shadows smoother and render faster. You can do lw renders this way.
With animated gi using Irr and bruteforce in vray, it just crushes animated gi in lw. Its like fprime montecarlo flicker free gi but super fast.

geo_n
11-21-2010, 07:28 AM
Arnold for LW makes MUCH more sense than VRay for LW, imho.

Arnold could be the best renderer soon but the track record of vray and market penetration and how it performs in multiple 3d appz is a big factor why its the renderer of choice.:D

Exception
11-22-2010, 03:54 AM
My point was as a renderer, vray is not specialized at all and far from limiting. It does photoreal renders so well that people have a tendency to compare it to kray(speciailizing in gi still render).

I don't know what 'people' do, but VRay very much IS a specialized GI render engine. You have not shown a single image that refutes that. In my experience, getting the flexibility out of Vray that you can get out of Lw render requires much more work, and it is far less integrated. Comparing it to Vray is very much valid, because their are essentially very much alike... they even have the same operating paradigms and are mostly based on the same theories and methods. If you look into render technology a bit, you'll quickly see that Kray and Vray are very much alike.

I don't even know why this is a point of dicussion. When you need to hit a nail, you need a hammer, and when you want to put in a screw, you use a screwdriver. Sure, you CAN use a screwdriver to hit a nail and a hammer to try to screw in a screw, but it makes no sense. Vray is not the one-stop render shop you make it out to be, and neither is Kray. It's very powerful, has many qualities, but it isn't the end-all-and-be-all of render engines.

geo_n
11-22-2010, 04:12 AM
The links I posted, they don't require GI at all. They are setup much like lightwave with vray arealights, vray domelights, max default spotlights, omni lights, etc. Using even shadowmaps, etc. No GI at all. But taking advantage of all vray strength.
That's how some vray users like us setup vray for scenes.
Vray is neither a hammer or a screwdriver, it is a swiss army knife capable of rendering all types which people here say is not flexible, limited, and can't produce other images but only photoreal images. Quite incorrect.
Its not an end all be all of render engines, but its close especially for studios that don't have a renderer monkey or a programmer.:D
You bought kray which I also use, a specialized GI renderer, meaning lightwave is weaker for such tasks. And kray can't be used for lw type renders, for now anyway. This is not the case for vray. :thumbsup:

bazsa73
11-22-2010, 04:35 AM
Interesting topic.

MDSPECIFIC
11-22-2010, 06:07 AM
@geo_n: I would like to see examples of your best work with vRray and LW/K-Ray. I'm curious.

Again, I think artist personal knowledge (2d/3d, motion/animation/directing/DOP-photography), experience, creativity and available working time produce average or amazing work.
About scene, lightning, adjusting and rendering speed, all I can say is that I was able to manage very good setups with only 2 lights and one little trick (I prefer 3 light setup and sometimes more lights). I'm not using GI for animation, just multiple light setups.

PS: Alex Roman use massive post work (heavy post) for impressive final shoots. You need to keep that in mind. ;)

You can model, texture, render apples, pears, lemons, roses and crystals in LW too. :D
And of course, don't forget post work!

See ya!

Exception
11-22-2010, 07:21 AM
The links I posted, they don't require GI at all. They are setup much like lightwave with vray arealights, vray domelights, max default spotlights, omni lights, etc. Using even shadowmaps, etc. No GI at all. But taking advantage of all vray strength.

That's reasonably irrelevant. Whether or not you had your headlights on when driving your BMW does not make it a caterpillar. (got to love the car analogy)
If they don't use GI, I'd probably be just as easy in LW (a caterpillar can still drive you home at night, but a BMW doesn't pick up trees... :) ).


Vray is neither a hammer or a screwdriver, it is a swiss army knife capable of rendering all types which people here say is not flexible, limited, and can't produce other images but only photoreal images. Quite incorrect.

Er... ever tried to hammer in a nail using an army knife? Using a swiss army knife to weld a boat's hull or cutting down a tree is not as handy as you might think. Nobody said Vray is not flexible or limited. It just is what it is. Like a swiss army knife not being a chainsaw or a piece of rotoscoping software not being a spreadsheet editor.


Its not an end all be all of render engines, but its close especially for studios that don't have a renderer monkey or a programmer.:D

I beg to differ. Vray would sincerely limit the options we have it it was the only tool in our arsenal. Vray is useful and powerful, but certainly not enough to cover the spectrum. LW + Kray is more complete in that sense.


You bought kray which I also use, a specialized GI renderer, meaning lightwave is weaker for such tasks. And kray can't be used for lw type renders, for now anyway. This is not the case for vray.

Yes, and besides Kray and Vray and LW and Sketchup and Terragen and VUE and EnergyPlus and Ecotect and about 50 more software packages we also have Swift3D, Blender, LightScape and another 50 more. VRay is just one of a large set of tools. It would be 'nice' to have in LW, but hardly necessary. It does little more than LW + KRay can cover, perhaps some low learning curve stuff. LW has a steep curve no matter what, which is something that needs adressing in the general sense, perhaps.

geo_n
11-22-2010, 09:44 AM
@geo_n: I would like to see examples of your best work with vRray and LW/K-Ray. I'm curious.

Again, I think artist personal knowledge (2d/3d, motion/animation/directing/DOP-photography), experience, creativity and available working time produce average or amazing work.
About scene, lightning, adjusting and rendering speed, all I can say is that I was able to manage very good setups with only 2 lights and one little trick (I prefer 3 light setup and sometimes more lights). I'm not using GI for animation, just multiple light setups.

PS: Alex Roman use massive post work (heavy post) for impressive final shoots. You need to keep that in mind. ;)

You can model, texture, render apples, pears, lemons, roses and crystals in LW too. :D
And of course, don't forget post work!

See ya!

I dont have best work. Only work thats on a budget and time:D. They are mediocre imho.
Regarding lighting, the one you mention is typical lighting and this is what I try to explain that its not impossible to use vray in this way yet people here say vray cant do these scenes and only good for gi photoreal renders. I also posted some cg work we did in my youtube channel all named "sample". All character work with and without gi for game cutscenes rendered in vray.
Here is one short clip nothing original, not photoreal.
I'll try to make a movie how vray rendered this npr scene.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0r2YRF91y24

I would like to see some of your best examples with lw and its rendertime as well as Exceptions flying chair, lw animated gi and its rendertime.
Artwork including lightwave renders go through post work. its not unique to vray renders. Lets keep that in mind. ;)
I would like to see a lw version of those apples,pears, lemons, roses and crystals rendered in lightwave. Not still render ofcourse. Just curious as well what the rendertime would be especially with those crystals.

geo_n
11-22-2010, 09:56 AM
Starting a car analogy....
You said lightwave renderer is INFINITELY more flexible and adjustable than vray.
Read your posts. :D
Next thing we read is lightwave is infinitely more flexible than maya in ca.
Again you say limited if vray. But to me and other studios vray is equal to a lw and kray renderer. Excellent Photoreal and NPR animation and still renderer in one renderer.
You have many software. We have only a few and concentrate on lightwave and 3dmax vray renderer, kray is my personal license and not yet used at work but people are interested when I showed it. We dont use so much cebas finalrender,mentalray renderer and I guess that helps to keep things more focused.
We even stayed away from maya because we need easier software to use. Such is the case for renderers, vray has been the choice for the past 2 years replacing lw renderer after more than 5 years in use.

Would you mind sharing your flying chair animated scene tutorial? A proxy scene is ok.
I am curious with the rendertime.

Exception
11-22-2010, 11:23 AM
Would you mind sharing your flying chair animated scene tutorial? A proxy scene is ok.
I am curious with the rendertime.

Well I would, as you know I tend to share a lot, but that model was developed for a special project and I can't repost it. It was also made 3 years ago, so I'm not sure if it's that appropriate, and it uses HDInstance.

That said, it was used primarily to test LW's new animated GI options. And while that is useful in some cases, I think we can all agree that LW's 'animated GI' doesn't hold a candle to Vray, Kray or most other animated GI implementations. LW's GI is pretty good for stills, but it's a real pain for animation. I'll never say that LW's internal engine is really good at animated GI. Kray is pretty good at it, though, but I have not tested that scene.


Except, see, there is a massive misunderstanding of what NPR means, maybe you should clarify that first... because that is not NPR. :)

Exactly. Having 'Control' does not only extend to some image balance modifications.

This is NPR:
http://www.except.nl/design/torontochapel/images/Siteplan.jpg

http://www.except.nl/design/torontochapel/images/Section.jpg

And yes, those are LW renders.

geo_n
11-22-2010, 06:08 PM
Except, see, there is a massive misunderstanding of what NPR means, maybe you should clarify that first... because that is not NPR. :)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-photorealistic_rendering
As long as you regularly shade and light a scene as in the real world, it is not NPR. Tinting a skin shader purple instead of the usual skin colour does not mean it's NPR all of a sudden.

Fair enough. I did mention in previous post that vray renders non photorealistic render, no gi needed all the time and light setups similar to what lw does. To me what I posted at youtube is more cg final fantasy type renders. You would never say that short clip is Alex Roman similar type render. :)

geo_n
11-22-2010, 06:20 PM
Well I would, as you know I tend to share a lot, but that model was developed for a special project and I can't repost it. It was also made 3 years ago, so I'm not sure if it's that appropriate, and it uses HDInstance.

That said, it was used primarily to test LW's new animated GI options. And while that is useful in some cases, I think we can all agree that LW's 'animated GI' doesn't hold a candle to Vray, Kray or most other animated GI implementations. LW's GI is pretty good for stills, but it's a real pain for animation. I'll never say that LW's internal engine is really good at animated GI. Kray is pretty good at it, though, but I have not tested that scene.



Exactly. Having 'Control' does not only extend to some image balance modifications.

This is NPR:
http://www.except.nl/design/torontochapel/images/Siteplan.jpg

http://www.except.nl/design/torontochapel/images/Section.jpg

And yes, those are LW renders.


We finally agree on something. I think lw animated cache and montecarlo is the way to go in the future. Vray uses similar tech but super fast and clean, IRR and bruteforce. :D
The Iphone promo video I made at 1:39 was rendered in vray. It rendered faster than native scanline.
http://www.newtek.com/forums/showpost.php?p=1079978&postcount=7
I think thats the literal category of NPR strictly speaking. No problem for vray that time as well. :D

geo_n
11-23-2010, 04:13 AM
Hehe... well, keep in mind that all Except tries to explain is that many renderers have been designed and developed with certain stuff in focus. He even agrees with most of your points, are you aware of that? But show as many "NPR" results from VRay as you like, it does not make it a "dedicated allrounder" just as the few great architectural renderers done in LW do not make it the perfect architectural renderer. Why you want to compare a standalone developed renderer with the built in one (in max) is beyond me. :stumped: Honestly, I have no idea why it is so hard to accept that VRay was meant to be an awesome, fast and clean GI renderer first and foremost - we had the developers visiting us not 3 weeks ago, and I doubt they'd object. And while it is important to you to place Vray above anything else, Except tries to bring the point across that while Vray is a great renderer, there are others that have strengths in different areas... or as in LW's/KRays case, come at the price of having to put more work in for in turn more possible results. Would Except NOT use Vray, if he knows that the result he's after is in the realm of what Vray does best? On the other hand it seems to be beyond you how someone could NOT use Vray, no matter what. No need to wonder who's point is more mature? :hey:

Hehe. You playing the unsolicited protect the buddy role here? That's mature alright. Dont really care who visited you if its just to name drop. I care more about work and unless you've worked with vray,kray, lw, I can't see how your post has insight. If you have pls post some renders of vray,kray,lw, not your max buddies at work ok?You always point them out when a 3dmax post comes up. :D

It is beyond you to compare the standard renderer in max with vray? Now that thought of yours is beyond me.
People compare lw to kray to fprime all the time.

My point was very well pointed out. Vray is a general render engine and I DOUBT the developers which I won't name drop for the sake of it, will agree that its Infinitely less flexible and adjustable than lw renderer when people are rendering photoreal, motiongraphics, nonphotoreal renders. I never said its beyond me that someone could not use anything else than vray and even said Arnold could be the best renderer soon. Read pls. Lol.

MDSPECIFIC
11-23-2010, 04:57 AM
@ geo_n:

I run out of apples, I have only peaches at the moment, but I can show you right now, client privacy policy. :thumbsup:
I had some very interesting results with crystals, and I'm not using Dielectric node so my render times are quite nice, even on my laptop.
My understanding of "Why not" thread talk is that LightWave is pain in the *ss when it comes to set it up for photorealistic results in compare to V-Ray these days, including render speeds.
I have vary projects and I can say LightWave is very good, fast and powerful tool if you know what you are doing. Again, photorealistic results demands good modeling, quality texturing and above all good lightning. I think I forgot something, post work, yeah. ;)

I also think LightWave artists (including me) should work much more and pull maximum from it and if our maximum isn't good enough to compare with others then I will go and spend some extra money for new toys. Until then I will shape my imagination in LightWave.

Soon, I will post in gallery some of my best work, at this moment of course, either organic, achViz or fantasy.

Less talk, more work. :D

geo_n
11-23-2010, 06:04 AM
The original poster actually just wants vray for lightwave since its available in other appz and not in lw. But then anti vray people would just say you dont need it. Lw is much better than vray. I dont know maybe its just loyalty to ones tools. I have used them and trying to be objective and civil to posts that are civil. :D
I am also a lightwave artist and I love lw and enjoyed rendering with it for some time but it will not grow with people saying its the best. Yeah who needs vray, all the good plugins etc. With this thinking less software support will be added to lw. No realflow, no octane, no vue.

Anyway Happy Holidays soon. I rendered this in lightwave FG before. A bit slow and not good for animation. :D

Less talk, more work indeed.

Exception
11-23-2010, 07:28 AM
The original poster actually just wants vray for lightwave since its available in other appz and not in lw. But then anti vray people would just say you dont need it. Lw is much better than vray. I dont know maybe its just loyalty to ones tools. I have used them and trying to be objective and civil to posts that are civil. :D

Actually, your absolutist stance and your continuous referral to 'people', putting them into holes, stamping them with a name while 'binarizing' their arguments is far from civil. It is, in fact, quite rude. These 'people' are here in the room with you, and might deserve a bit more consideration.

It seems to me like you just want to be right.

geo_n
11-23-2010, 08:02 AM
Actually, your absolutist stance and your continuous referral to 'people', putting them into holes, stamping them with a name while 'binarizing' their arguments is far from civil. It is, in fact, quite rude. These 'people' are here in the room with you, and might deserve a bit more consideration.

It seems to me like you just want to be right.

The problem is you keep telling people that they lack knowledge and experience in lw not just once,twice or maybe more in this thread. I know you love lw to death but...
How do you know the original poster and other posters like me who are using vray have lack of knowledge and experience in lw? And there' s more flexibility and control in LW and its INFINITELY more flexible and adjustable than vray multiple post makes it seem you want to be right.
The only absolute stance I have is vray is a general renderer that can render anything lw renders and is not INFINITELY less flexible and adjustable.:thumbsup:


Is vray fast?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=maTvI0wqiFI long pause in middle just wait.

less than 40 secs per frame on q6600 6gig mem. Fast for me imho.

manholoz
11-23-2010, 08:23 AM
I didn't even know Exception used Vray. I admire his work a lot, and whatever tool he uses must certainly be top-notch. I doubt he'd touch Vray (or Lightwave, for that matter) if he didn't find it to be a good tool suited for a particular purpose.

MDSPECIFIC
11-23-2010, 11:24 AM
In my first post I said if they make V-Ray for LW I don't mind.
But I do mind when people say LW renders can be even close with quality like V-Ray renders (ArchViz section). If nobody didn't make something similar that doesn't mean it's impossible or hard to do.
Lack of knowledge or something else? Maybe people are shy. My conclusions are based on LW gallery, or quality and appearance of LW renders on internet (SpinQuad, 3DTotal, CG Talk). So I'm saying we need to work more, harder, make detailed and inspiring images and if we fail in our goal than I will say LW isn't capable.
I also think we need improvement in animated noise/flicker free GI, more render speed and we need instancing.
I will wait until LW 10 goes out and I hope they make some big improvements. We'll see.

PS: Also working in 3D Max and I'm not just another LW fanatic. Aside I spend to much time having fun with it I just want to be objective and take in consideration how much I can get with invested money.

@ geo_n: Man, you forgetting the last but crucial step in production pipeline. Cheers! :)

Exception
11-23-2010, 01:02 PM
The problem is you keep telling people that they lack knowledge and experience in lw not just once,twice or maybe more in this thread. I know you love lw to death but...

Here you go again. I love LW to death? And I keep telling people they lack knowledge? What nonsense.
You're not making any friend here, mate.


How do you know the original poster and other posters like me who are using vray have lack of knowledge and experience in lw?

When you conjure up one fabrication, you might as well stop before you use it to build arguments on top of it.


And there' s more flexibility and control in LW and its INFINITELY more flexible and adjustable than vray multiple post makes it seem you want to be right.

Infinitely is hyperbole. But Yes, I believe there's more control and flexibility in the LW + Kray spectrum than with Vray alone. I am not entitled to that opinion, it seems.


The only absolute stance I have is vray is a general renderer that can render anything lw renders and is not INFINITELY less flexible and adjustable.

Yes, you've made that very clear. And when someone disagrees with you, you start to become personal. 'People' don't know Vray well enough, or 'people' are fanboys or 'people' think this and that.


Is vray fast?

I don't recall anyone asking that question?

Well, here's my unasked question. Is there such a thing as a cute kitten hidden by kittens?

Here (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8PAVSBUCCkQ)

I think so.

Elmar Moelzer
11-23-2010, 01:13 PM
You want Vray and other 3rd party products ported to LW?
Then make sure that it is worth it for said 3rd party!
Of course if people then go and simply download the crack, once the product has been released, or complain about the high price (anybody remember Syflex?), then that wont motivate 3rd parties to port their products to LW. Currently LW and its users are considered "cheap". MAX/MAYA/XSi users have no problem with spending thousands if not tens of thousands of USD on a 3rd party product. How many users here are really doing that?
Anybody here bought Syflex, or VoluMedic? Heck people wont even buy Kray in sufficient numbers so the developer can make a good living and compared to Vray it is CHEAP!
I bet my butt that half of the people that are whining about there not being Vray for LW, would not even consider shelling out the cash for it.

Exception
11-23-2010, 01:24 PM
Anybody here bought Syflex, or VoluMedic?

I thought Lw was a visualization plugin for VoluMedic :)

Elmar Moelzer
11-23-2010, 01:26 PM
I thought Lw was a visualization plugin for VoluMedic
Not quite, but I think that in terms of sales NT has benefited more from VoluMedic than VoluMedic has from the fact that it has LW as its platform.
Most VoluMedic users have never seen LW before they started using VoluMedic.
We do get a lot of requests for ports to MAX and MAYA. Mostly MAX though. People would even pay more for a MAX version.

Exception
11-23-2010, 01:55 PM
We do get a lot of requests for ports to MAX and MAYA. Mostly MAX though. People would even pay more for a MAX version.

Worth considering. NT doesn't give much for anyone who's not um... them?

jasonwestmas
11-23-2010, 02:07 PM
I don't remember the last time I said something was too expensive in this industry. If I do then slap me silly. :D I may have said one package is a better deal (money wise) for a certain set of tools.

Elmar Moelzer
11-23-2010, 02:42 PM
Worth considering. NT doesn't give much for anyone who's not um... them?

There are a few reasons why we have not made the move.
One is familiarity. The other is that LWs licensing scheme has the kind of userfriendliness that we want to give to our customers.
We do also feel some loyalty to NT and LW and we do like the LW userbase for some strange reason ;)

erikals
11-23-2010, 02:58 PM
to change the perspective on this a little,...
how would it benefit Lightwave to have Vray as a plugin?

jasonwestmas
11-23-2010, 03:33 PM
to change the perspective on this a little,...
how would it benefit Lightwave to have Vray as a plugin?

Because it almost does everything that Lightwave + Kray does but is faster; Just as flexible; Has higher physical precision with less artifacting. ;) Or so I'm told.

silviotoledo
11-23-2010, 04:03 PM
I think V ray would benefit lightwave a lot.

The photorreal and beauty look is still easier to get than in Kray and it has more advances. Many people would preffer Lightwave than Max to work with V ray.

I also think Vray on Lightwave would also promote Kray.

It seems Vray was originally drawn for Lightwave, but ...

I also look at Kray and see impressive results from an small team.
I think the best for lightwave would be to incorporate Kray as native, but I'm not sure the parts are interested.


Did Digital Domain adopted Max because of V ray? No more lightwave?

silviotoledo
11-23-2010, 04:33 PM
About syflex, I got the licence but it never worked as it supose to work in XSI in Lightwave. Actually syflex works in LW 9.0 only and does not work correct in 9.X versions. Hope they back to support their Lightwave version in LW 10 era.

And syflex was very expensive! I paid $ 2,000 more than a lightwave licence. Too much for a plugin ( oh only a few bites ). Anyway I would have to spend more if I would have to learn XSI. Time is money.

If the plugin solves the problem people will buy it, but there's a lot of users that does only for hobby or portfolio and they don't want to pay more.

erikals
11-23-2010, 04:42 PM
hm, i tested Syflex in LW96 some time back and it worked fine...
(for what i did though)

people must remember though that it's an advanced displacement plugin,
not a dynamics plugin, so it does have some limits.
http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=erikalst+syflex&aq=f

 

Elmar Moelzer
11-23-2010, 04:53 PM
And syflex was very expensive! I paid $ 2,000 more than a lightwave licence. Too much for a plugin ( oh only a few bites ).
See, I dont think that it is expensive at all. The development of a plugin like that costs the same, no matter what the host application costs. Maybe the problem is that LW is to cheap. If it was more expensive with a userbase actually willing to spend the money, maybe more high profile 3rd party developers would be willing to invest (yes invest, you know this is often quite an investment, much more money than you would think) their time and their money into developing for LW. If they have the feeling that there is no market, because not enough users would be willing to buy the plugin, then they wont be interested in porting it.

Cageman
11-23-2010, 05:01 PM
Another thing would be to do surveys... to see where the interrest lies.

Lets play with thought here...

Lets pretend that ChaosGroup aggrees on doing a port for LW. Not only that, but for a limited pre-pay period, it will cost just $395.

How many LW-users would sign up?

Lets say it is 1000 LW-seats that signs up and pre-pay... that would mean Ģ395.000. Would a port to LW cost more or less than that? I hope Elmar or any other dev can answer, because I do not know what a port of a renderengine would mean in terms of manpower needed and for how long...

Elmar Moelzer
11-23-2010, 06:11 PM
that would mean Ģ395.000
No, it would be 395$ (Dollars), that is much less than 395Ģ (Pounds).
Assuming you mean US Dollars and British Pounds.
Vray for MAX is currently selling for about 1300 USD. Why would Chaosgroup even consider a price of 395USD?
I also think that 1000 seats is highly optimistic, especially for a comparably short pre sale period. No matter how cheap you make it and how desired a plugin is, you wont sell 1000 seats in a short time. Not even Fprime did that, from what I know (though they came close, AFAIK) and that was revolutionary for its time (and filled a huge hole in the LW market too).
Making a port to a new platform means a lot of risk. A new SDK that you have to learn, a new (though simillar) market. You also need to support yet another product. This adds to the operational cost of the product (one of the reasons why NT was so hesitant to make a Linux version of LW).
On the other hand, Chaos Group can probably make just as much with a small, paid update to the existing versions (MAX, MAYA, etc).
Less risk and more reward, since a feature update also means that they will stay ahead of the competition. Supporting an additional platform has to bring a lot of reward, much more than just covering the cost of the port. It has to make profit. They are a profit oriented organisation. If they dont see that they will make enough profit, they wont make the port. It is simple as that.

geo_n
11-23-2010, 09:51 PM
Here you go again. I love LW to death? And I keep telling people they lack knowledge? What nonsense.
You're not making any friend here, mate.



When you conjure up one fabrication, you might as well stop before you use it to build arguments on top of it.



Infinitely is hyperbole. But Yes, I believe there's more control and flexibility in the LW + Kray spectrum than with Vray alone. I am not entitled to that opinion, it seems.



Yes, you've made that very clear. And when someone disagrees with you, you start to become personal. 'People' don't know Vray well enough, or 'people' are fanboys or 'people' think this and that.



I don't recall anyone asking that question?

Well, here's my unasked question. Is there such a thing as a cute kitten hidden by kittens?

Here (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8PAVSBUCCkQ)

I think so.

Read your own posts. You keep posting of your experience and peoples lack of knowledge and experience with lightwave or how we might not know how to use LW and/or Kray all that well...
http://www.newtek.com/forums/showpost.php?p=1076384&postcount=26
http://www.newtek.com/forums/showpost.php?p=1078051&postcount=33
http://www.newtek.com/forums/showpost.php?p=1080241&postcount=47

Show your work with lw, vray and kray. Show how fast render vs quality in lw, vray and kray for you and why you think lw renderer is INFINITELY more flexible and adjustable.



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=maTvI0wqiFI long pause in middle just wait.
less than 40 secs per frame on q6600 6gig mem. Fast for me imho.

I've shown how fast vray renders and you can render anything that lw renders. You show your npr renders , I show my commercial of Iphone rendered in similar style. So where does INFINITELY not flexible and adjustable come from for you? That is just a question that maybe vray users can answer for you if you're more specific and not general words like control, not adjustable, etc.

geo_n
11-23-2010, 10:22 PM
to change the perspective on this a little,...
how would it benefit Lightwave to have Vray as a plugin?

To answer this as objective as possible.
The ease of use of vray and the fast and high quality renders it can achieve is well known in multiple appz that have this plugin.
Having 999 nodes in lw helps to speed up render time on projects but small to medium studios like ours have less than 10 nodes and with only a few vray license its enough to render on those 10 nodes.
I would say vray is atleast 5 times faster in rendertime than lightwave. More if bruteforce is considered. Look at my vid how fast it can render vs quality. Kray users would even say kray is 10 times faster than lw in archiviz. I tend to agree with them.
So in our case we have 10 nodes of vray that are very fast to finish projects, ease of setup, native exr support and vray buffers.
The bottom line is, if you can afford it, use it.:D

geo_n
11-23-2010, 10:27 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3h81-g3IMvI Vray


Those are vray renders not lw renders?
Looks like vray can render different types which is just my point. peace :thumbsup:

jdomingo
11-23-2010, 10:35 PM
i think we are getting out of topic on this thread. i believe it is not about what vray or kray or lw render can do (this is a never ending battle of about what these rendering can do). at the end why no development of vray for lightwave? is there some bueaurocracy involve? or something NT or chaosgroup cant agree upon? mmm we need answer from NT or CHAOS GROUP.

geo_n
11-23-2010, 11:07 PM
i think we are getting out of topic on this thread. i believe it is not about what vray or kray or lw render can do (this is a never ending battle of about what these rendering can do). at the end why no development of vray for lightwave? is there some bueaurocracy involve? or something NT or chaosgroup cant agree upon? mmm we need answer from NT or CHAOS GROUP.

I agree. The thread derailed with posts of we don't really need vray as lw can do it more, more flexible and adjustable if you have experience and knowledge and know lw better. But enough of that. No more post about it from me now. Less talk, show work.
I posted vray strength, speed and versatility when I use it in max at my work. I would welcome vray for lw anytime.
Cinema 4D didn't have an official port of vray afaik. A developer decided it was a good idea to have vray for cinema so he made one and sold it and made some money, maybe more. Now c4d motiongraphics are rendered in vray.
At the request of some lw users here and at octane forum, a plugin was made to have a lw octane bridge. That would never have materialized if people didn't ask and ask and ask for it..:D There were people who did post again that they don't see what the big deal was with gpu octane since the images could be done in lw. The octane gallery is full of high caliber work. But that's another story.

Cageman
11-24-2010, 01:26 AM
Those are vray renders not lw renders?
Looks like vray can render different types which is just my point. peace :thumbsup:

One of them was KRay, one of them was VRay... it was a response towards you where you said something in the lines of Oliver not knowing Kray nor VRay.

Cageman
11-24-2010, 01:28 AM
I agree. The thread derailed with posts of we don't really need vray as lw can do it more, more flexible and adjustable if you have experience and knowledge and know lw better.

Not so much LW.... KRay on the other hand... that is what people have talked about.

As I've said before... I rather see Arnold for LW than VRay, since we allready have something that can compete with VRay (KRay).

Exception
11-24-2010, 02:33 AM
Show your work with lw, vray and kray. Show how fast render vs quality in lw, vray and kray for you and why you think lw renderer is INFINITELY more flexible and adjustable.

My work can be found far and wide, I don't feel I need to be co-erced in posting dozens of examples to satisfy your demands. You claim that Vray is as versatile as Kray + LW. I disagree. I have shown you two images that in my opinion could never have been made straight out of Vray. I have not seen anything that comes close in your examples. That pretty much sums it up for me. You want Vray to be accepted as a wide spectrum engine, and I tell you that in my experience, this is not so. Why not let it rest?


I've shown how fast vray renders and you can render anything that lw renders.

Novody contested the speed of Vray. You have just not shown vray can render anything LW can. Sorry, it just can't. And it doesn't need to, because it can do plenty of other things really well.

I don't think Vray for LW is realistic to expect when LW development and market share do not pick up, or anyone codes a bridge to Vray in his own time. If there was really a high demand for this, that might have already happened. I agree with Elmar here. Vray is in a different price class. The LW market is too small and 'cheap'. I can see Vray fro Blender, though, as that actually makes more sense to me. Blenders render engine is not so hot, but its market is growing and it is developing fast...

Elmar Moelzer
11-24-2010, 05:30 AM
The other "problem" is also that LWs render engine is actually to good and that Kray and also Fprime are to good and to cheap.
Both means that even less people will feeld compelled to buy a 1300 USD Vray for LW. LWs render engine is more than sufficient for most people. It has never failed me, not in 15 years.
For almost everything else there is Kray available for a very low price or Fprime, which is also much cheaper than Vray.
So Vrays market is the thin slice left that is not covered by any of these 3 excellent renderers that are already available for LW.
This is the reason why there is not Vray for LW.

jdomingo
11-24-2010, 06:33 PM
dear NT
cc: CHAOSGROUP
cc: ARNOLD RENDERER DEV. TEAM too

Hi, I wanted to know why there is no vray development for Lightwave?
If vray is not going to happen anytime in the future will ARNOLD be another option of are we going to have another thread of "why not" for arnold?

thanks:)

erikals
11-24-2010, 07:41 PM
wonder, is Octane comparable with Vray?

looks very good,...
http://www.refractivesoftware.com/gallery.html
aslo see,
http://www.refractivesoftware.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=3071


Perhaps Vray and in general raytracers can output rough renders faster, but the beauty of Octane is that it takes trial and error out of the equation... so a LOT of time is saved setting up materials to look right etcetera, since all these tweaks are nearly-realtime... You would normally spend a full day setting up lights, materials and render parameters with Vray. In Octane this setup can take what, one hour, two hours?

A Fermi 470 costs 300 euros, that is 3 days worth of work; with 4 or 5 projects the time you'd save will pay the card in full... time is money!
:]

 

geo_n
11-24-2010, 08:30 PM
One of them was KRay, one of them was VRay... it was a response towards you where you said something in the lines of Oliver not knowing Kray nor VRay.

yes I ask him to post vray work to show his insight of renderers.. After watching its not in the style of Alex Romans work which was my point that vray is as versatile as lw renderer to do different types of images. The debate here is whether vray can do other types of render like lw does and since it was stated that lw is INFINITELY more flexible and adjustable than vray and you need to have experience and knowledge or we might not know lw all that well

geo_n
11-24-2010, 08:43 PM
As I've said before... I rather see Arnold for LW than VRay, since we allready have something that can compete with VRay (KRay).

It can't compete with vray I'm sorry to say even if I own it. Its cheaper yes but for versatility and lw workflow support, no.

Major problems.
1. No proper alpha,matt, shadow support for breaking out scenes for comp
2. Can't exclude lights, objects from each other
3. FG method of gi flickers even on highest settings(slow) unless you consider walkthrough an animation
4. Uncached method is super slow like monte carlo in lw. It should be as fast as vray bruteforce
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=maTvI0wqiFI long pause in middle just wait.
less than 40 secs per frame on q6600 6gig mem. Fast for me imho.

5. No exr support

If kray can have all these features then yes it can compete since in a still render it has shown super quality renders. But to say it can compete now head to head with vray, nope.

geo_n
11-24-2010, 08:55 PM
You claim that Vray is as versatile as Kray + LW. I disagree. I have shown you two images that in my opinion could never have been made straight out of Vray. I have not seen anything that comes close in your examples.

If there was really a high demand for this, that might have already happened. I agree with Elmar here. Vray is in a different price class. The LW market is too small and 'cheap'. I can see Vray fro Blender, though, as that actually makes more sense to me. Blenders render engine is not so hot, but its market is growing and it is developing fast...

Some studios use only lw renderer to finish projects past present and maybe future. Do you honestly think that other studios dont use vray as their only renderer past present future? Really?
For many studios, like ours, that do so many different kinds of projects commercial, musicvid, films, games, archiviz, etc, that have used vray only, because scanline is not enough or mental ray is slow we must be rendering projects on an unknown renderer since vray is INFINITELY not flexible and adjustable and cant render different style of images.
That is far from the truth and Ive shown thru examples that vray can render anything lw renders fast, easy to setup and believe it or not as flexible and adjustable as lw renderer. The bonus of speed is you can do test renders fast and be as flexible and adjust scene parameters to get the look.
I guess you ignored the Iphone commercial I posted and its as cartoony and npr style as the lw render you posted.
Last time I checked volumedic, a specialized renderer is more expensive than vray yet it still survives.

I attached another project we did. This time done by our lead all by himself. Animation of mech. Vray once again doesn't seem as limiting or not adjustable and can render different type of images.

Again with speed Im able to tweak tweak scenes faster and get more different results and get more work done.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=maTvI0wqiFI long pause in middle just wait.
less than 40 secs per frame on q6600 6gig mem. Fast for me imho.:D

geo_n
11-24-2010, 09:40 PM
Why not for lw indeed.
Sketchup with vray. Cheap combo with excellent results.
Lw with vray would be as cheap a combo. Another advantage of having this plugin. :thumbsup:

erikals
11-24-2010, 09:52 PM
Octane looks just as good though, if not better... simpler setup too... and affordable...
(slow at times though, if you want it to be flicker free that is...)

Octane vs Lightwave
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zqfj0535hQk

 

geo_n
11-24-2010, 10:06 PM
Octane looks just as good though, if not better... simpler setup too... and affordable...
(slow at times though, if you want it to be flicker free that is...)

It has same problems as kray as I posted above and more, but its still in alpha so lets see. I will still use it for still either way and my ferrari test animation shows potential.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B9LISEglVNA
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q4D7RjPU72g

And to make images clean it needs more time with octane.
My vid shows vray can render final renders in 40 secs at DV size in quadcore. Using corei7 will render that in 15 secs or less. Im using only 3 default max lights and default materials. If I used vray lights and vray materials I could shave the time a little more maybe.

erikals
11-24-2010, 10:12 PM
a lot of flicker can be removed in post though, check these two renders...

1- an original Lightwave render
2- and the same render where noise is removed using a NeatVideo plugin in After Effects...

http://www.newtek.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=89965&d=1289832427

pretty cool...  http://erikalstad.com/backup/anims.php_files/smile.gif

 

Exception
11-25-2010, 06:29 AM
Some studios use only lw renderer to finish projects past present and maybe future. Do you honestly think that other studios dont use vray as their only renderer past present future? Really?

I have said nothing of the sort whatsoever.
I'm not going to go any further with this.

You can have the last word if you wish.

geo_n
11-25-2010, 08:02 AM
I have said nothing of the sort whatsoever.
I'm not going to go any further with this.

You can have the last word if you wish.

I didn't say you said it. It is a question which can you answer honestly that do you think with some studios rendering only with lw past present future, other studios can't just render with vray past present future? Really?
With all the samples I gave, different types, including our own projects,
your post about vray being Infinitely less flexible and adjustable than lw render and, that experience and knowledge or that we might not know how to use LW and/or Kray all that well....:question:

Vray is a general renderer capable of rendering different types of projects, versatile, fast and definitely not less flexible and adjustable. That is my only point.:thumbsup:

Now to be back on topic. Why not for lw??

Elmar Moelzer
11-25-2010, 08:31 AM
Last time I checked volumedic, a specialized renderer is more expensive than vray yet it still survives.

You can not really compare VoluMedic to Vray. We make much less money than Chaos Group and we have a very different and much smaller market. They are a multi million USD company. We are not in that league yet. Also, we dont really sell that much to LW- users. We sell more to non LW- users and markets where price really is a secondary concern.
Chaosgroup would not even bother thinking about doing a port for the sales figures that we have.

Lightwolf
11-25-2010, 08:39 AM
We make much less money than Chaos Group and we have a very different and much smaller market.
So that's why you didn't have a massive presence at Siggraph and didn't send all of your developers over... I was wondering ;)

Seriously though, the reason is plain and simple - the LW market is tiny. Not because of the number of total users but because of the number of users that happily purchase third party products.

Cheers,
Mike

Elmar Moelzer
11-25-2010, 01:19 PM
Not because of the number of total users but because of the number of users that happily purchase third party products.
Most LW users expect LW to do everything out of the box. That is because LW does a lot out of the box already.

Mike, our market is more at ECR, RSNA and tradeshows like that.
We had a presence at the Quest booth at RSNA.

Lightwolf
11-25-2010, 01:22 PM
Mike, our market is more at ECR, RSNA and tradeshows like that.
We had a presence at the Quest booth at RSNA.
Sheesh, I can't even make a joke without you getting, like, all serious on me :D

Actually, I just said it because Chaos Group was all over the place this year - and I met some of their developers while having a smoke.

Cheers,
Mike

erikals
11-25-2010, 01:57 PM
well, like i said earlier, i hold a finger on Octane...
also Octane is $150, Vray is $1300

the quality of the Octane renders are just as good...
it's animation flicker can be removed in post, like shown above (http://www.newtek.com/forums/showpost.php?p=1081943&postcount=106)...

realtime preview too :]
+fast updates...

 

Elmar Moelzer
11-25-2010, 02:28 PM
while having a smoke.
Dont do that brother, smoking can kill you ;)
I used to smoke as well, though never much.

tischbein3
11-25-2010, 03:36 PM
If they have the feeling that there is no market, because not enough users would be willing to buy the plugin, then they wont be interested in porting it.

And beside that, nobody stops actually those people who really want an exporter, to gather together, collect some money, and hire / ask one of the 3rd party developers wich do frequently visit this forum to build it.
(And no: this does NOT include me, I've got no time)

Heres an actual example from the blender guys:
http://www.savetheoceansim.com/

tischbein3
11-25-2010, 03:50 PM
well, like i said earlier, i hold a finger on Octane...
also Octane is $150, Vray is $1300

Yeah, and then we got luxray, just heard of mitsuba, indigo, the promising aqsis rewrite,... plus a few others..... defintive some big movement in that sector. (Also a reason, a 3rd party developer wouldn't show much self initiative tp invest time and money: simply too much movement in such a niche market)

Elmar Moelzer
11-25-2010, 03:52 PM
And beside that, nobody stops actually those people who really want an exporter, to gather together, collect some money, and hire / ask one of the 3rd party developers wich do frequently visit this forum to build it.
Genau!
But of course that would require people to put their money where their mouth is.

tischbein3
11-25-2010, 04:21 PM
Genau!
But of course that would require people to put their money where their mouth is.

And to be fair, towards those people who would actually pay:

It would also provide them with a first hand, realistic and unbiased, situation report of the real market situation and needs.
:D

erikals
11-25-2010, 05:30 PM
http://www.cgarena.com/archives/news/images/2010/octane.jpg

just bought Octane :]

 

jasonwestmas
11-25-2010, 08:15 PM
http://www.cgarena.com/archives/news/images/2010/octane.jpg

just bought Octane :]

 

kewl, what card are you planning on rendering with?

geo_n
11-25-2010, 09:28 PM
well, like i said earlier, i hold a finger on Octane...
also Octane is $150, Vray is $1300

the quality of the Octane renders are just as good...
it's animation flicker can be removed in post, like shown above (http://www.newtek.com/forums/showpost.php?p=1081943&postcount=106)...

realtime preview too :]
+fast updates...

 
I posted on the previous page about octane. In comparing vray to octane or kray in price there is advantage but to produce final work for animation there are showstoppers they need to fix. For stills its perfectly fine.
There are 5 major issues that exist in kray and 2 of those exist in octane. Number 3 could be supported soon in the octane release candidate.
Until then my octane license is not used.

1. No proper alpha,matt, shadow support for breaking out scenes for comp
2. Can't exclude lights, objects from each other
3. No exr support

1300US is not so much considering per project you're probably earning net 10000US on a small animation project.

Again why not vray for lw? Its versatile, fast, and general renderer.
This is from my previous post. Made by our team lead and rendered in vray.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vxv4JRPjEuw
animation of mech. enjoy!

Sample of speed against quality I screencapped
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0r2YRF91y24
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=maTvI0wqiFI long pause in middle just wait.
less than 40 secs per frame on q6600 6gig mem. Fast for me imho.

erikals
11-26-2010, 01:01 AM
kewl, what card are you planning on rendering with?

i'll probably go with a GTX 470 or a GTX 480...
depends on the price difference...

erikals
11-26-2010, 01:06 AM
geo_n

yes, those are lacks,
unfortunately i feel Vray is limited as well, as far as speed /quality /easy of setup /vs price goes...
Vray for LW, sure, but i think the market is limited...

also other quality render apps are coming along, so it might not be long before Vray gets some real competition...

yes, shame about those points (1,2,3) at the moment...

MDSPECIFIC
11-26-2010, 09:13 AM
Octane is very attractive, for me it's more good looking than vRay.
VRay is ok option but what's with LW 10 Render Capabilities?
I am really interested how things will go with LW renderer, specially with animated flicker free GI and rendering speed. Any improvement with VPR and VPR speed. Can we save VPR results as images (save as animation)?

For consideration in my case:
1. LightWave 10 improved renderer (animated flicker free GI);
2. New, better, faster, flicker free K-Ray
2. Lightwave 10 + Octane (updated of course)
4. V-Ray, if they ever decide to make LW version.

Again, I am relly interested about RENDERING capabilities of Lightwave 10.
Can we get some NEW informations, promo-videos, render images, somebody?

jasonwestmas
11-26-2010, 09:57 AM
"Again, I am relly interested about RENDERING capabilities of Lightwave 10.
Can we get some NEW informations, promo-videos, render images, somebody?"

You'll find out soon enough I think :)

silviotoledo
11-26-2010, 11:04 AM
I'm sure a plugin for VRay will not sell more Vray licences, but more lightwave ( and also some LW Cad ) ones.

This is because it's better to work in lightwave and many people form other softwares would come. Also because it's cheap too.

So, this is the kind on development that would make Newtek interested and also chaosgroup. Once they will be updating their product to be more competitive in the market.

but I really would like to see a LW develloper working on this. I have no idea sales will pay the plugin developer. Probably not.

but I would also say it will sell more KRay licences too once it will get more people looking at lightwave and K ray would be very attractive to people that is familiarized with Vray too if they will be in lightwave.


Octane Render is also amazing, but it does not support the multimillion polys V ray supports in rendering and other advanced features. GPU thing will need time.

I would not think in Arnold. It seems it's actually. Too early. It's for big companies.


And about LW 10, yeah! Moooore Videos pleaseeeeeeeeeeeeee!


VPR is a little far from Octane, V ray RT and others, but it's native. So less pain in translating geometry, no plugins...

wsi
11-26-2010, 01:14 PM
Hm... I use Lightwave and C4D + VRay at work. Whenever I need a job to be done very fast and not necessarily photorealistic, I use Lightwave. Whenever I need a photorealistic image, I use VRay. Not because it's not possible in Lightwave. It is, I know. But when you've got a scene with multiple GI bounces, blurry reflections, blurry refractions, sss and heavy AA, VRay's rendertimes are still okay (not good, but bearable), while Lightwave stops to a crawl.

I love working with Lightwave in conjunction with LWCAD and FPrime (or VPR). But I would really love to see some additions to the LW render engine and shading stuff. f.e. energy conservation as a node, animateable interpolated reflection, etc.). VRay would be cool in Lightwave, but I guess KRay does the job, too.

geo_n
11-26-2010, 07:41 PM
geo_n

yes, those are lacks,
unfortunately i feel Vray is limited as well, as far as speed /quality /easy of setup /vs price goes...
Vray for LW, sure, but i think the market is limited...

also other quality render apps are coming along, so it might not be long before Vray gets some real competition...

yes, shame about those points (1,2,3) at the moment...

Yes price is a limiting factor. I doubt though if Arnold will be cheap. Lets hope because the quality for photoreal seems better than vray.
If kray and octane fix those major issues then I'll be more happy to have them.

erikals
11-26-2010, 08:10 PM
true, i hope and believe though that Octane will have these implementations in the near future...

Rayek
11-27-2010, 01:08 AM
I just bought a 480 card with a Black Friday rebate for a 'mere' $340, and plugged it into my rig alongside the "old" gtx280. I thought rendering in Octane was fast on the 280, but with that extra 480 rendering times are just insanely fast.

It feels like I just plugged in a render farm in my box - I laughed out loud :-)

Ooh, I remember the times when I had to wait an hour or so for a simple tiny rendered thumbnail preview on my old Amiga 1200.

erikals
11-27-2010, 08:14 AM
yeah, it'll also be fun to see what the next generations GPUs will bring :]

caesar
11-27-2010, 09:48 AM
I have more interest in Arnold than Vray.
Right now I think modo has the better cost/benefit in quality/speed in render.
The major problems in LW native render now (for me) are: AA too slow, lack of PR materials/library, memory used for geometry, cached GI animated too slow.
Waiting\betting my coins for Core...(maybe v2?)

geo_n
11-29-2010, 05:18 PM
true, i hope and believe though that Octane will have these implementations in the near future...

Well there's one more limitation in octane I never expected. I thought you could combine gfx card memory. That's a shame I was saving for two 480. which costs almost as much as vray btw, to increase my render speed in octane. Scratch that idea now.

Vray 2.0 to be released with tshirt. :D
VRayRT and VRayRT/GPU now included with vray 2.0 :thumbsup:
http://vray.us/vray.shtml

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h_hXoTEjT0Q VFX Demo Reel 2010
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hQCvvlfnPEg Automotive Demo Reel
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h-T5pk4zBbk Architectural Demo Reel 2010
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IdGryOtSkcU maya and vray


Regarding Arnold. Has anyone used it for non photorealistic work and more general cg? I know messiah has Arnold but is it updated.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KemtQrh5UrE& good speed

erikals
11-29-2010, 05:51 PM
yep, but i'm sure memory on graphics cards will boost quite shortly...
we'll probably see affordable graphics cards with 4GB in 2011... :]

caesar
11-29-2010, 05:56 PM
Regarding Arnold. Has anyone used it for non photorealistic work and more general cg? I know messiah has Arnold but is it updated.

http://www.cgauiwtalk.com/showthread.php?14797-Arnold-Render

The link above show some test with Arnold X MentalRay in AA, AmbOCC, grass, some animations, etc, not the latest, but very fast and beautiful !!!

erikals
11-29-2010, 06:09 PM
nice... :]
fast too...