PDA

View Full Version : Opinion: What's the best rendering software besides Lightwave?



RT-4-777
07-16-2013, 06:07 PM
Hello, fellow Lightwave gurus. I'm gathering facts and opinions about which rendering plugin(s) or software is considered the most useful for video production, or in general. Any ideas? Opinions? I've heard of Arnold, Lumion, Kray, and Octane, but that's about it. Feel free to share your experiences.

nickdigital
07-16-2013, 06:38 PM
What's your definition of "video production"? Flying logos?

What type of work do you do?

erikals
07-16-2013, 08:48 PM
if you mean TV/advertising when you say for video production, i'd say LightWave is one of the major ones.
also for film. Vray is a good contender, Kray3 is supposed to be great, but is not out just yet.

Octane is realistic for close ups (perfume bottles etc.) and interiors.
Kray is faster though.
Octane / Kray are not that great for long animations (they are either too slow or flicker)

for exteriors, i'd say use LightWave, or wait for Kray3 for exteriors / interiors...

interiors in LightWave is more tricky, it's best to bake, or use some tricks combining baking, rendering foreground / background separate, for then to mix in post...

realgray
07-16-2013, 09:59 PM
Lightwave/Modo for ease of use. Most broadcast graphics are done in C4D using their internal renderer or vray for C4D. Mental Ray/Arnold/Vray/Renderman up you'll see in commercials/movies/game cinematics depending on budget/preference.

jwiede
07-17-2013, 01:24 AM
if you mean TV/advertising when you say for video production, i'd say LightWave is one of the major ones.


Lightwave/Modo for ease of use.

:rolleyes: :bangwall: There needs to be a wrought irony fence around this place.

Danner
07-17-2013, 02:18 AM
There are many viable renderers out there, there is no single best one, because each has it's strenghts and weakneses so it really depends what kind of work you do, what is your budget and personal preference. Lightwave has three strenghts. VPR, speed and flexibility. By flexibility I mean the huge amount of options and features you have access to out of the box and with third party add-ons. Even other render engines as Add ons, like Octane, Kray and soon Arnold.
Speaking of Octane, it's a great renderer too, on a decent gaming card (gtx 670 here) it's very fast for stills and for animations where you can't use fixed cache. It has many limitations as far as shading options and you must plan ahead if you want to do something complex in order to avoid hiting the GPU memory barrier, this is a limitation of all GPU render engines as fas as I know, you must re-create your materials/surfaces inside Octane but it's very easy to get good looking results out of it. I've seen Maxwell and Vray at work but my experience is limited, from what I've seen Maxwell is extremely easy to use and very deep in shading features but quite slow. Vray is not as good as I had imagined, it's not as fast as LW and getting good results requires quite a bit of knowledge. What I loved about Vray is the quality and quantity of fully shaded ready-made models and scenes.

erikals
07-17-2013, 03:00 AM
:rolleyes: :bangwall: There needs to be a wrought irony fence around this place.

hardly, explain. :twak:

RT-4-777
07-17-2013, 06:13 AM
Video production...I was referring to a movie or TV series pipeline, anything requiring heavy cgi. Personally, I'm graphics designer, but that's not what I meant by it.

nickdigital
07-17-2013, 07:34 AM
Well, LightWave is more than capable. It's been used on Star Trek, Roughneck Troopers, Battlestar Galactica, Walking Dead...

The list of tv and movie projects is quite long.

tyrot
07-17-2013, 09:08 AM
Buy Octane .. and awesome Octane plugin. It is SO fast that you cannot wait for any other renderer. When you earn money buy TITAN NVIDIA card(s)- you ll have an insane raw power for render.
Also Juan - Octane plugin author simply is a genius - he keeps updating his plugin like noone else. With this plugin we have survived within heavily MAX VRAY infested archviz competitions.

About materials - it is SO easy to understand.... because of insane speed and MATERIAL UPDATE in IPR - you ll be changing everything in no time.

I cannot recommend enough .. .download demo and see yourself..

LW_Will
07-17-2013, 09:22 AM
The FX Guide is doing a series on the state of the render in modern 3d graphics. First is about the hows, seconds the actual programs (Including Lightwave and Modo).

Check it out http://www.fxguide.com/featured/the-state-of-rendering/

3dworks
07-17-2013, 09:59 AM
maxwell and kray, of course...

erikals
07-17-2013, 10:04 AM
those are not so good for rendering animations afaik...

3dworks
07-17-2013, 10:23 AM
well, some create excellent work with kray for animation: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-XJFmo7UGMk

maxwell is best for stills.

djwaterman
07-17-2013, 10:26 AM
The FX Guide is doing a series on the state of the render in modern 3d graphics. First is about the hows, seconds the actual programs (Including Lightwave and Modo).

Check it out http://www.fxguide.com/featured/the-state-of-rendering/

Holy Moly! One of my renders was used for Lightwave renderer, although in the article placed in misleadingly close proximity to the mention of Kray.

jwiede
07-17-2013, 12:33 PM
hardly, explain. :twak:

What does the phrase "besides Lightwave" mean to you?

Skywatcher_NT
07-17-2013, 12:40 PM
From the fxguide article :


"The company has roots in scanline rendering but since 2006 it has had a fully ray traced solution." :stumped:

saranine
07-17-2013, 02:51 PM
Buy Octane .. and awesome Octane plugin. It is SO fast that you cannot wait for any other renderer. When you earn money buy TITAN NVIDIA card(s)- you ll have an insane raw power for render.
Also Juan - Octane plugin author simply is a genius - he keeps updating his plugin like noone else. With this plugin we have survived within heavily MAX VRAY infested archviz competitions.

About materials - it is SO easy to understand.... because of insane speed and MATERIAL UPDATE in IPR - you ll be changing everything in no time.

I cannot recommend enough .. .download demo and see yourself..

My video card/GPU or whatever it is won't run Octane. The demo won't work on my PC.

erikals
07-17-2013, 03:24 PM
What does the phrase "besides Lightwave" mean to you?

a figure of speech.
i hardly think he meant to exclude it, not unless he is an expert on LightWave rendering.

BeeVee
07-18-2013, 04:49 AM
My video card/GPU or whatever it is won't run Octane. The demo won't work on my PC.

Hey,

What sort of video card do you have? Octane requires an Nvidia graphics card with CUDA cores.

B

juanjgon
07-18-2013, 10:29 AM
My video card/GPU or whatever it is won't run Octane. The demo won't work on my PC.

Yes, Octane only works with NVidia GPUs with CUDA model equal or greater than 1.2 (I think that even GTX 2xx can work)

-Juanjo

alexos
07-18-2013, 11:34 AM
Octane is realistic for close ups (perfume bottles etc.) and interiors.
Kray is faster though.

Eh, what?

ADP.

RT-4-777
07-18-2013, 03:39 PM
Thank you everyone, this is more than enough!

tyrot
07-18-2013, 04:03 PM
no no you are wrong - it is never enough... We have just started !!!!

Cageman
07-18-2013, 04:54 PM
Besides LightWave I would argue Modo, since it has a very solid and integrated renderengine in the package, and is generally easy to use, if you can manage the Shadertree, which I think is quite daunting to use for large scenes with lots and lots of surfaces to shade. For Biased engines, (such as LW, Modo, Kray, Vray), I would say KRay is a good GI-engine capable of putting Vray to shame, and is quite low-cost (around $300 for a license and that includes unlimited rendernodes), but capable means a hell of a lot of learning (much harder to learn compared to Modo or LW). VRay is another very good biased engine, but there is no version for LW avaliable yet.

Unbiased engines are the next level engines, such as Maxwell, Fryrender, Arnold and Octane. These engines are doing physically correct calculations of lightbounces and shaders and as such, they are certanly slower compared to biased engines, but the results are quite fantastic (they do not cheat as much as biased engines). Arnold and Octane are the faster ones of the unbiased engines and depending on the shot, can rival any biased engine in terms of setuptime and rendertime; Arnold being CPU while Octane is GPU. Octane can run circles around Arnold, again, given the right scene to render since it is using GPUs, which are faster for that sort of calculations, at least at this moment.

I would personaly go for adding Modo as an additional renderingsolution as a companion to LW. It can read and write LWO files, it supports MDDs natively, and have some interesting rendering features such as Importance sampling, making it a quite fast bruteforce MC-engine. While that will never be able to compete against GI-interpolation in terms of speed, it certanly makes Modo one of the faster, if not the fastest, bruteforce MC engines around. A perfect solution for animated deformations without forking out an arm and a leg for Arnold, or using Octane with GFX-card memory limit (6GB for the very, very expensive graphicscards).

Oh well. :)

erikals
07-19-2013, 04:37 PM
Octane is realistic for close ups (perfume bottles etc.) and interiors.
Kray is faster though.


Eh, what?

what?

saranine
07-20-2013, 10:45 PM
My video card is a AMD Radeon HD 6700

That's why I can't run the Octane Demo?

erikals
07-20-2013, 11:41 PM
yes, sorry, AMD won't work, you need an Nvidia video card that supports Cuda.
the more Cuda cores it supports, the faster the render will be. (basically)

jasonwestmas
07-20-2013, 11:53 PM
For rendering larger textures and highly detailed displacements I'd use bucket rendering like vray, modo or renderman based software.

For speed and ease of use I'd stick to Lightwave and possibly a GPU renderer like Octane. Running out of memory for textures and displacements is often the problem I run into with these types of renderers though. . . so here it's all about optimizing your assets as much as possible like you were making a video game some times. Of course with Lightwave if you have 16-32 GB of ram per renderbox then you'll be fine for most things.

Maxwell is kind of in the middle where you get the flexible benefits of software rendering with crazy amounts of realism and beautiful lighting . . .considering how much faster computers are now, I think it's worth the render time if that's what you want. So choosing the right renderer depends largely on how big your scenes are, the texture sizes and the desired style of your images.