PDA

View Full Version : Maxwell V.s Fprime



silverlw
02-27-2005, 01:07 PM
I really don't know what to say about these images so i leave it to you to comment them if you care. The main reason for me was to see how much difference is there between a 3 bounce rad solution in Maxwell vs Fprime,how will the light spread,will Fprime be less noisy etc. Judge for yourselfs.

Both renderings was given 3 hr's to complete. maxwell version is with physical sky + sunlight enabled. Fprime version has 0 ambient 1 distant light and blue backdrop

UnCommonGrafx
02-27-2005, 01:12 PM
Just so we don't have to be so assumptive, is there anyway to know which is which?

Panikos
02-27-2005, 01:21 PM
Actually FPrime duplicates LW rendering via a shortcut so you are actually comparing LW renderer vs Maxwell.

So, from my experience with LW renderer there are some things to point out:
- Number of bounces ignores backdrop. Number of bounces has to do with polygons and lights only, thats why FPrime's sky/backdrop doesnt illuminate some parts of your image.
- The luck of ambient in FPrime combined with the above, let all shadow areas as black. The bounced light from the building was far too weak (even with 3 bounces) to reach each and every corner of the building.

I have no idea about Maxwell except from what is written in the promotional web.
Seems that the skylight there works differently. In general, noise=lack of light

;)

antwik-2
02-27-2005, 01:22 PM
There is a big difference in does.
Look at the dynamic and color bleeds in the maxwell render. The fprime render is not close to that.

The fprime render looks more dull and blurry compared to the maxwell render.
Look at does area, See how the bleedings make the maxwell render look sharp and realistic.

http://www.antonw.com/jpgcopys/silversponza.JPG


I whish we could have that quailty in fprime. I hope Worley look into the maxwell techniques.

UnCommonGrafx
02-27-2005, 01:29 PM
Maybe it's the example, but I don't see anything that is worth 3 hours. Never mind the fact that you can get the maxwell rendering inside LW, within 3 hours.

I see the tests but somehow it seems invalid: one fake is better over another fake but the fakes that are best aren't even in the competition...? That is to say, spinning lights and other trickeries we've learned.

It's the 3 hours I'm really having an issue with. :rolleyes: :eek:

silverlw
02-27-2005, 01:56 PM
:D I knew from the beginning that i throw in a molotovcoctail by trying to compare Fprime vs maxwell. For those wondering wich is wich, Maxwell is at the top, frprime beneith. Before everyone tries to compare this simple scene with native lw interpolated rad muck to show off how much faster it is, look at how Maxwell mimics/simulates the light scattering in a more natural way than lw/fprime. Maxwell seem to be using a technique called "Metropolis Light transport" Papers here (http://graphics.stanford.edu/papers/metro/)
Would'nt it be great to have this algorithm implemented in Fprime with full interactivity you think?

Panikos
02-27-2005, 02:09 PM
the dilema is :

Should FPrime go hand-in-hand with LW, or move on ?

the question is :

Can Newtek follow ?

:confused:

fartofart
02-27-2005, 03:52 PM
:confused: what ..3h for what ? the thread is not even semi pro
this test is not even worth to drop this words.

fprime renders fine ...only the old known SDK weakness

3hours on a pentium 2 ?
or is your hd heavy fragmented ?
fprime need abit extra storage you know?! :cool:

cresshead
02-28-2005, 10:58 AM
not one to throw a bag of red hot bolts into the arena but lightscape 3.2 would and does such a totally amazing job in such scenes and renders them out in a couple of mins each frame once the solution has been made in about an hour or so.

also both results shown here are not satisfactory...they lack lightbouncing into the corners of the building so seems pointless to compare right now.

as others have stated faking would get you a result whereas both of these have yet to get the "result" in 3 hours.

robk
02-28-2005, 12:08 PM
I really don't know what to say about these images so i leave it to you to comment them if you care. The main reason for me was to see how much difference is there between a 3 bounce rad solution in Maxwell vs Fprime,how will the light spread,will Fprime be less noisy etc. Judge for yourselfs.

Both renderings was given 3 hr's to complete. maxwell version is with physical sky + sunlight enabled. Fprime version has 0 ambient 1 distant light and blue backdrop

I'm not sure why you are comparing these two renderings. In the maxwell version you have Physical sky and Sunlight enabled and yet on the Fprime rendering you have 0 ambient which to me would seem to be maxwells physical sky. So the maxwell render is using light from the atmosphere and Fprime is not. Not much of a comparison here if I am reading this right. The Maxwell rendering also seems to have the sunlight turned up way higher (hence more details in the dark area). Turn up global light intensity and let Fprime go and I think you would get much of the same results. Also if it took 3 hours to get that grainy shot out of Maxwell who has the time.

Earl
02-28-2005, 05:26 PM
I gotta admit, that after 3 hours on a fairly simple scene, there really shouldn't be grain left in the render.

I'm not impressed.

Captain Obvious
02-28-2005, 05:45 PM
Is the scene available somewhere so we can see how low we can get the render time for an interpolated radiosity in LW's native? ;)


I'm not sure why you are comparing these two renderings. In the maxwell version you have Physical sky and Sunlight enabled and yet on the Fprime rendering you have 0 ambient which to me would seem to be maxwells physical sky. So the maxwell render is using light from the atmosphere and Fprime is not. Not much of a comparison here if I am reading this right.
As far as I can figure, the blue backdrop is essentially the same as the "physical sky" in the Maxwell render, though perhaps a bit less complex.

cresshead
02-28-2005, 05:56 PM
it's not that simple a scene..it has a third of a million polys in it.

edit!....doh!...it's actually 36thousand poys!....geez i feel dumb! :o

see the attatched screen grab.

cresshead
02-28-2005, 06:04 PM
another shot from modeler with textures

cresshead
02-28-2005, 06:06 PM
boy...i need a coffee!

try again!...

if anyone wants the model/scene/textures post me!

[email protected]

Mipmap
02-28-2005, 06:59 PM
I'm mixed on Fprime. It shows visual results very quickly, but still seems to take a very long time to get anything that is usable. People say you can use the early images as a text video, but with LW you could just render a rad test animation in half the resolution, then put the sequence to video at 200% size and it would probably be about the same thing.

Earl
02-28-2005, 08:34 PM
Sorry, I guess "simple" was a bad choice of words. But I still don't think there should be any grain after 3 hours of rendering.

theo
02-28-2005, 10:12 PM
I'm mixed on Fprime. It shows visual results very quickly, but still seems to take a very long time to get anything that is usable. People say you can use the early images as a text video, but with LW you could just render a rad test animation in half the resolution, then put the sequence to video at 200% size and it would probably be about the same thing.


I've been off the FPrime bandwagon for quite a while now. It is used, but rarely.

Fact is Lightwave's native render is absoutely superb especially with the upgraded options. For 90% of what most professional need Lightwave's renderer is more than robust.

I would not waste valuable time at this stage banging your head against the proverbial renderer wall when you already have an excellent one in front of your face.

Panikos
02-28-2005, 11:36 PM
Fact is Lightwave's native render is absoutely superb especially with the upgraded options. For 90% of what most professional need Lightwave's renderer is more than robust.

I would not waste valuable time at this stage banging your head against the proverbial renderer wall when you already have an excellent one in front of your face.

You made me laugh :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D

theo
03-01-2005, 07:31 AM
My comment isn't meant to convey that I am happy leaving LW's renderer as it is forever because I would like to see a couple of additional features implemented in a much more robust way.

But at this stage I find a fixation on other renders to be a bit of a time waster if you are making a decent living with LW. It comes down to splitting hairs really.

The reality is there is not one magic algorithm available that will create true non-grainy radiosity renders in two minutes flat. When that happens I will be interested.

JML
03-01-2005, 09:48 AM
My comment isn't meant to convey that I am happy leaving LW's renderer as it is forever because I would like to see a couple of additional features implemented in a much more robust way.

But at this stage I find a fixation on other renders to be a bit of a time waster if you are making a decent living with LW. It comes down to splitting hairs really.

The reality is there is not one magic algorithm available that will create true non-grainy radiosity renders in two minutes flat. When that happens I will be interested.

agree with what theo said.

--

I hope radiosity in LW will become more powerful and faster,
but until then, I'm not going to go in another package to render.
importing stuff into another program takes time to setup and I don't think the extra time setting it up is worth it.
--except if radiosity renders is a LOT faster and higher quality.--
and until now I was not impress much by maxell in quality/speed,
and Fprime still has heavy noise just like LW without noise reduction..

I will look more at maxell to see if it's really worth it (quality/speed on big scenes), and hope a newer version of Fprime will fix some of its issue..

just my thoughts

cresshead
03-01-2005, 12:16 PM
if anyone wants to try out this lightwave scene it's held here....

here ya go!

http://hdri.cgtechniques.com/~sibenik2/

it's the sponza scene you need...

i'd email it out but it's about 1.5 mb

monovich
03-01-2005, 04:54 PM
I still use fprime for rendering about 75% of my stuff. Most of it is animation. It works quite well if you are aware of the pitfalls (and there are pitfalls).

perfect? no.
useful? yes.
end-all solution? no.

It has made my lighting and texturing skills much much better because of the quick feedback, though.

-s

theo
03-01-2005, 06:00 PM
It has made my lighting and texturing skills much much better because of the quick feedback, though.

-s

That's called a Previewer- which is what FPrime IS very good at functioning at and what it was initially designed to do.

pixym
03-02-2005, 07:46 AM
I have a reply from Next Limit that tells me Maxwell for LW will be avalaible in a couple of months...

JML
03-02-2005, 09:58 AM
yes, Fprime is previewer.

it also helped and helps me a lot with lighting and texturing, I love it for that.
but not a renderer.
one of the caracteristic of a 'real' renderer is to render on network. that's the number 1 requierement I think to be call a renderer.

it's not possibe to use Fprime to render animations on our renderfarm, so it's not a renderer, just a really good previewer

monovich
03-02-2005, 10:05 AM
I render across a network (multiple machines) with fprime all the time, it just has to be set up manually. As far as just being a previewer, that's pretty much bunk. We've delivered many projects with it, the results have been great, and would otherwise been impossible with the Lightwave renderer because of it's speed.

But if you guys disagree, that's fine. Pick the tools you like and use them how you want. Whatever pays the bills and makes the clients happy is fine by me.

-s

cresshead
03-02-2005, 10:20 AM
maybe the best way to descibe f prime is that it's a great "render option"...it's very cool to be able to see your lighting change nr realtime inc radiosity , same with uv mapped textures also it's very caable of rendering nice stills or animations..bottom line is i prefer to have it as an available option than not!

just think of the "pain" other app have [xsi esp but also include max, maya] with those apps you don't have nr realtime raytracing preview capabilities that f prime gives you..i'm just ral happy that it was made for lightwave and not another app! :D

steve g

JML
03-02-2005, 02:12 PM
how did you render with Fprime on network monovich ?

pixym
03-02-2005, 02:16 PM
how did you render with Fprime on network monovich ?

Yes, Same question for me, please let us know...

monovich
03-02-2005, 02:40 PM
rendering on a network with fprime is sort of a hack-job thing. You render the same scene file with different computers. the content directory on all the computers you will use would point to the one master computer/directory.

Basically you decide how many processors you have, that determines your frame step. So if you have six processors, you set the first LW instance to render frames 1-60 by 6, then the next to render 2-60 by 6, then 3-60, 4-60, 5-60, 6-60. Each instance of lightwave renders every sixth frame, but they start with a different frame, so they never overlap.

On a PC, if you have dual processors, then do one instance for each processor. Just launch LW, set your render going, then launch another instance of LW and set your next instance going.

On a Mac, if you have dual processors, you have to make a duplicate of the LW program and rename it in order to launch two instances on the same machine. Then you do the same as if you were using a PC.

Mac and PC lightwave cannot refine each other's frames, and they will not always render the exact same frame exactly the same, so it's best not to mix platforms on a network render.

----

yes... it's a hack-job solution, but it works. It isn't the best in every situation, but like cresshead said, it's a good option.

-sf

JML
03-02-2005, 07:46 PM
do you have a copy of Fprime for each LW computers ?
as you said, it's a work around,
Fprime was not made to render on network, but it would be great if they could do that next time.
this way I could use it to render scenes instead of using it only as a preview tool..
(and of course after newtek/Fprime fixes the volumetric issue too..)

but until then , I'm still happy with Fprime, it saves me a LOT of time when setting up lighting inside a scene,

pixym
03-02-2005, 08:43 PM
Fprime is USELESS for me... because of its noisy renderings. So I have quite de-installed it from my workstation...
Preview is not important for me at all... This plug-ins reminds me my Artlantis Render times (some years ago), and preview my scene is not very important because of my experience. I can "feel" the LW final result for my Archi viz Work...
All I want is NT to improve the rendering time of the native renderer specially for multi bounce Monte Carlo...
What is also very important is to have acces to all the pixel filters such as sasquatch... and other ones during the rendering process...

theo
03-02-2005, 09:19 PM
Fprime is USELESS for me... because of its noisy renderings. So I have quite de-installed it from my workstation...
Preview is not important for me at all... This plug-ins reminds me my Artlantis Render times (some years ago), and preview my scene is not very important because of my experience. I can "feel" the LW final result for my Archi viz Work...
All I want is NT to improve the rendering time of the native renderer specially for multi bounce Monte Carlo...
What is also very important is to have acces to all the pixel filters such as sasquatch... and other ones during the rendering process...

Right on....

Chris S. (Fez)
03-02-2005, 11:48 PM
I use FPrime purely to preview texturing and lighting. The native renderer with G2 has much better image quality IMO.

We'll see what FPrime 1.5 brings though...Worley has certainly not been wasting away on a beach.

JML
03-03-2005, 08:05 AM
Fprime should work on their web site too, to make it look more professional, they would probably get even more sales that way..
it's looks really cheap right now

Captain Obvious
03-05-2005, 09:30 AM
This image took about 15 minutes to render in LW's native. Interpolated radiosity (three bounces), 21-pass PLD anti-aliasing with normal motion blur. A corona effect is applied. It could definitely be better, I'd say... The radiosity shadows need to be sharper, and there needs to be less light in the corners. I suppose gMIL could solve it, but it felt a bit like cheating. :p The lighting needs a bit of tweaking too, I guess. I turned up the intensity of the light instead of using gamma correction or fiddling with levels in Photoshop, so the white areas are perhaps a bit too white, and the dark areas are too dark. I'm still in the process of learning how to tweak the radiosity in LW. It's a lot of work. I'll get back to you.

It's a 1.6GHz G5, by the way. What hardware did you use, silverlw?

Lightwolf
03-05-2005, 10:02 AM
it's not possibe to use Fprime to render animations on our renderfarm, so it's not a renderer, just a really good previewer
Unless you find that, in certain situations, FPrime on a single box outperforms your complete renderfarm (which happened here, and its not a pretty sight ;) ).

Cheers,
Mike

hulagirl7
03-06-2005, 12:57 PM
Fprime is USELESS for me... because of its noisy renderings. So I have quite de-installed it from my workstation...
Preview is not important for me at all... This plug-ins reminds me my Artlantis Render times (some years ago), and preview my scene is not very important because of my experience. I can "feel" the LW final result for my Archi viz Work...
All I want is NT to improve the rendering time of the native renderer specially for multi bounce Monte Carlo...
What is also very important is to have acces to all the pixel filters such as sasquatch... and other ones during the rendering process...


I agree. To many work arounds needed to implement lw's benefits.
No pixel plug-ins work, no nuthin' works with it!
Great for preview. Sweet for simple architectural work, with massive post.

BEAUTIFUL baby, pixym! Mine's 3, now, so makes me smile in a big way!
Congrats

pixym
03-06-2005, 08:21 PM
BEAUTIFUL baby, pixym! Mine's 3, now, so makes me smile in a big way!
Congrats

Thanks hulagirl7 :)
My little Frederic is now 19 months only.

ingo
03-07-2005, 01:09 AM
I agree. To many work arounds needed to implement lw's benefits.
No pixel plug-ins work, no nuthin' works with it!
Great for preview. Sweet for simple architectural work, with massive post.....

Thats funny, for me its the opposite. I use FPrime for my final architectural renderings, but for previews good ol' Lightwave is much faster since you can render selected object only. The option to stop a render and continue it later is worth the price alone. I hope only that in a later version FPrime stores ALL data in its files, so you don't have to take care about not updating objects or scenes.