PDA

View Full Version : Kray, LW9 people should contribute to this render test thread!



wacom
08-08-2006, 12:17 PM
http://forums.cgsociety.org/showthread.php?t=389990&page=6&pp=15

I'm sure some one here can get a render out of LW or Kray that is even faster than, or at least beter quality for the time, than the Modo or Vray renders shown in this thread!

I'd like to see some Kray people go at it...and a LW node guru...

Remember to try and take the HDRI map and blur and shrink it first...

Thanks!

Captain Obvious
08-08-2006, 03:39 PM
I'm computer-less at the moment, or I'd be all over that. :(

wacom
08-08-2006, 04:35 PM
What happened to your computer? Hopefully it didn't bite it and take your work with it...

Captain Obvious
08-08-2006, 04:36 PM
Not to worry, I managed to back it all up before sending it in for repairs. The hard drive crapped out. I still have warranty, but I'll have to make due with a 733MHz Power Mac G4 from way back when until it gets back.

Of course, my main machine is a 1.33GHz iBook G4, so the difference isn't THAT big... :p I really need to buy a Core 2 Duo system or something.

Matt
08-09-2006, 06:08 AM
Wouldn't want to try that with LW's native GI, waaaaaaaaay too slow and outdated to be any practical use.

Mike_RB
08-09-2006, 11:06 AM
nice rendertime for 3millons subdivided polys. Cool stuff.

Also, you arent limited to 30 days, ask nicely at the end of your trial and the'll just give you another 30 days.

moc
08-09-2006, 01:51 PM
yep...
so far,
I don't know how to do a "blurry" reflection on a surface...(No image reflection blur......and no hyper smooth plugin)at LW.......
Anybody know that?

3dworks
08-09-2006, 01:55 PM
yep...
so far,
I don't know how to do a "blurry" reflection on a surface...(No image reflection blur......and no hyper smooth plugin)at LW.......
Anybody know that?

...in LW, open the surface editor, select the 'Environment' tab and set 'Reflection Blurring' to something greater than 0.

cheers

markus

Bog
08-09-2006, 02:32 PM
the renderer often is no better than the meatbag controling it.

Laughing hard here! Always true, though. Tools are only ever as good as the person who wields 'em.

Krix
08-09-2006, 03:05 PM
Hi,

The reflection blurring on surface editor/environment tab is slow plus you cannot controll the sampling. Open the node editor. Add node->shaders->reflection->reflections. Set the reflection's color output (for example) to the surface's reflection (green) input. Select the reflections node. Right side properties panel ->reflection blur. If you use higher AA settings than just leave the samples at 1x3...

Cheers,
Krix

silverlw
08-09-2006, 10:26 PM
Ive had a go with it and this is what came out, no post. Still with singlethreaded version of Kray. It's way to dark if you ask me but this is with the materialsettings found in that Modo scene. I will continue play some more with it and brighten it a little.

wacom
08-09-2006, 11:32 PM
I got curious about this Modo business and I've meant to try it out for some time. I am extremely impressed with their 30 day fully functional demo as well as the roughly 2Gb tutorial/tool tip movies as well as PDF Modo 202 reference and sample scene files. Now this is something :newtek: could learn from.

I slapped that thingy boxy model in to a basic Modo layout with default light and set up basic Irradiance caching, et voila one speedy render, with absolutely no knowledge about modo.

I also hit TAB on the entire model to throw some heavier geometry at the renderer (though it broke the model in several places), same render time.
Now I'll seriously have to consider adding Modo to my toolset, as a "plug-in" to LightWave. Price is *eugh* though for what I need it for. I'd rather have a similar renderer in LightWave and save my money.

I gotta toy a lot with Modo over the coming 30 days to see if it gets me hooked. I could really use the renderer and an instancing modeler and painting and...

This is 2 min setup mind you, with no Modo know-how at all. (Dual 2GHz G5, 2.5Gb RAM).


Ah yes...but this is missing TWO main things HDRI lighting (no lights other than), and glossy raytraced or otherwise reflections. I'm not saying your speed isn't impressive on this (though some AO shaders for other packages and such can do the same in about the same time, with the same setup you have).

Try it with those other addtions and at the full test resolution...

Oh and I don't think LW 9 would do so bad...or not as bad as people think...

Don't forget to try a smaller, blured HDRI...

BazC
08-10-2006, 01:47 AM
Is it me or is the interpolated GI in LightWave worthless? I've never made it do anything acceptable, sure it can make something that looks barely ok, but that's it. Could be user error, but I gave it up on it.

Well I kow some of the rendering gurus around here swear by it but I can never get rid of the blotches. Add umpty-two AA passes and it eventually smooth out but then I find Monte Carlo with fewer passes just as quick. I must be missing something!

parm
08-10-2006, 04:18 AM
I've been having a try with this. But can't get blurred reflections using the nodal shader.

can anyone see what I'm doing wrong?

duke
08-10-2006, 06:00 AM
Don't you have to set dispersion?

BazC
08-10-2006, 06:24 AM
Don't you have to set dispersion?

Nope! The only way I've got this to work is to plug the reflection color out into reflection (green) AND Reflection Shading (red). I'm sure that's not how you're supposed to do it but it works!

Weepul
08-10-2006, 06:38 AM
Is the checkbox to enable Nodal shaders checked for the surface in question?

Pavlov
08-10-2006, 07:50 AM
Yes Modo looks very promising, after Kray and Vray it's one of the fastest things around.
But i'm sure NT will come out with something competitive soon... (have i already said this ? hmmm). anyway for the price of Modo you can get both Fprime AND Kray, and both are kickass, complementary engines which will fill almost every need.
then, if Lux makes a plug fr Lw with their engine at less than $300, i guess i'd buy it ;)

Paolo

Karmacop
08-10-2006, 09:15 AM
I've been having a try with this. But can't get blurred reflections using the nodal shader.

can anyone see what I'm doing wrong?
Is it showing up any reflections at all? You need to give the surface some reflectance value, the reflection shader just tells it what to reflect.

silverlw
08-10-2006, 09:24 AM
same scene, just increased the hdri to 200%.

wacom
08-10-2006, 01:09 PM
I just think that if people took the time to set it up in nodal (give a surface to each object) they could adjust the rays and blured reflections per each object and save a lot of time.

And the only Modo posts on CG talk (with HDRI and blured reflections) aren't overly impressive. Please people- post these on CGtalk (the images) as you contribution is important.

You'll also note that while LW's renders are slow- they often seem much more acurate than others. It's give a give and take situation. There is also the ease of use issue...people want their one stop GI solution that works for everything with minimal fuss...but so far there isn't one on the market that works well without fuss...

Interpolated Radiosity is very dependent on you having your mesurments right...

parm
08-10-2006, 01:40 PM
Is it showing up any reflections at all? You need to give the surface some reflectance value, the reflection shader just tells it what to reflect.

Thanks guys.

That's whats what's confusing me a bit, I am getting reflections, but not blurred ones. I am away for a couple of days I'll give it another try when I get back!

Cheers!!

Yog
08-10-2006, 01:44 PM
.....anyway for the price of Modo you can get both Fprime AND Kray, and both are kickass, complementary engines which will fill almost every need.Except neither gives you a kickass modeller, 3D paint program nor texture editor. ;)

I really must look into Kray sometime soon, I keep hearing a lot of good things about it. A bit surprised I haven't looked into it before now as I'm a bit of a render engine junky:rolleyes: , but it just seems to have avoided me.

wacom
08-10-2006, 01:56 PM
Except that MODO is only good for turn table renders, and really isn't ever going to be suited for animation any time soon...

Mike_RB
08-10-2006, 02:30 PM
Except that MODO is only good for turn table renders, and really isn't ever going to be suited for animation any time soon...

That's an odd statement to make. It really isn't *EVER* going to be be suited for animation any time *SOON*?

I'm betting it *WILL* be suited for animation, and probably pretty *SOON* as far as software timelines go. modo has gone from a basic poly modeler in september 2004 to a texture painter/renderer in july 2006. And the've already demoed animation working. I'm guessing animation will be here sooner than you think.

Will the renderer be "suited" for animation that soon, well, we will just have to wait and see.

Captain Obvious
08-10-2006, 02:55 PM
Technically, modo can already render animations.

http://www.modomotion.com/Home.html

;)




I really must look into Kray sometime soon, I keep hearing a lot of good things about it. A bit surprised I haven't looked into it before now as I'm a bit of a render engine junky , but it just seems to have avoided me.
Kray rocks!

Pavlov
08-10-2006, 04:51 PM
Yog, so you have to catch it before it's too late ;)
Listen to me, give a look at it and be a bit patient in the beginning, then you'll get very much.

Paolo

RedBull
08-10-2006, 05:24 PM
Technically, modo can already render animations.

http://www.modomotion.com/Home.html

;)




Kray rocks!


Not really, obviously it's not released... But more importantly, Modo202
can't render GI animations as the GI uses some random sampling, causing Modo to render the same frame differently each time it's rendered..

Obviously not acceptable for GI animation, Allen has commented that it will be addressed in future updates, but for the moment, it's not usable for such.

I would love to see Kray, working well.... I have not tried it as yet, but look forward to a multiple threaded version.

Weepul
08-10-2006, 08:50 PM
I just think that if people took the time to set it up in nodal (give a surface to each object) they could adjust the rays and blured reflections per each object and save a lot of time.I'm not sure if that would help. I did set it up in Nodal with what optimizations as I could muster that work globally (in particular, reflections will not show up except to the initial camera ray, which is acceptable for this scene, though that would have had a larger impact if I'd used Monte Carlo radiosity).

26 minutes on a G5 Quad, perspective camera, 4 threads, BG radiosity only, noise reduction enabled, slightly blurred HDR probe. It's still grainy - this is about as long as I was willing to wait for a speed test like this. :p Given 4 hours it might be approaching "smooth", I figure.

The first attached image is with some HDR exposure adjustments in the FP Viewer, to take it up from LW's linear gamma (and I dislike plain gamma adjustments because they lack contrast). The second image is the straight render.


You'll also note that while LW's renders are slow- they often seem much more acurate than others. It's give a give and take situation.
That's right - but LW in its present state can't do a "smooth, fast but not quite totally accurate" render like other engines can, as far as I can tell. It also seems to me like other renderers ought to be able to do a smooth, accurate render in less time than it would take LW, especially when it comes to multi-bounce radiosity.

Pavlov
08-11-2006, 03:26 AM
ROTFL these times speack for themselves, Modo renders this in 1/20 of the time and better, Kray and Vray are way faster than Modo.... hope NT is reading here.
Anyway, yes, i always save in HDR when i render stills, then i expose in Photoshop.
now a question: how could we reproduce the awesome Logaritmic tonemappic we find in Kray or Vray ? does it have a correspondance in Photoshop's level management ? It loos like a simple curve editing wont do the same.

Paolo

Weepul
08-11-2006, 03:46 AM
I find an HDR Exposure filtering (either via FP Viewer, or for higher quality, via the image filter) with white point of 1.5 and black point of 22% gives a nice nonlinear tone curve. Tweak to taste, of course. :)

zapper1998
08-11-2006, 05:16 AM
so were can i find the object and scene file so i could try it out on my system??

Erwin Zwart
08-11-2006, 07:05 AM
http://www.xs4all.nl/~ezcc/modo/Boxy_202_Kray.jpg

Kray on AMD64X2 4800+ on one thread
8 bounces

"my" scene, Silver's settings.

Pavlov
08-11-2006, 07:55 AM
weepul - thanks, anyway imho LW's exposer cannot give the same quality of Logaritmic tonemapping, with vastly luminous, tiny gradient surfaces and sudden shadows (Vray look, for example).

Erwin - Did you use blurring accuracy limit ? it allows for much faster blurred reflections because it allows reflection to "see" just irradiances (not FG) over a given blurring limit.

Paolo

Captain Obvious
08-13-2006, 12:34 PM
What settings did you use, Erwin? Is it the usual light map + irradiance caching?

Exception
08-13-2006, 03:16 PM
Nice shot, erwin, good to see you on the bandwagon!

wacom
08-13-2006, 09:15 PM
That's an odd statement to make. It really isn't *EVER* going to be be suited for animation any time *SOON*?

I'm betting it *WILL* be suited for animation, and probably pretty *SOON* as far as software timelines go. modo has gone from a basic poly modeler in september 2004 to a texture painter/renderer in july 2006. And the've already demoed animation working. I'm guessing animation will be here sooner than you think.

Will the renderer be "suited" for animation that soon, well, we will just have to wait and see.

Look, I'm sure MODO is great for many people, but to me a package that starts and modeling...and ends in animation isn't really my thing. I'd rather have every major part of the software thought out and intergrated. When I hear about the progression of MODO it almost reminds me of how some MODO devleopers took the development of LW: modeling first, then render, and all that "other" 3D stuff last. It just doesn't sit well with me.

However- you never know what their plans might of been, so maybe they planned it this way all along.

OH well- the modo users are crazy ga ga for it so there is really no use in debating something that isn't real yet (IE real animation etc. in it).

Mike_RB
08-14-2006, 10:43 AM
However- you never know what their plans might of been, so maybe they planned it this way all along.

Not going to keep on this here. :) We could start an entirely new thread dedicated to this, but do you really think the people behind LW's renderer and HV's went off to create a modeling only program, then added a renderer as an afterthought? Way back in modo 101 if you typed item.create into the command box you could find a bunch of disabled options for stuff like Voxels, VideoClips, Particles, Bones... All that stuff has been there from the start, and they are just polishing one piece at a time (gotta make money too).

Brad's demo last siggraph showed that everything in the scene are items with channels, and anything can be animated. For example the render settings, like AA values, or resolution are all just item channels for the render item, so you could (if you wanted to) animate the x resolution over time....

Screenshot from modo 101 (in 2004) Before even painting and render was announced.
http://www.elementvfx.com/WebDemo/itemcreate.jpg

Pavlov
08-14-2006, 11:00 AM
looks great, the deep-obj oriented concept at the base of Modo is very interesting, imho all apps will go that route sooner or later.

For sure Modo cannot replace by no mean the power of LW+Fprime+Kray and other 3rd part tools like LWcad or Pictrix's tools. And it wont for some time - SDK and a vast 3rd party tools library, animation tools and related rendering issues (MB and other), volumetrics and so on.
By now LW AND its 3rd party tools offer this, even if in a fragmented, overlapping and sometime incomplete way.

Anyway Modo is growing so fast that i'll keep my eyes on it constantly, if it will offer the same but in a more unified, clean, moder enviroment i guess it will receive the attention of many people from every other 3d app.

Paolo

wacom
08-14-2006, 10:17 PM
...For example the render settings, like AA values, or resolution are all just item channels for the render item, so you could (if you wanted to) animate the x resolution over time....



Well write me again when they have a full CA set with all the works. Those features sound really great for a flying logo...but when I say animation...I mean more than just moving the camera and having particles.

Like I said- right now it has turntables...and camera animation (if you love pain). I could go into XSI or LW right now and add a bunch of grayed out features in a drop down that would make you sick...but they'd be just that...illusions to...

Maybe some people are just used to the hope, wait, and wish software development plan though...

Captain Obvious
08-15-2006, 08:27 AM
Well write me again when they have a full CA set with all the works. Those features sound really great for a flying logo...but when I say animation...I mean more than just moving the camera and having particles.
I don't see your point. Luxology have made it quite clear that they first built the foundation for animation: stuff moving around. Then, as they progress, they're adding the tools to achieve it in a pleasant manner.

Full character animation won't be in modo for another year or so, at least. But the foundation is there. It just needs the tools.

I really don't understand your point. In fact, I'm quite sure you don't even have one. You just seem to be a Lightwave loyalist. Well, wake up and smell the coffee: being loyal to a piece of software makes about as much sense as being loyal to brand of toilet paper. Just use whatever tools fits the current job best. I am a registered owner of modo, and I recently bought Lightwave as well (I've been borrowing it up until a while ago; now I bought it for myself). I plan on learning Blender, and I'm playing with the thought of adding XSI once I have a Windows-based workstation and enough money to buy it.




What makes me so irritated is comments like this:

I'd rather have every major part of the software thought out and intergrated.
You mean like Lightwave, where the modeler and the layout/animation/rendering are two wholly separate applications? Yeah, that sounds REALLY integrated.

I don't really mind the Layout/Modeler separation, but claiming that modo is the app that isn't well thought-out and integrated just shows you're ranting about nothing in particular, and you're not all that concerned about actual facts.

Mike_RB
08-15-2006, 08:40 AM
Weird response. I wasen't claiming anything about modo's character animation ability by showing that item.create list. I was just responding to this comment:


However- you never know what their plans might of been, so maybe they planned it this way all along.

And I showed that they did in fact plan it this way from the start, and that they have built a foundation that will allow anything and everything to be animated as they have gotten flak in the past with thier previous software efforts being not flexible enough at a core level. Noone is claiming modo is ready to be animating anything at this point. But to the question of weather they were planning animation when Allen wrote the new renderer, I think it's pretty clear from thier demos and that item.create list that rendering, and animation, when it comes will not be a bolted on afterthought.

wacom
08-15-2006, 09:20 PM
Do you guys work on the Modo team or something? Grayed out features and the creator saying "oh yeah, we'll have that..." aren't really doing it for me. And yes when I say well thought out and fully intergrated I mean that all of the peices are being developed together- not tacked on with glue and tape at the end. Sounds like LW6.5-8.5 development to me...

CA and more complex animation isn't something you just plan for- it is as important as a render engine or a modeling component- and they should all relate to each other and be developed along side one another- otherwise you end up with a program for rendering, modeling, and animation...and we know what that is like.

I'm in no way a LW loyalist- mearly a user who takes note of people pushing things that are half baked.

Modo- as a complete package, to this date, is half baked. LW, even with all of its faults isn't. Granted Modo MIGHT one day get there, but I for one am sick of paying for a future piece of software anymore without seeing far along working demonstrations. It's all vapor...

So maybe I wasn't clear- but I said: MODO is great for stills, but it isn't fit for many other projects due to its lack of animation tools. If you want to talk about the current MODO vs the future one then I guess we can live in LA LA land and pretend that at this current time LW has the uber fast GI render engine, instancing, a history stack, and vastly improved CA. But I live today.

Mike_RB
08-15-2006, 09:56 PM
MODO is great for stills, but it isn't fit for many other projects due to its lack of animation tools.

Cool man, right there is somthing we agree on. Lets pick this discussion up again in a years time when we might have somthing more to talk about.

EDIT: If you do want a peek at thier plan, and havent seen this yet, here is the Lux siggraph 2005 video, some neat animated stuff near the end, 600mb http://content3.luxology.com/event/2005/siggraph/Luxology-201-Event.zip