Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 19

Thread: The fastest GI renderer aviable

  1. #1

    The fastest GI renderer aviable

    This one is for NT development team or any with experience on GI solutions. Ok I know there are different solutions for GI so what is the best for the next generation of Lightwave Radiosity Engine.

    1) Full Cuasi Montecarlo
    2) Montecarlo Path Tracer
    3) Irradiance Maps
    4) Photon Mapping
    5) Arnold "Brute Force" method

    There is a good link in CGTalk that talks about "wich is the fastest GI renderer"

    http://www.cgtalk.com/showthread.php?threadid=50228

    also take a look at the link of thi guy too

    Hi,
    I've just completed my fastest test render so far, using my very own renderer. I'm extremely pleased with the high quality and resolution I was able to achieve due to my superior choice of algorithm (Monte Carlo path tracing). Most impressive of all is the render time - only 24 hours and 5 minutes!
    http://www.graphics.cornell.edu/~ajb64/
    I hope to see this algorithm used more frequently in commercial renders, instead of the slow and poor-quality photon mapping (which produces a biased solution anyway!)

  2. #2

    Talking

    No one even knows what the Arnold method is. There is no way to implement it unless arnold make it public.

    And since mental ray and brazil all use photon mapping, I doubt he can convince people otherwise.
    Last edited by harhar; 04-17-2003 at 01:17 PM.

  3. #3
    LightJustice Panikos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Nicosia Cyprus
    Posts
    1,727
    There is some info on the net about Arnold and several pics.
    I also found a Siggraph Paper in which Marcos Fajardo presents Arnold.

    Here is some info :
    Unbiased MC: path tracing
    Fool-proof: only one quality knob to tweak, the only artifact is noise
    Spends most resources in visible features
    BRDF importance sampling
    Fixed path length, not truly unbiased. 2 bounces are usually enough
    Next event estimation, can be turned on and off on a per-light basis

    Sampling
    Improved convergence by QMC (low discrepancy sampling)
    Low discrepancy sampling avoids random selection of samples
    Randomized QMC avoids aliasing (Cranley-Patterson1976, Owen1995)
    ARNOLD uses RQMC (since 1999)

    Geometric complexity
    Efficient storage of dense triangle meshes
    Fast ray traversal of dense triangle meshes (almost constant time)
    Hierarchy of nested uniform grids
    Grid preprocessing time is a tiny fraction of total rendering time
    Geometry must reside in memory at all times

    Shading complexity
    Shading is decoupled from geometry
    Arbitrary parametric BRDF’s
    Any BRDF parameter can be fed with a texture map or procedure
    Atmospheric scattering and procedural volume shaders

    Light sources
    Standard types: point, spot, spherical, quadrilateral
    Any geometric primitive can emit light
    Why skylight works”
    – The sky is hard to miss with BRDF sampling
    – Rays don’t bounce off the sky
    – Performance degrades as we move indoors
    HDRI-based lighting. Spiky light probes are hard to sample

    Parallelism
    Split the image into square, independent buckets
    Shared memory, multi-threaded bucket rendering.
    Bucket or frame granularity in network rendering
    Animation
    No artifacts: fully compute every pixel of every frame
    No preprocessing
    Motion blur comes for free (almost)

  4. #4

    Talking

    you can see arnold in action by purchase PmG's Messiah: Render.

  5. #5
    Hello
    I was talking to a few Messiah- Studio- users a while back and they said that Arnold is still pretty much unusable. Dont know whether they fixed it meanwhile...
    CU
    Elmar

  6. #6
    Pixel Harmonizer
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Virginia
    Posts
    188
    Originally posted by harhar
    you can see arnold in action by purchase PmG's Messiah: Render.
    That's not Arnold. They purchased an early Alpha Arnold from the developer and developed their own from there.
    G5... 64 bits of hype and lack-luster performance in a pretty desktop box. Apple jobbed to Jobs!

  7. #7

    Talking

    ha ha, arnold is still in early alpha, so it's arnold.

  8. #8

    Arrow :)

    I don´t know any Arnol or messiah users to date but acording to some beta testers Arnold is the fastest GI renderer and there are other GI renderers wich might be even faster than Arnold (Dali renderer) for example.
    Shure things can be faster in LW GI solution but the only problem is to find a balance between quality and speed don´t you think?

    Best
    Christian

  9. #9
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Fredericton, NB, Canada
    Posts
    169
    Okay, for a real GI renderer, you're going to use all four of these:

    1) Full Cuasi Montecarlo
    2) Montecarlo Path Tracer
    3) Irradiance Maps
    4) Photon Mapping

    Plus some other stuff. You want to have a quasi-monte-carlo path tracer that uses both irradiance maps AND photon mapping to help with the sampling. That's just the TIP of the iceberg. Nearly every reasonable renderer has all these features, and these features are not what separates the super-slick from the run-of-the-mill.

    - Graham Fyffe
    - Graham Fyffe
    proprieter, Happy Digital

  10. #10
    Registered User amorano's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Burbank, CA
    Posts
    81
    Or you could do 2 other things....

    A) Don't use GI at all, since even the big guys don't. Look to Ambient Occulsion for how/why ILM does this.

    B) Use bounce lights.

    I have found that smaller farms (like the solo or under twenty machine shop) don't even look at GI as a solution, esp. when other lighting methods have been in use for a decade+ that produce equal results in tenths of the time.

    I feel that things like GI still scream Uber-I-Think-It-Will-Make-Pretty-Method. If your worth your salt these things can be done sans bleeding edge feature.

  11. #11

    Talking

    A) Don't use GI at all, since even the big guys don't. Look to Ambient Occulsion for how/why ILM does this.
    3. paint GI in photoshop

  12. #12
    LightJustice Panikos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Nicosia Cyprus
    Posts
    1,727
    With such thoughts, we would have been still in quickshade rendering.

    I believe that its a matter of time and patience for better GI renderings.

  13. #13
    there are big disadvantges to othe GI methods compared to lw's..final render is very fast BUT it's view dependant..that's why it's fast...you have to "sample" frames in your animation the renderout...but you may still have flickering and texture crawling etc...it's pretty good for stills but not as nice as lightwave...that was one of the main reasons i bought lightwave as my second 3d app...i wanted a top renderer...i already had max scanline and final render...lightwave is really nice...don't knowck it so much!...brazil is okay but at the same price as lightwave i went for a full 3d app rather than another renderer for max.

    mental ray is a good move for maya but remember you only get one node to render to..other will need paying for!...same with brazil to a extent [4 nodes]

    steve g
    stee+cat
    real name: steve gilbert
    http://www.cresshead.com/

    Q - How many polys?
    A - All of them!

  14. #14
    Registered User amorano's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Burbank, CA
    Posts
    81
    Originally posted by Panikos
    With such thoughts, we would have been still in quickshade rendering.

    I believe that its a matter of time and patience for better GI renderings.
    Sure, if you are three years old and can not find alternative solutions to problems.

    I am all for magic buttons when they are magic. Radiosity in LW is far far far from magic. Just the fact that I can not animate with it without it crawling and(more AND than or)/or it taking super long render times.

    Why would I want this solution in a production pipeline, since most industry big boys do not touch it with a ten foot pole, having better served the end vision with alternative techniques?

    Please, do not think out side the box, because, when and if more people do, this industry will be even more overcrowded with little jons and janes who know where the magic buttons are but not what they mean.

  15. #15
    Registered User amorano's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Burbank, CA
    Posts
    81
    Originally posted by cresshead
    don't knowck it so much!...brazil is okay but at the same price as lightwave i went for a full 3d app rather than another renderer for max.

    Vray and Mantra are also good. Lets not forget PRM. Which as of 11 can do GI.

    mental ray is a good move for maya but remember you only get one node to render to..other will need paying for!...same with brazil to a extent [4 nodes]
    Not only that, but if you want access to higher end features, HDRI for instance, you still need a copy of standalone Mentalray. Then things like FUR and Paint Effects are not supported in Mentalray. I am sure they will have it figured out soon enough though. And the ubiquitous no support for Macintosh currrently.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •