Show your LW2018 Test Renders

prometheus

REBORN
sorry for crossposting this, but I wanted also a special dedicated thread for it...
Goody Rays again..
Check thread here, to find more info, and if someone wants to engage in clouds discussion more on topic.
http://forums.newtek.com/showthread.php?155945-Goody-Rays-and-Clouds-Again, it´s a 2018 VPR render though...unfortunately gone discovery mode on me now, quality can be raised for no noise of god rays..but haven´t had time now.

 
Last edited:

MarcusM

New member
And it isn't Diffuse samples.. it is bounces. Which compounds the problem exponentially for every bounce.

In any case... I created a small test scene that we all can chime in on.. trying to find the best setting with the least amount of noise. Have a go at it:)

In its current state.. this is near default. Try find the clearest setting.. and share the scene. Maybe we all can find some settings that works the best for a general case.
At least we will have some good pointers to go by.

MichaelT here is 1min 56sec on my poor 4 thread i5 i am sitting now:
View attachment TestSceneMarcusM.zip
Test scene 01.png
 

MichaelT

Active member
Nice :) That speed is OK for your machine I think. I'll look at your settings, as well as RebelHill's.. and see what it will look like. This scene isn't as easy as one might think at first glance though. Particularly since the lenses are diffracting colors inside.. as well as plenty of darker areas. The cloth is also tricky. As is the subtle pattern on the floor. But as clean as possible is the target :)
 

MichaelT

Active member
There are many descriptive terms I'd use for that pattern on the floor, but "subtle" isn't one of them. ;D

:) Sure.. but in the lighter areas of the pattern.. interpolation could easily destroy them.
Anyway... more on that in morning.. midnight... yet again :)
 

MichaelT

Active member
No I don't personally struggle that much any more. But there are enough who do. This is why I think it can be a good idea to have a scene that will (as much as possible) deliver clean results. Preferably with settings that don't take ages to render, but that is secondary. Also.. it is kind of a challenge on my part. Because we all have different opinions on what is regarded as being a "clean" render too. I'm perfectly happy with some noise in the scene... while others are not :)
 

jwiede

Electron wrangler
I am ending with this scene for now and here link to download my setup if someone want to play in free time:
https://drive.google.com/open?id=1bOlxzbuKsY3ai1QN9Qg5Ep2t1r8Cwj7o

LW 2018 - 53 min, i5 4 threads, no noise filter, no post processing

View attachment 139950

Looks like something odd's going on w.r.t. the shadowing in the ceiling corners of the back wall (with the window).

There's some odd lighting on the trim/moulding of the tray ceiling edge with that back (window) wall, and the way it's brightening towards the center, seems a lot for just bounce off the window sill (esp. given sun angle shown). There's also some odd brightly-lit trim/moulding in the corner between the left wall and the back (window) wall -- that one's happening in the shadow of the curtain/window frame/whatever, so little justification why it's so bright, maybe a light leak?
 

rustythe1

www.Digitawn.co.uk
Can you share a set of Render Presets that can act as a good starting point?

Render presets are kind of pointless, they are totally scene dependent, as in your lights, surfaces, types of geometry so you have to tweak the render settings to suit these, for example just look at the "render tile" page in docs https://docs.lightwave3d.com/display/LW2018/Render+Tile+Size for every scene, you need to try a different tile size, using the wrong one can add 20 to 30 seconds a frame, and its affected by your entire scene and hardware, so whats good for one person, could be bad for another.
 

Schwyhart

Member
Still a W.I.P
6h 30m 2s

4 point lights - 60lx Inverse Distance^2
2 Area lights - 75lx Inverse Distance^2, 30 samples, 256 MIS, Normalize
4 point lights - 3.14lx Inverse Distance^2
4 spot lights - 30.57lx ID^2, 20 samples, 512 MIS
3 linear lights - 70lx ID^2, 20 samples, Normalize
2 Area lights - 10.14lx ID^2, 20 samples, 256 MIS, Normalize


Camera.jpegRender.jpeg

Test_29-Interpolation.jpg
 
Wow. 6.5 hours.
I'm curious: if you change your camera to 10 to 20 for adaptive sampling and up your light samples to like 64 or so, does that render in less time but with acceptable quality?
That's where I am with the new renderer: as few samples as I can with outrageous sampling numbers. Outrageous in the sense that they are above 64 yet without a render penalty.

Nice imagery.
Robert
 

samurai_x

New member
Wow. 6.5 hours.
I'm curious: if you change your camera to 10 to 20 for adaptive sampling and up your light samples to like 64 or so, does that render in less time but with acceptable quality?
That's where I am with the new renderer: as few samples as I can with outrageous sampling numbers. Outrageous in the sense that they are above 64 yet without a render penalty.

Nice imagery.
Robert

Since you're very familiar with the lw 2018 renderer being a beta tester, here's a scene to play with
http://forums.newtek.com/showthread.php?155830-LW-2015-vs-LW-2018-Arch-Viz-render-testing/page7
 
Thanks, but I'm not (a beta tester). My familiarity comes in the same time frame: after the January release.
I'm a user, just like the rest of you.

I've popped this scene into layout, and as you all know, right out the box, it is dog slow.
Comparing it to a version 3 of Kray is kind of silly. But I guess that's the point of your exercise: to show how silly it is for us to be ... pleased with this 1.0 version they've given us.

I am rather enamored with the new renderer. I have found I can do things I could not previously (without octane). Fiberfx even works.

Lots of updates to look forward to. Perhaps they'll be able to get their 1.x version of this renderer to match or surpass some version 3 or so of another software. Let's see...
Robert
 

jwiede

Electron wrangler
I've popped this scene into layout, and as you all know, right out the box, it is dog slow.
Comparing it to a version 3 of Kray is kind of silly. But I guess that's the point of your exercise: to show how silly it is for us to be ... pleased with this 1.0 version they've given us.

You might want to read closer, the label says that is a Kray 2.62 render, not a Kray 3 render. The Kray 2.62 update was released just over two years ago (and based on a significantly older engine core).
 
Top Bottom