Maxwell Render | Official public forum

Hi, Here is my version comparison between 2.7 and 3.0
I rendered using Maxwell Max plugin 2.7 and 3.0

The material setting is not changed but the results are somewhat different.
As you can see, the normal mapped area is slightly different too.
What makes this difference?

Hello sandyoufax,

Yes, both the Displacement and the Normal mapping have been changed internally, making them better now.

The differences shown here seems to be merely in the estimation of the displaced height. Seems to need just an adjust on the height.
Anyway, the result in v3 should be more correct.

PS: That Displacement is Vector displacement (On-the-Fly, Pretess), or is just 1D height map?

Dario Lanza

Hi, dario
I used On-the-Fly mode for this.
And I found that If I use pretessellate mode, the result of 3.0 is similar to 2.7. But with this mode, it eats too many memory and takes long voxelization time.
Even though it's been improved in 3.0, the result should be the same. Aren't you?

Hi,

I think it isn't just height problem.
Maxwell v3 displacement produce some strange black artifacts.

Here is Maxwell 2.7


Here is Maxwell 3.0


You can see some black spots.

Another test with previous scene.

Maxwell 2.7


Maxwell 3.0


At first, I just thought that it's a clipped area due to height problem, but it was not.


Anyone can confirm this?

Hi sandykoufax,

I think I got those black spots as well by rendering an old mxs file produced by the old plugin.
Once I opened the 3d file with the new plugin and exported a new mxs file it went ok- the black dots disappeared.

It appears to me that V2 is faster than V3.
Just did this test involving displacement.

raul_arfwedson wrote: It appears to me that V2 is faster than V3.

That should happen only in render which materials with additive layers, in that case the extra checking to keep them energy conserving can make things a bit slower. Is that the case?

Hi Juan,

Thanks for the reply.

Yes, that is the case.
So, I did a new set of renders.
This time I closed all the applications except maxwell so that the final result would be more accurate.

V3 No additive materials
Voxelization time 1m33s
Benchmark 203.12
22m55s

V2 With additive materials
Voxelization time 1m25s
Benchmark 222.37
20m56s

It is not a huge difference, but still, kind of a bummer, and if having additive layers is a must, then it gets worst.
Is there any reason for this?

Tks.

Hi Raul,

Regarding voxelization times, they could be slightly slower in some cases, this is the prize to pay to get speed boosts of 5x-10x when there is motion blur or in other cases with lots of geometry.

And about additives, it is not that they are slower now, it is that they were incorrect before, as was reported here in many occasions. Having physically correct additive materials has been one of the main challenges of v3, but of course we will try to optimize its speed in future updates.

Thanks,

Ah!
Great, had forgotten that the additive had been changed.
Tks!