[choo-chee]

after a lot of years doing arch-viz... almost 20 are using Maxwell. There's always the struggle between higher resolution with lower SL, or lower resolution with higher SL. And Maxwell usually likes higher resolution because you get more details, but also more noise to clean. I usually - today - render at 3000X1500 (interiors) or 4000X2666 (exteriors) to get decent SL and enough detail, since we can use AI to sharpen and denoise better. However I'm wandering what is your experience with it, should I go for higher SL and lower res and use AI enhancers, or the opposite? or keep is the same way I do today ? thanks

[Mark Bell]

We've adopted a similar outlook and stick to CPU renders, as well as using Maxwell' s Resume Render if more time is needed. Generally, with interiors , double the screen resolution is used but in a lot of instances, the final presentation and format overrides so if a very wide, say 5:2 format is needed then the filmback is adjusted starting from the base screen resolution upwards. As you note, this does increase render time so we've started using Maxwell 5's built-in denoiser which is showing good results for the type of work we do. Rendering is not out core business and a lot of our clients don't understand what's involved, they think it's just a matter of keep making design or material changes then press a button to get new renders. The denoiser has helped a lot in speed with good results in a fraction of the time and the client's prefer them to non-denoised renders that sill have a way to go to remove the noise. Here's a few on a current affordable housing project we're designing all rendered in a day-
You might want to submit both options to your client and ask them which they prefer then use that technique?