[photomg1]

Hi Brett,
so are you suggesting that everybody on this thread who is looking to speed up there workflow doesn't get this ? I come from an industry where you don't make things (bar making a set) and feedback is virtually instant . You spend far more time worrying about whats going on in a frame than any technicalities . Any process that allows for making iterations quicker will generally lead to better results faster, the faster that happens the quicker an individual will just focus on what is going on in a frame/image.

[simmsimaging]

Life is game. We just sometimes want to play with different toys.

that's a different motivation

[Fernando Tella]

I try not to separate both things too clearly. I call it research and development. I think it's important to spend some time on it.

[simmsimaging]

Hi Brett,
so are you suggesting that everybody on this thread who is looking to speed up there workflow doesn't get this ? I come from an industry where you don't make things (bar making a set) and feedback is virtually instant . You spend far more time worrying about whats going on in a frame than any technicalities . Any process that allows for making iterations quicker will generally lead to better results faster, the faster that happens the quicker an individual will just focus on what is going on in a frame/image.

Nope. If you read what I wrote you will see that I did not say "everybody on this thread" and I wasn't suggesting anything - I think I stated it pretty clearly.

There is a common and - as I clearly noted: in my opinion - misplaced emphasis on render times. In other threads (more than this one), and other forums too, there is a sense that this is somehow what is holding everyone back from making great (or greater) work. It is a tempting line of thought, and because of workflow demands like you pointed out (and that I am more than a little familiar with myself). It's just not borne out though.

Next Limit has always taken a consistent and clear stance on this issue: Maxwell is first about good, second about easy, third about speed (at least that is how I see their stance, they can correct me as needed). My point is simply that the same exact prioritization on our part is what leads to better work, and as commercial artists that is really far more important than speed, and that many people miss this and end up wasting a lot of their own time and energy.

If speed is really the only or main priority in someone's line of work that is different, but again - I did not say "everybody"

Note that I do not say that speed/efficiency is *not* important. I get it, I like fast too

[jespi]

I think nobody here wants Maxwell to becomes something similar to what Vray is. What we are asking for is just a bit of flexibility.

Brett, about your statement about focusing on the image instead of the speed. I think this is unrelated to the software you use. Everyone should focus on the image, no mater the tools you use. It's like saying that Alex Roman didn't focus on the final result because he was using Vray But as commercial artists, we must do the job under an specific deadline, and sometimes you have to sacrifice something to be able to deliver at that specific deadline. In archviz, my field, many times we need to deal with heavy deadlines. As Eric noted a few post above, interiors are a bit intimating in render time. Wouldn't be great if we could have a few simple controls that'd give us the opportunity to adapt the quality to our specific needs? I don't think this would be in detriment of any user.

José

[simmsimaging]

@Jespi: my comments were not directed to the Alex Roman's of the world Even so, I would bet that if you looked at his priority list you would see that render times fall well behind quality.

And yes, I agree that as you put it "a few simple controls" that allowed you to adapt quality would be great. Maybe they could be right beside the "perfect render here" button It's a nice idea, but it's not realistic. After all the time and work by people much smarter than me, if it was going to be like that it already would be.

Anyway, I get it. I really get it - speed is nice. The point I was making, I think, still stands: that the majority of people that I have seen focusing on render times would be better off spending it elsewhere. I only make this point because I would hope some people would stop to think about it and maybe refocus their efforts - and to their own gain, not mine. That's all.

( and I speak as someone who has spent a lot of time chasing that same holy-grail, and learned the hard way )

YMMV.

/b

[jespi]

Hi Brett, I think we both agree. And I also realise that is not an easy task for the developers to create such "magic" controls. But I think it is important to communicate our needs to the developers in order to get something close to what our perfect rendering tool should be.

Cheers,
José

[simmsimaging]

Fair enough.

[photomg1]

The Internet is a strange beast I've just read this.

"The key to getting good results is to have a quick turnaround time for iterations.The faster you can make a tweak and see the result , the more tweaks you can get in.A fast renderer directly translates into a better final image." - John Knoll

Anyway I'm glad we all understand where each other is coming from. I can only echo what Jespi has written in his last two posts above.

Best

Matt

[Bubbaloo]

The key to getting good results is to have a quick turnaround time for iterations.

He should have said, "One of the keys..."

[AndreD]

Couldn't resist testing how fast Corona would be! I downloded the Benchmark scene, which doesn't require 3ds max to be installed. It's just an standalone version of Corona. I must say that I'm impressed by how fast Corona cleaned the scene. My old Mac Pro 2008 finished the job in 8:08 min I think this is prety fast. What dou you think?

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/264 ... aBench.PNG

Even my acer Windows 8 tablet with intel mobile corei5 dualcore cleaned the Scene within 18 min!
As not a max user, I have to wait for the material improvements in the standalone version make a use of the blender exporter,
for the moment, there is a single glossy layer only per material..
No way to make carpaints e.g.

[Mihai]

I really don't get it, what is different between this thread and the other 50 previous threads "explaining" that people like it when rendering is faster.....

Is this news? There are at least 5-6 other renderers you can try which will give you similar render times and they have been available for years, oh and where is the GPU crowd?? 18 min??? I can do that in 2!!!!

[AndreD]

Is this news? There are at least 5-6 other renderers you can try which will give you similar render times and they have been available for years, oh and where is the GPU crowd?? 18 min??? I can do that in 2!!!!

What I doubt
The Acer W700 is so slow, that I was never expecting to render anything on it
Of course, it could never match mw quality..

[simmsimaging]

I really don't get it, what is different between this thread and the other 50 previous threads "explaining" that people like it when rendering is faster.....

Is this news? There are at least 5-6 other renderers you can try which will give you similar render times and they have been available for years, oh and where is the GPU crowd?? 18 min??? I can do that in 2!!!!

[photomg1]

I really don't get it, what is different between this thread and the other 50 previous threads "explaining" that people like it when rendering is faster.....

your right probably nothing if its going to get ignored by the developers