well, give us render times for that and the resolution, so we have a clue...
but:
besides mapping problems of the model, sorry to say, but it looks pretty flat...
i always see this kind of flat-charcoal-waxy finish on all v-ray renderings which holds me off it ... look at any picture of the v-ray galleries and they have this soap-feeling...
* * *
of course, if an image like this renders in five minutes instead of four hours this is great, but still it's about to choosing the preferred renderer.
i REALLY don't understand why people BLAME NL for not anymore using their software. everyone who bought a license of maxwell has known about rendering times before it was bought and thus noone can be blamed. and it is a totally different story that NL's development is called slow. i've seen worse. MUCH worse ! (namely art vps)
what is it about to announce loudly not to use the software any more? do You guys think this will change something if two of three people hop off the ship that is just starting to sail ?
come on - maxwell is still young and a kind of pioneer project, yes, with weaknesses. but fact is also that these algorithms of physically correct light transport exist already since 20 years and it's the first time that computers are fast enough to use them reasonably. Your renderings are too slow? for me that's a problem of the hardware firstly, not software.
and as said, everyone has known in advance that maxwell renders «slow».
«and that's how the cookie crumbles !» (from bruce almighty)
- By choo-chee
- By Mark Bell
- By Forum Moderator
