[ivox3]

Well for a slow renderer, it seems my personal image gallery is getting bigger faster ....hmmmm, interesting. Maybe it's because it's actually fun. ?? .........desire/fun/motivation = get more done. We have a saying around here ......"JUST GET IT THE F___ DONE." No one cares how you do it, what you do it with...they just want results. I'm 37, so I remember when computers had 64K's of ram with 9600baud rate modems(a Lamborghini in it's day) . You don't know what slow is, if you've never experienced this--- So, if speed is so damn important to you, then build a renderfarm or pay to use one. I suspect if that if your so 'in demmand' and important, then your making more money than you can count. If your not, then shut up and appreciate the process, knowing superior resulsts await you. I actually never want to see "instantaneous' high res. renderings, because in relative terms...the customers/clients become aware of the increased performance capabilities.. ...they will then expect more in less time. It is Relative(ala, Tom) Doesn't life's demands already suck enough time out of my life already? , and now people lacking foresight want to add to that? People always rushing rushing to judgment ..., "yeah, this is a good idea!" ...this will make my life perfect " ...will it? maybe for some, and a definite hell for others.

So, i say to you, Mr. I think i'm so damn important/ i need it yesterday/my clients are so demanding/i'm actually the Real George Lucas,but nobody knows it ....... yeah, it's a forgone conclusion that there will be render engine speed optimizations and pc's in the future will be doing G-flop calculations exponentially and guess what? ...instead of a few renderings....you might find yourself doing hundreds, and asking, "how'd it get like this? ..it used to be fun.", all the while pulling your hair out and still whining for more speed increases.

STFU. i3.

maybe I just woke up on the wrong side of the bed.

[Hervé]

you're right.. at the end, what count is how many finished render you've got... I remember giving up with other render engines, because it did not turn to what I was looking for....

[thomas lacroix]

come on ivox, my first personnal comp was an atari 520 stf, i know what speed issue is

speed is an issue, money is an issue and competition is another one, if my competitor says the job can be done in that much time and any modification in that much time, i'll pass for a perfect moron if i say to my client that i need to render another 30 Hours only to change is sofa texture as other competitors would in 6 to 12... ( i said it times and times ago but few seems to see the point ) clients are becoming quite aware of delivery time/prod , were far from the early days filled with lens flares mojo...

this business is made of rush and opportunities, and sure it sucks to much of my time already, i would had thought that maxwell would have helped easing it a little (hope just it'll do even more even if time pass by and so are opportunities)

but that was kind of you to say that if we are demanding info or increasing speed that we dont deserve it as we must be to lame to do a render...

so get back to bed, we were just kindly asking, and come back later so we can talk...

i'm not whining, just beeing grumpy from time to time knowing i've got a porsche with wich i cannot go further 20m/h... my 2 cent

[ivox3]

Adehus,

I'm not saying that i have special stuff that i'm doing that allows me 'quik' scenes. Although, following certain guidelines can greatly help.
Remember, clients are lay people ....they don't see what we see. I know too many people cg/photographers/artist's who OVERWORK an area to death with no real reward, that meaning .....in the end, nobody noticed -- and if they did, they didn't really care. Suggestion: simplify and edit certain things down. Use diffuse when possible. Sure it's an ideal situation to show a customer 'photographic' realism, but only if the situation has the criteria necessary(that being, mostly time). If not, then they can't have it. If you say, then maybe they'll find someone else to do a better job quicker. ......so be it. That'll be the day when i let someone else(client) determine what my workflow is like. .....Fire me., i'd rather eat dog food and starve then behave like a trained monkey jumping through a hoop of fire. Those days are over for me.

When i say that my image count is increasing .....it's no mystery. Let's say you just do 1 a day...that's 30 a month. In reality, i can't keep up with Maxwell ...as i can't model that fast. I'm behind. It's like i have all these ovens with sheets of cookies baking constantly ....it's madness. Seems like everytime i turnaround something is coming out of the oven. The best thing is that you don't have to worry about burning them. As we all know...burning them is actually a good thing. Maxwell is not the problem ......it's me. I have to become even more faster & proficient with modeling -- and simultaneously keep the quality.

BTW: ...i've seen Andrikos' stuff ...and i'm certain he's more technically knowledgable than myself with Maxwell, so maybe he'll shed some light on those type of things that you can do for speed improvements.

i3.

[ivox3]

going back to bed now..........

[thomas lacroix]

that's why we are here, to exchange knowledge...
and ease things for any of us, i dont want to "buffos" around, even if sometimes i know i would... we need infos to be reactive...i really want to turn into a maxwell render frenzy, but at the time i cant allow to spend that much time

[thomas lacroix]

sure, and i'll do either...

[ivox3]

Well said and agreed, and your point is well taken. I was just saying that 'overworking' an area that increases calculations is senseless. Focus on the area of the scene which will create the most impact. This doesn't dillute the beauty of a high end renderer. It just makes it more efficient.


How many situations in life are really idyllic? i'm being patient and i'll wait for those much desired adjustments & improvements.

...and don't forget, even with simplification of a scene(not necessarily the models, but more the fancy things like caustics/direct refraction..etc.(and that's just a temporary assignment) . Maxwell is a fledgling. It's not reasonable to ask it to do a Trans-Atlantic homing pigeon run, is it?

and besides even with cutting some effects , the image is still kicking the ass of most. ....at least it is from here. i3.

btw: ....In my experience, the clients always notice and remember the main areas of interst, and no so much the sub-details-- that i thought at the time would be a crowd pleaser.

[Mihai]

You do realize that this statement is equally applicable as an argument against using Maxwell- if it's going to take too long, and nobody's going to notice the difference anyway, then why do it?

But you forget here one of Maxwells other advantages, that it allows you in certain scenes to set up the lighting literally in 5 secs, turn on sky and sunlight. Or you can just combine the sky with a few emitters to get a bit stylized lighting, setup time 10 minutes.

So in cases of "nobody will notice the difference", you would still have to spend perhaps 3-4 hours in a biased renderer to first of all set up the lights and their params while tweaking, materials, and then tweak some more until you get rid of artifacts. This is for one of those mediocre renderings. To get to the quality and subtlety of Maxwell you would have to spend aditional time, plus you wouldn't really be sure....."will that 60W spot actually cast that much light on that material?" ok, watts is wrong, but i think that will change in future releases....you know what I'm trying to say

All that tweak time can be used working on other projects while you have one or two renderboxes rendering away. That tweak time adds up over a period of say 1 year. Not to mention you have more fun doing it and a better portfolio of images.

[giacob]

if one should listen to some people in the forum it would seems that only using maxwell would be possible making very good renders... which is quite ridicoulus...and untrue

[ivox3]

forgive me giacob,

i'm not sure i understand the 'gist' or meaning of your statement....

....request clarification. ..... i3.

[ivox3]

thanks Ad,

gotcha. ...., ....i defiitely don't think anyone is saying that. ...., that'd be ridiculous.

[giacob]

I think giacob is saying that to listen to some on this forum, you'd think that Maxwell is the only render app that can create great images.

If I understand him correctly, then I think there's something to his point- there are other packages that create most, if not all of the effects that Maxwell can, in a small fraction of the time. It's not as if all of the jaw-dropping CG images in existance come exclusively from Maxwell...

thanks for "translating" my poor english

[John Cantu]

Adding my 2 cents (to the extremly large pile of other peoples pennies)

I love Maxwell but unfortunaltly am not able to use it for production rendering. A couple of weeks ago my boss wanted a couple of different color schemes for one of my models because the client was around. I wanted to use maxwell but I only had about 4 hrs to render 4 different versions. Maxwell couldn't produce renderings that quik so I set up 4 different schemes in Brazil. Now Since I have the Brazil scens set up I have no need to use Maxwell. That seems to be the norm when it comes to using Maxwell, its awsome if I have a weeks notice to produce renderings but alot of times the client wants multiple views and schemes and he wants them by the end of the day.

,John

[giacob]

just for example ( image is not mine)
Software: 3ds max 7
Rendering engine: Vray 1.46.xx
Render time: 6m 4.6s
Hardware: P4 2.4 Ghz, 512 mb ram
Features: Refractive GI caustics activated

Image

how long would it take in maxwell?