Everything related to http://resources.maxwellrender.com
User avatar
By Jan
#161761
Vandadium.ior V.ior

Image

S.L.: 20
Render Cost: LOW
Remarks: n/a
Last edited by Jan on Fri Jun 16, 2006 6:18 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
By hdesbois
#161778
Image


void.ior

S.L.: 22
Render Cost: see below
Remarks: after more than 21 hours of render, the void material casts and receives shadow. Though I can't imagine any reason why anyone would use this one, this is obviously not correct.
Last edited by hdesbois on Fri Jun 16, 2006 11:00 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
By Dexel
#161851
Image
Zinc Cadmium Telluride (30% Cadmium).ior ZNCDTE3.ior

S.L.: 20
Render Cost: LOW
Remarks: S.L. < 20 ok
User avatar
By Dexel
#161894
Image
Zinc Selenide.ior ZNSE.ior

S.L.: 20
Render Cost: LOW
Remarks: S.L. < 20 ok
Last edited by Dexel on Fri Jun 16, 2006 8:33 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
By Jan
#161950
Zinc Sulfide (cubic).ior ZNSCUB.ior

Image

S.L.: 20
Render Cost: MEDIUM
Remarks: n/a
Last edited by Jan on Sun Jun 18, 2006 9:12 pm, edited 4 times in total.
User avatar
By Dexel
#161987
Image
Zirconium oxide.ior ZRO2.ior

S.L.: 20
Render Cost: HIGH
Remarks: higher S.L. required
Last edited by Dexel on Sun Jun 18, 2006 7:33 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
By Tyrone Marshall
#162121
Jan wrote:Rendering Zinc Sulfide (cubic).ior ZNSCUB.ior

S.L.: n/a
Render Cost: n/a
Remarks: FAIL

ZNSCUB.ior causes a runtime error when try to render. I've tryed to render it in two separated pcs and it's the same
Jan, I checked the file, there seems to be commas in the file. These are known to cause errors. I have stripped them. Try the following. Just copy and replace the information you have.

1 1 6 100
2.2795 0
2.282 0
2.2846 0
2.2874 0
2.2903 0
2.2933 .000003
2.2965 .000003
2.2998 .000003
2.3033 .000003
2.3069 .000003
2.3107 .000003
2.3146 .000004
2.3187 .000004
2.3229 .000004
2.3274 .000004
2.3319 .000004
2.3367 .000004
2.3416 .000004
2.3467 .000004
2.352 .000004
2.3576 .000004
2.3633 .000004
2.3692 .000004
2.3753 .000004
2.3816 .000004
2.3882 .000004
2.395 .000004
2.4021 .000004
2.4094 .000004
2.417 .000004
2.4248 .000005
2.433 .000006
2.4414 .000006
2.4502 .000007
2.4593 .000007
2.4687 .000007
2.4799 .003934
2.4927 .010842
2.5071 .019785
2.5229 .02982
2.54 .04
2.557 .04432
2.5754 .04816
2.5952 .05184
2.6167 .05568
2.64 .06
2.6708 .06192
2.7024 .06576
2.7336 .07264
2.7632 .08368
2.79 .1
2.8109 .13424
2.827 .17312
2.8378 .21488
2.8423 .25776
2.84 .3
2.8154 .336
2.7861 .3688
2.7551 .3976
2.7254 .4216
2.7 .44
2.6984 .44176
2.7028 .43888
2.712 .43312
2.7248 .42624
2.74 .42
2.7519 .42384
2.765 .42992
2.779 .43808
2.7941 .44816
2.81 .46
2.8277 .47216
2.8458 .48608
2.8642 .50192
2.8823 .51984
2.9 .54
2.9143 .56416
2.9282 .59048
2.9418 .61872
2.9557 .64864
2.97 .68
2.9861 .7036
3.003 .7304
3.021 .7624
3.0399 .8016
3.06 .85
3.0986 .92752
3.1341 1.01376
3.1623 1.10624
3.179 1.202481
3.18 1.3
3.1338 1.40112
3.0701 1.49736
2.9915 1.58504
2.9006 1.66048
2.8 1.72
2.6922 1.75992
2.5797 1.77656
2.4651 1.76624
2.351 1.72528
2.24 1.65
User avatar
By Dexel
#162155
Mihai wrote:Shouldn't render cost be HIGH for some of these?
Well.. 4h 30min on 4 cores surely is not LOW - but it meets that classification. The render time standards are high, and the multi core conversion ratio is very conservative. But then, serious benchmarking would require definite processor specs and what not - not easy in an open render thread. So this "render cost" mark is just a vague notion. To make it less vague, we could supply core numbers and types, exact render time, and benchmark info for the next runs.
User avatar
By Mihai
#162176
Maybe go by SL instead. If the material needs >20, then at least it should be noted as medium. I would note it high even.
User avatar
By Tyrone Marshall
#162199
Mihai wrote:Maybe go by SL instead. If the material needs >20, then at least it should be noted as medium. I would note it high even.
That is the general rule of thumb. If an ior looks to resolve less than 20 this would classified as low. If it seems to require just a bit more than 20 and there is still small bit of unresolved areas than medium. If it has not resolved, i.e. noise in caustics and general noise throughout that something on the order of 30 or higher SL is needed, than it should be high and there are a good number that meet this.
User avatar
By Tyrone Marshall
#162201
Dexel wrote:
Mihai wrote:Shouldn't render cost be HIGH for some of these?
Well.. 4h 30min on 4 cores surely is not LOW - but it meets that classification. The render time standards are high, and the multi core conversion ratio is very conservative. But then, serious benchmarking would require definite processor specs and what not - not easy in an open render thread. So this "render cost" mark is just a vague notion. To make it less vague, we could supply core numbers and types, exact render time, and benchmark info for the next runs.
Dexel,
I appreciate the rendering contribution. I would re-evalute the ior for Zirconium oxide.ior ZRO2.ior in my opinion is borderline medium and very much near High in render costing.
User avatar
By Dexel
#162212
Tyrone Marshall wrote:That is the general rule of thumb. If an ior looks to resolve less than 20 this would classified as low. If it seems to require just a bit more than 20 and there is still small bit of unresolved areas than medium. If it has not resolved, i.e. noise in caustics and general noise throughout that something on the order of 30 or higher SL is needed, than it should be high and there are a good number that meet this.
That makes sense. I adhered to the 'time passed' formula.
Changed all my postings now. Sorry to disturb. S
  • 1
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 13
Texture/finish lost in render.

Anything?

Material preview

Yes, I have set Maxwell for Rhino as Current Rende[…]

Hi, there are two problems in studio - First one t[…]

Hello everybody, we have a problem with the Maxwe[…]