[Steve Jepson]

My rendering in looks bad even after 3 hrs. I fact, it might look worse now than it did after about 30 min. It seems to me that there should be some sort of optimizer.

Something that with a few basic parameters would automatically make some of the more obvious adjustments necessary for a good clean render.

Beginners like me could ruin a good render with only one small adjustment out of whack and spend months trying to figure out what it is.

There aught to be some sort of default settings that can be applied for some typical kinds of rendering.

Architectural renderings for example. I am guessing that 99 out of 100 renderings I will do could start off with the same basic settings and tweak from there for each project.

Is there some defaults like this some one would like to share with me?

It seem like there are 3 areas where defaults would be very useful for beginners.

Lighting, Render Settings, and Materials. There aught to me a set of typical materials optimized and configured to work with some default render settings and light settings.
Some thing that if you were to hit render, it would give you a perfectly clear image.

Is there some sort of example scene for a building exterior, a diamond, a car, a watch, an interior, etc....that would have some good default settings?

This is my bad render. It looked so good in 1.7 before I put the materials on it. Now in version 2 (where I put the materials on it) it looks like crap. I could have gotten a better image using the PrntScrn button on my key board. And after 3 hours??? What can I do? Where do I start?

Is there a tutorial or something that begins with... "OK, so you have managed to generate a rendering. Now lets go step by step through what it takes to make it good.)

Every render you do with Maxwell should not have to be the result of 6 month experiment in optics and computer science.

Perhaps my expectations are not realistic.

I would think a simple render like this should take no more than 15 min. to apply materials and 10 min. to configure the render settings. And you should be able to render something better than average in an hour of render time. If that is not possible, please let me know. So I can put Maxwell back on the shelf for another 5 years.


Shot at 2010-11-05




Shot at 2010-11-05

[Half Life]

You might want to watch my Maxwell videos -- they are linked in my sig and the first 3 chapters are free and cover most material basics in about the same amount of time as your render took. It may help ease some of your frustrations.

Best,
Jason.

[brodie_geers]

Well, Maxwell does come with default materials as well as the Wizard in the material editor. Using those will ensure some fairly optimized materials in terms of render time.

As far as default lighting, the physical sky settings that are default work quite well. You could also try the other default sky files that come with Maxwell.

And as for default render settings, they're really aren't any render settings - at least not in the typical sense if your comparing this to, say Vray. You don't have to mess with things like global illumination methods, anti-aliasing, etc. In fact, you can't control these things since Maxwell is unbiased.

As for your rendering I see a few serious issues.

1) lighting - I'm not sure what you've got going here. It looks like perhaps some form of skydome? Never use skydome for an exterior. Using the default sky settings would be a very good start.

2) textures - you've got a lot of textures which tile very bad. That's something that Maxwell can't fix. Your textures also seem very very diffuse. I'd suggest replacing some of them with some materials from the gallery and using those as a starting point and tweak from there. Is your glass reflective? If it is, it doesn't have anything to reflect but the sky. Adding an HDR map to the Reflection slot of the IBL setting would help a lot - then just check Disable for all the other slots so that it will use your physical sky for those.

3) modeling - you have some very low poly models - another thing that Maxwell can't fix. The more detail you add and the more beveling you do, the more realistic it will look.

What modeling software are you using?

-Brodie

[brodie_geers]

Also be sure and read through the manual. It's got tons of great info in there which I still refer to on a regular basis.

-Brodie

[Steve Jepson]

Well, Maxwell does come with default materials as well as the Wizard in the material editor. Using those will ensure some fairly optimized materials in terms of render time.

As far as default lighting, the physical sky settings that are default work quite well. You could also try the other default sky files that come with Maxwell.

And as for default render settings, they're really aren't any render settings - at least not in the typical sense if your comparing this to, say Vray. You don't have to mess with things like global illumination methods, anti-aliasing, etc. In fact, you can't control these things since Maxwell is unbiased.

As for your rendering I see a few serious issues.

1) lighting - I'm not sure what you've got going here. It looks like perhaps some form of skydome? Never use skydome for an exterior. Using the default sky settings would be a very good start.

2) textures - you've got a lot of textures which tile very bad. That's something that Maxwell can't fix. Your textures also seem very very diffuse. I'd suggest replacing some of them with some materials from the gallery and using those as a starting point and tweak from there. Is your glass reflective? If it is, it doesn't have anything to reflect but the sky. Adding an HDR map to the Reflection slot of the IBL setting would help a lot - then just check Disable for all the other slots so that it will use your physical sky for those.

3) modeling - you have some very low poly models - another thing that Maxwell can't fix. The more detail you add and the more beveling you do, the more realistic it will look.

What modeling software are you using?

-Brodie

Thanks for the help. It may seem simple to you but it's a big help to me. Thanks.

Lighting - It's a physical sky. I loaded the first preset listed in the menu.

Textures - There are only 10 materials. They are mxm except for the roof. I could not find good asphalt roof shingles that were to to scale. The one I tried was too big and I don't know how to change that so I used a texture I had. Looks very bad. The glass is what ever was generated by the ArchiCAD plug-in. I don't know what it is.

Modeling - I am not sure what a low poly model is, but wouldn't that make for a faster render ? I am not so interested in the art value of the picture as much as how how to make it clear.
there isn't much I can add as far as modeling. The building is rather plain from this view. There is always something more I could add, flashings, scuppers, downspouts, perhaps. But I am mostly interested in being able to generate a clean clear rendering. This is more of a test object than a rendering project. What is beveling?

[Half Life]

Nine times out of ten, when the model is excessively noisy it is a result of materials that need tweaking... I see a few that need attention in your model. Slow renders can also be caused by certain materials settings, so getting a handle on Maxwell materials will probably give you most of the answers you need.

You can check quickly if there is a problem with any of the other Maxwell settings by doing a simple Maxwell material override with the default material -- if it renders fine and quickly then it is definitely a material problem.

Emitters (which technically fall under materials as well) can also be the source of excessive noise if set up in the wrong ways -- but I don't think that is a problem here.

Best,
Jason.

[Steve Jepson]

You might want to watch my Maxwell videos -- they are linked in my sig and the first 3 chapters are free and cover most material basics in about the same amount of time as your render took. It may help ease some of your frustrations.

Best,
Jason.

I love those videos. Very good stuff. The only improvement would be if you could get that girl in the NL videos to narrate them. I watch those videos just to listen to her.

[Bubbaloo]

You can squeeze more quality out of Maxwell Render than any other render engine available, but you have to be willing to put in the time to learn the intricacies of the software. Pulling in a CAD model, throwing on some generic materials, adding a daylight system, and pushing the render button will usually not get optimum results. Keep practicing with Maxwell while asking specific questions as you run into problems and you will get where you want to be.

As for your specific rendering you've shown, I'd say there are 2 main problems:

1. Materials. Materials are one of the most important (and difficult to master) aspects of Maxwell Render. Bad materials = bad render.

2. Composition. You're angle is boring. It almost looks like an axonometric view. A more interesting perspective improves any render.

[brodie_geers]

Thanks for the help. It may seem simple to you but it's a big help to me. Thanks.[/b]

Lighting - It's a physical sky. I loaded the first preset listed in the menu.

Textures - There are only 10 materials. They are mxm except for the roof. I could not find good asphalt roof shingles that were to to scale. The one I tried was too big and I don't know how to change that so I used a texture I had. Looks very bad. The glass is what ever was generated by the ArchiCAD plug-in. I don't know what it is.

Modeling - I am not sure what a low poly model is, but wouldn't that make for a faster render ? I am not so interested in the art value of the picture as much as how how to make it clear.
there isn't much I can add as far as modeling. The building is rather plain from this view. There is always something more I could add, flashings, scuppers, downspouts, perhaps. But I am mostly interested in being able to generate a clean clear rendering. This is more of a test object than a rendering project. What is beveling?

The physical sky certainly seems off to me, and it's hard to give advice on the materials without seeing them. Perhaps you could do a File -> Pack N Go which will put all your associated files into a folder including a copy of the MXS file. If you could zip that and upload it (to dropbox for example - http://www.dropbox.com/referrals/NTM4NDI4MTk ), then we could take a look at it and give you more specific advice.

Beyond that, I'm unclear on what your expectations are. If you let it render longer you won't really see any drastic changes to the image. After a few minutes of render time you should have a good idea what it will look like. What will happen the longer you render is simply that you'll have less and less 'noise' (if you zoom into a flat color like your yellowish stucco material you'll see some slight color variations from one pixel to the next - that 'noise' will smooth out over time). In terms of that, I'd say your level of noise for a 3 hour rendering at 2000 pixels wide is about normal (depends a lot on your computer processor).

My assumption though, from before, is that what you were anticipating is for more realism from the render which has little to do with time rendered and lots to do with what you give Maxwell to render.

On second look, I don't think the problem is that your model is too low-poly (ie. low detail), although the things you mentioned would certainly help with realism down the road as you progress with the modeling.

-Brodie

[brodie_geers]

Oh ya, and beveling. If you look at all of your corners, you'll notice that they're very very sharp which doesn't look very realistic. If you bevel (or chamfer) the corners, it'll smooth them out and the light will be able to bounce of of that bevel providing more realism.

-Brodie

[Chris Krüger]

If this comes out wrong, it is just because i have had three beers. I am not trying to be clever

Regarding edges, in real life you will never find perfect sharp edges, they may seem perfect to your eye, but on a molecule level they never are. And that will affect photon bounces.

Like Brodie also says, allways bevel your edges, it doesn't have to be much, 1/2 inch is enough i believe?

In a cad application you would use a chamfer or fillet command. Fillet obvious gives you more polys.

This is probably saying things twice, but now it is written

Cheers
Chris

[Steve Jepson]

Very good tip about beveling. In ArchiCAD I will use SEO for that. Modeling for Maxwell will be a little different than just a regular CAD model. I will give it a try.

On an other related subject. I am planning to print the final rendering on 11x17 or 18"x24". Will it make a better print if I render to a very large size and the print it out smaller ?
I know that printing it out larger than was rendered will make it more fuzzy so i was wondering it doing the opposite would make it look any better ?

[Chris Krüger]

Yes it will. You will have half the grain/noise in the downscaled image, if any. Depends on the amount of grain/noise in the original image.

Chris

[brodie_geers]

Generally, the recommended resolution is 300 ppi (pixels per inch). I find doing that to anything over 11x17 though is restrictive and often unnecessary. At 11x17 you're looking at about 5000px wide which is quite large. Typically if you're printing larger than that, you're talking about more of a presentation situation where people are seeing the image from 5+ feet away, at which point you can easily reduce the ppi without noticeable loss in quality. I've heard that highway billboards for instance are often at resolutions as low as 10 ppi but since you're so far away, you can't tell. I try to render most of my finals to 4000-5000 px since I never know what size I'll need to print down the road.

That said, I just did a rendering that was 12,000 x 9,000 for someone doing an architecture school presentation. It was going on a 6' x 3' board and reviewers were going to be walking up to it to see it from quite close. At sizes like that RAM really starts coming into play.

-Brodie

[Steve Jepson]

Perhaps you could do a File -> Pack N Go which will put all your associated files into a folder including a copy of the MXS file. If you could zip that and upload it (to dropbox for example - http://www.dropbox.com/referrals/NTM4NDI4MTk ), then we could take a look at it and give you more specific advice. ....

-Brodie

I will take you up on that. I am going to do some beveling on the model and I will put it in the drop box. It may be tomorrow before i get to it.