[simmsimaging]

haven't quite had the time yet to finish it off

I have to mention, Maxwell setups of both tests took several minutes, even including modeling of the cup.

Well, you can use all that extra time to do more jobs to help pay the extra 5-6X cost difference from Maxwell to Vray

I'll have something for you later today. The vray setup really didn't take long either - although having to go in to try and match pre-existing work is always slower than just creating it the first time.

b

[simmsimaging]

k - here is one that I think it better matched to what you had in Maxwell. I emulated your description of the material (used VrayBlend to add a bit of extra glossy reflection) but I think the refraction glossy could be less and the reflect glossy could be more and it would be closer to yours.

More or less my default Vray settings, not "maxed" for quality, nor particularly optimized for render time. I could up the settings and smooth out the bit of graininess still there (or use different GI) but that wasn't really the focus from what I gathered, and I don't have much time right now

Photoshop to tone-map from 32bit (I render linear so it's necessary) and tweak the blue colour to better match yours. It was a bit purple, but nothing more than a quick hue shift.

(EDIT: Also: I'm running a beta of Vray so photon mapped caustics are not used in this render (not in this build unfortunately) so this is just GI caustics.)
b

[tom]

Thanks for your time, Brett! I'm really happy to see someone cares about this challenge

Now, I post Maxwell version below to compare once again on the same page.


The good thing is, even* your version is still way behind Maxwell. Well, I leave it up to the jury over here...
*Considering you're a great prodviz artist.

[simmsimaging]

Well, I appreciate the sentiment but really, this is a challenge properly undertaken by a more technical expert at Vray. I'm an artist/user, so it would be a better comparison if someone like Vlado gave it a whirl I just felt that the first Vray image was particularly far from what could be done with relative ease in Vray and maybe gave some readers a false impression.

Anyway, I've always loved how Maxwell handles glass/dielectrics (it's why I bought it in the first place) and V2 is really looking good - congratulations on the work you've done there. From an 'artistic' standpoint though, the differences are getting *fairly* subtle in the grand scheme of things, so I'd say that other engines being "well behind" is really a matter of interpretation. You gotta admit its hard to argue with 11 minute renders though

b

[rusteberg]

i had a feeling this would happen

edit: how the F did you get yours to render in 11 minutes? my attempt took ages! you bastard...

[Bubbaloo]

You gotta admit its hard to argue with 11 minute renders though

I'll argue.

I'll argue against an 11 minute render that produces an inadequate result. If the goal is to make frosted glass that is indistinguishable from the real thing, it seems that a little extra render time makes a BIG difference.

[tom]

The Q is, would it look more real if it was 110000 mins. Of course, not. But well, there are other engines can't even render frosted glass, so at least you can do something similar with Vray. Although only similar and nothing close to the real thing at all. In Maxwell, you don't have to tweak it for hours and days and make several 11 min renders. You only need to throw it in and leave rendering without worry. It will converge to the most photorealistic result in the end.

[simmsimaging]

I kinda thought this would turn into the typical render engine dick-swinging discussion. You guys mix and match fact with opinion and emphasize different aspects with different values. This could go on all day, as it usually does. I'll pass thanks

[simmsimaging]

i had a feeling this would happen

edit: how the F did you get yours to render in 11 minutes? my attempt took ages! you bastard...

I use slightly modified universal settings (you can find them on the vray forum and in the docs). The only change from my default setup was to turn on sub pixel mapping and turn down the Dmc sampler from my norm (because I never render at such lo res). Took about 40 secs. The longer time was spent trying to figure out what glossy values came closer to Tom's test.

[Bubbaloo]

I kinda thought this would turn into the typical render engine dick-swinging discussion. You guys mix and match fact with opinion and emphasize different aspects with different values. This could go on all day, as it usually does. I'll pass thanks

I certainly meant no offense. I've always admired your work and have been inspired from it, no matter what render engine you used. A true artist transcends the tools used. The real artistry is in the creative mind.

But speaking of pure quality of output, and by quality I mean reality re-creation, all render engines are way behind Maxwell in my opinion, because that is the main goal of the Maxwell developers, and always has been.

No ding-a-ling swinging here, just casual conversation.

[tom]

Awaiting for a frosted-glass render... A correct one please.

[Frances]

I think that since the Maxwell developers are satisfied with their frosted glass, this thread is rather pointless. If the quality of Maxwell 2.0's frosted glass is what qualifies it as a production engine, then I have to wonder whether every version that came before it was a production engine? It was a rather long time in the making, wasn't it?

[tom]

This is why we have a photo challenge as you suggested, no?
http://www.maxwellrender.com/forum/view ... 74&start=0

[Frances]

This is why we have a photo challenge as you suggested, no?
http://www.maxwellrender.com/forum/view ... 74&start=0

I could repeat my above comment on that thread too. Consider it done.

[simmsimaging]

I think that since the Maxwell developers are satisfied with their frosted glass, this thread is rather pointless. If the quality of Maxwell 2.0's frosted glass is what qualifies it as a production engine, then I have to wonder whether every version that came before it was a production engine? It was a rather long time in the making, wasn't it?

Seriously Fran, why even bother? You know better than most how this will continue to go don't you?

Brian: I know you meant no offense and none was taken.

I'm out of this one now - I have to go spend time tweaking settings in Vray or something.....

b