[j_petrucci]

But after a few minutes, with lots of 'approximating error' left, that render can't be called unbiased??

yes, it's an unbiased rendering far far away from the exact solution!

[KRZ]

still closer to the exact reality then a biased one...kinda,..just more noisy:) haha

[trick]

If you want biased renderer why can't you use mentalray or buy finalRender, Brazil or VRay? Whats the point of making yet another biased renderer when there are already four excelent renderers on the market right now?

I use all the engines above for different situations and I'm still requesting features after all these years of development. So too with Maxwell: I love it in certain situations over the other ones, but in the process of seting up lighting/materials I want biased output to accelerate my scene setup; after that I don't care that much about rendertime and prefer the unbiased output. Just as with many things in life I want to have a CHOICE !!

(The developers of Lightscape also stayed loyal to their initial ideas: well...you know what became of them...)

[Micha]

I should use Photoshop? Do nobody read what I write? I think, a Maxwell integrated denoiser could do much more. Maxwell can use more informations about a scene as only a 2D image.

I like the easy setup of Maxwell and that it render better and better after the time. A denoiser could help to get fast clean result and if I like, I could wait longer for the full unbiased image.

Why see so less user here the advantages here? We could choose. But now we must take what we get and some times it needs for ever. I get images in less minutes with my biased renderer and a high pixel resolution image in a few hours, Maxwell need much more time for it. I don't like to see Maxwell is unbiased, but it could be great to conect the unbiased cocking method with a optinal (!!!) biased approximation.

[DELETED]

DELETED

[MetinSeven_com]

A Maxwell-specific, optional denoiser would of course be great, no doubt about that. As Tom has already proved a while ago Maxwell noise is not a random pattern, so effective denoising with a dedicated algorithm should be realizable I guess.

[Hervé]

I am sure my old dog avatar knows all but does not want to say anything...

[Thomas An.]

Noise reduction has already been considered by Oscar previously:

I'm not sure yet, but maybe in a future I'll develop some noise reduction filter for maxwell render. Honestly I don't like filter methods to reduce noise because even the best filter, can introduce ugly artifacts or you can loss delicate details of the image. Anyway it would be an user choice to use it or not (Oscar Cano, Feb 26, 2005)

http://www.maxwellrender.com/forum/view ... 6495&#6495

[Hervé]

I think it would be a good idea... coz Maxwell knows about geometry... possible or not.. big question..

other idea... : sometimes I see renders that only need cleaning in small ard to reach areas... so the possibility to denoise only some areas in the image would be good.. as we would not alter the clean parts.. like a region denoise function... doh.. I'm dreaming...

[j_petrucci]

I think, a Maxwell integrated denoiser could do much more. Maxwell can use more informations about a scene as only a 2D image.

I had the same idea as you, look here: http://www.maxwellrender.com/forum/view ... highlight=

[MetinSeven_com]

I am sure my old dog avatar knows all but does not want to say anything...

Hmm, don't know ... Your dog avatar has more noise than a Maxwell render that's been stopped after three seconds of rendering.

But seriously, to be honest I don't mind a little noise. A little bit of noise even has a certain charm, like in some digital photographs. FinalRender renders (the first release of Stage-1 is the last version I used) also show a certain amount of noise unless you tune up the controls and make it real slow. No fR user I knew really minded about that.

VRay may have nice smoothing algorithms, but that also gives each V-Ray rendered scene a certain recognizable V-Ray appearance that's often just a bit too smooth to be truly photorealistic. I like a little rawness in my images, except when it comes to animation, because it's adverse for video compression. So an optional denoiser wouldn't be a bad addition.

[DELETED]

DELETED

[trick]

...But seriously, to be honest I don't mind a little noise...

The weird thing is that I'm using fR and VRay (or even any other NON-GI renderer) ATM to IMITATE Maxwell previz renders at a fraction of the time for both stills and animation. Wouldn't it be better being able to do it ALL in Maxwell, so I won't have to choose other renderers because they are faster, but instead I will be able to use Maxwell for it's specific features and advantages ?

[Micha]

@ Buffos: in VirtualDup it is called temporal smoother and if I remember me right, my digital camera do it for long time exposures too.

[MetinSeven_com]

Everyone keeps repeating that Maxwell is so slow. I think Maxwell is quite fast if you consider the unbiased approach. On my dual Xeon 2.8 GHz I can render a 1600 x 1200 size image that reaches the already very acceptable sampling level 14 within 6 to 9 hours, depending on the complexity of the scene.

Try turning on DOF and Caustics in V-Ray with high quality settings, throw in a number of glossy reflections and glossy refractions, set the GI settings quite high and then compare the render speed with Maxwell. Then you'll realize how slow a biased renderer can be compared to an unbiased renderer after all.