[tom]

clipi,

Thanks for enlightening us.

Best regards,
Tom

[Micha]

Tom S., I agree with you. Maxwell need much more speed. Sometimes you can read here about rendertimes of some days.

For me it is no problem, if Maxwell would kill the noise with some biased calculations. We talk about this subject some weeks befor, but I feel, NL like to stay at the pure unbiased way. I would like to choose. The most Maxwell user use two engines, one biased and Maxwell. I hope, in the future Maxwell can do both for us.

[WillMartin]

Spiez, the prism images you posted... finally some comparisons that I believe are relevant here in this forum. I did not know that any other renderers could do the prism thing as M~R could. (The other images, though, seem a waste to post here. From Lightwave forums alone you could fill up a hundred pages with good/realistic-looking renders. Why show us what we know: that most 3D packages can do great stuff if you are talented at clever mapping, fiddling and tweaking?)

Also, I personally am against NL adding biased rendering to M~R at this point or in the near future. It's like telling Lamborghini that they need to add cargo room to their cars "so that they have what vans and SUV's have." A Lamborghini is made for one (more specialized) type of driving, and a van for another. Currently, M~R has a long way to go (needs more shaders, etc.) to even achieve the goal of being a finished renderer of its type. To wish that NL spend time adding features that will make it more like all other 3D software is to want NL to waste valuable development time that could be spent improving M~R's intrinsic strengths, no? As Micha said, most of us have another renderer at our disposal right now anyway. It's simple: if you need the van for a certain trip, don't grab the keys for the Lamborghini.

[tom]

Thank you Micha,
Thank you WillMartin,
Thank you Baboule,

[Renato Lemus]

Let's see what the NL guys have under the sleeves for us when they release the final maxwell.

[DELETED]

DELETED

[morbid angel]

So I looked at the POVray gallery....from 100 images there, only 2 were somewhat impressive. Most are old and has been around for 4-5 years. No where near as good quality and as easy to setup as maxwell. I glanced at the manual and darkness covered my eyes. POVray users...good luck dudes.

[morbid angel]

Like a great man once said;
you cant compare an apple and an orange. They are different but you can squeeze juice from both of them.

[tom]

lots of bugs

insecticides rule

[DELETED]

DELETED

[Micha]

Pur unbiased or more speed ... this post should let NL think ...

http://www.maxwellrender.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=6215

[Chris_TC]

I have not used Vray, but if it is as capable of doing the disco ball scene -- would be as easy to set-up -- then post a comparrison of that.

Out of curiosity I set up a quick mental ray test. It took me less than 15 minutes to create a basic discoball scene including rendering (I screwed up the ceiling though ).
The discoball effect is based on caustics and I doubt that VRay can't do this.

[tom]

Is this disco now?

[markps]

HI, we are talking about unbiased renders... but hey, for a fair comparisson some Global Ilumination renders are doing a great job too!


Parthenon.
http://www.bee-www.com/parthenon/index.htm

Redqueen.
http://www.magic-hour.co.jp/gallery/gal ... een_1.html


Why don't we come up with a standard image (Like a Cornel Box with caustics, reflection, texturing, bump, refraction, etc. ) to test all those renders out there and compare with M~R?

Cheers!
-Marcelo

[Emerey]

Tom Wrote

I think you won't be able to
understand this new approach for some reasonable time because it's
not open for discussion, comparison etc. For now, you better try to
understand one thing that it is not working as you think. Study more.

Tom, dude, you are a Next Limit Team mate... plese be more polite...