PDA

View Full Version : switch from FinalRender to Advanced Renderer?


fuller
02-10-2006, 11:41 AM
Hello,

A couple of months ago it seemed like a good idea to order FinalRender (the Mac version).

Now that i actually starded using Cinema 4D on an everyday basis, i'm starting to have doubts, wandering whether AR would be better for what i have to do.
I am doing archaeological reconstructions, but there are going to be a lot of texture/camera animation plus morphing the buildings to different stages.
I have to reconstruct 5-7 small buildings (about 50 000polys each), and a hillside with trees etc (i have DPIT for this)
I 'only' have a dual 1.25 powermac, and no other slaves to help the calculations.


I'm a beginner on a tight budget, thight deadline, and i need to to make the 'perfect decision...

The sources of my doubts:

- Could it be that even FinalRender's ultrafast GI would be too time consuming for my hardware?
- I was testing the Sky in the DEMO version, i really liked the way it lit the buildings.
- I am not looking for photographic reality, more like animated 3D illustration. For this reason i even prefer Maxon's more CG-like look.
- I could even just use the LUMEN plugin from 3DATTACK, and some Ambient Occlusion (or even without AO). Could it be faster?
- One of the principal visual effect is animated with the Proximal shader-effect, and it is perfect for what i need. This is not available in FinalRender. Is it difficult to recreate?
- Does FinalRender integrate with After Effects as well as Advanced Renderer?
- FinalRender only supports LAN network rendering. Does Maxon's Net Renderer support rendering over Internet (with the clients having dynamic IPs but the host has a fix address)? I could set up some slaves from the main office which is many kilometers away.
- FinalRender for Mac is still not yet finished, though the rendering phase is about 1.5 months away for me too, i am still modelling.

So i am considering canceling my order for FinalRender and getting AE + Net renderer.

Thanks for any opinion you share about this.

Balint Fulop

Ernest Burden
02-10-2006, 02:50 PM
From your very thorough explanation of your needs I would say you are better off with AR2.5 under 9.51. I use that and FR2. Yes FR2 is faster in GI, but its no magic bullet, either.

And you should be able to use NetRender over the Internet as you describe. The IPs are tricky, but it's do-able, so long as you have the licences. FR2 will bucket to 10 cores with one licence.

By the way, what are you reconstructing? I love that sort of work, and I encourage you to avoid a too 'CG' look as it is too common with archeological animation. I do a lot of NPR stuff and it would be great to see on what you are talking about. But that's just my opinion, take it for what that's worth.

moka.studio
02-14-2006, 01:43 PM
I agree with Ernest, from what you describe I would also recommend you to go with AR, since you only have the Basic renderer right now.
AR can produce some really great results, and if you are not looking at interior GI, then you should do fine. FR is a really powerfull renderer, but it is not a miracle solution either, as you have also pointed out.


- Could it be that even FinalRender's ultrafast GI would be too time consuming for my hardware?
GI will always be time consuming, however with some cheats you can get some rather decent GI solutions in minutes with FR, even on a single machine, which you could not do in AR


- One of the principal visual effect is animated with the Proximal shader-effect, and it is perfect for what i need. This is not available in FinalRender. Is it difficult to recreate?
- Does FinalRender integrate with After Effects as well as Advanced Renderer?
There is no Proximal Shader node in FR at the moment, however it could be re-created with some Xpresso work ( there are ways of connecting FR shader Networks to Xpressos, even if it is not as straightforward as it could be).

fuller
02-15-2006, 08:58 PM
Hello,

Thank you all for the replies.
Yes i`m going to cancel the order for FinalRender and get AR.

Actually i don`t really know what CG look exactly means, but we did decide that we are not aiming for photographic perfection. We don`t need to integrate real life footage, Brad Pitt or anything in the film, and for educational purposes it`s even better to simplify things.
And in this sense i prefer the less photographic look of Maxon`s renderer.

Proximal works perfectly for what we need, and xpresso at the moment is too far for me. Oh yes, we did buy Pyrocluster and SketchandToon for other effects, and these don`t work with FR either.

I will be very happy to show you the progress of the work. In fact i will create a simple work diary of the production just for those who are interested. (Like my boss, i`m doing teleworking)

Here is a folder with some images from last week:
http://www.huglass.com/ezredes/regesz/
with the first proximal-experiment:
http://www.huglass.com/ezredes/regesz/kerdojel.mov

i have some other short videos, and pictures of other buildings, i will put them all on the production diary page, asap.

Balint

Ernest Burden
02-15-2006, 09:18 PM
Interesting!

There's some similar work being done by your countryman Lemog:

http://www.cgarchitect.com/vb/showthread.php?t=14592

fuller
02-16-2006, 11:24 AM
Indeed this is very similar!
Thanks for the link, it's really interesting. Shame he uses Maya, not Cinema4D i would he a few questions...

CGTalk Moderation
02-16-2006, 11:24 AM
This thread has been automatically closed as it remained inactive for 12 months. If you wish to continue the discussion, please create a new thread in the appropriate forum.