Rendering

[Per-Anders]

can't maya convert subd's to nurbs or polys? (is it bad if it's a set of nurbs models?)

[beaker]

What's wrong with using maya's renderer? Even beyond Subdivs, MR still only suppots about half of maya's features. So your probably going to run into more problems then just no subd support.

[WhiteRabbitObj]

It can indeed convert to either nurbs or polys but there are difficulties in that. First of all, converting to polygons will necessitate a high amount of tessellation in the conversion in order to maintain the detail of the SubD, which makes the model quite heavy. Converting to nurbs makes my model into like 50 patches, which isn't necessarily a bad thing except that I have yet to work with nurbs patches (that is actually my next personal project). Both conversions create a lot of geometry to bind to the skeleton and as I am just learning to bind, this would prove especially difficult for me.

I am thinking that exporting to 3D Studio Max would be good, but I dont know how transformers/deformers/blendshapes and whatnot transfer over. Any further comments?

[WhiteRabbitObj]

Eh, Maya's renderer is so crappy and requires extensive lighting to simulate anything realistic. It would be nice if there is any way to output to a renderer that supports Global Illumination and Radiosity.

[CIM]

Well, you could wait until Alias/wavefront releases a decent connection to Mental Ray or use a free Renderman compliant renderer like Aqsis (use Liquid to covert .ribs).

[playmesumch00ns]

You could always take the opportunity to actually learn how to light a scene rather than just click "GI"...

[WhiteRabbitObj]

Sarcasm I see. I know perfectly well how to light a scene, it's much easier to do with a GI renderer and use 1-3 lights as opposed to Maya renderer and use 20 or more for a complex scene.

I think however, I am just going to use Maya renderer for this project anyhow, because I don't have time to worry about the lighting as much as I'd like to and exporting and working with a new program would be troublesome.

[ceql]

There's always stuff to simulate GI quickly and easily, like pixho's GI_Joe script for maya, hooray! ;)

[stickyblue]

Eh, Maya's renderer is so crappy

totally disagreed :)

There's always stuff to simulate GI quickly and easily

agreed :)

[beaker]

>> Sarcasm I see. I know perfectly well how to light a scene, it's much easier to do with a GI renderer and use 1-3 lights as opposed to Maya renderer and use 20 or more for a complex scene.

What I don't understand is why you would want to use GI that takes 20-40 minutes a frame when you could spend a few hours lighting the scene and save days in rendering time. You want the easy out when rendering but you would spend hours trying to figure out how to move everything to another software package that you may or may not even know how to use.

[WhiteRabbitObj]

Well I was askin advice on what to do ya know. The main reason I am going to use Maya to render is the inconvience of familiarizing myself with a new program in order to change renderers. 20-40 minute render times dont bother me tho, heh, I got the time =)

[Heber]

Originally posted by WhiteRabbit.obj
20-40 minute render times dont bother me tho, heh, I got the time =)

Originally posted by WhiteRabbit.obj
I am just going to use Maya renderer for this project anyhow, because I don't have time


:surprised

[CGTalk Moderation]

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.