F.render vs Vray adv.for architecture renderings

[s2a-adamk]

Vray is best.
I was using all 3 when they came out. Vray was the fastest, the programmers are quickest to fix bugs and address problems, and they were first to do distributed rendering - which is a plus if you stills of big arch projects.

FR is slow.
Brazil is too much $ - and you have to buy a licence for each machine. Vray will network render, and do distributed rendering on 1 copy - up to 10 machines.

You want the advanced copy for HDRI if nothing else. Still cheaper than Brazil and it does a lot more than FR.
http://www.vrayrender.com/home/#pricing

Good luck.
a

[Pyro2301]

Originally posted by meanadam


FR is slow.
Brazil is too much $ - and you have to buy a licence for each machine. Vray will network render, and do distributed rendering on 1 copy - up to 10 machines.



That's a little unfair. You have to buy a license for every machine you want a GUI for with either renderer. With Brazil one license gets you a GUI for your workstation and 3 nodes. With Vray one license gets you a GUI for your workstation and 10 nodes. With Vray you get more computers rendering for less $$$. Vray is faster right now and they have a fully functional demo version that you can download from their site (for Brazil you just need to email them for a 30-day trial).

-Victor

[Aldaryn]

Vray has proven to be storng in architectual visualization. However, Brazil also, with that powerful photon mapping engine.

I've got some friends using vray for taht kind of projects, and they're fully satisfied with it. So IMO I would recommend to use vray, but only because its prize.
Brazil is way too much $ compared to vray, but sometimes faster in production environment. But for taht, you'll need to but lots o' licences....
By the way, this means you're not satisfied with the scanline? Not even the Max 5.x scanline? Or the implemented Mental Ray solution of MAX 6.x? You get them free, and IMO Mental Ray is also powerful in architectual rendering. (And the advanced scanline has also handy features, only too slow...)

- A.

[octopus77]

Thanks for the advises.

Well every body seems to confirm what i allready suspected, Vray si the best shoot for me.
One thing i don know is: have these renderers the ability to calculate a radiosity solution, and then store it in a mesh like Max scanline?, because that is extremly necesary for arch. animations.
I´m asking this because i allways read something like this:

"· Indirect Illumination (global illumination, global lighting). Different approaches include direct computation (brute force), and irradiance maps."[/I]

And as i understand the GI only calculates the solution for the current frame.
BTW what is that Brute force an irradiance map?

The only time i actually read Radiosity is here:

"· Caustics (Radiosity) "[I]

Aldaryn:
I don´t complain at all about the scanline, in fact i´m very plaesed since R5, Its only a matter of options and competence, because i see all the time very good moods created wiht theese renderers, that can´t or would need very much work to be done with the scanline. And the clients will see that too some day.
Besides if you don´t invest in tecnology you are out off buisness.

chek mi latest work:
Swiming pool (http://www.cgtalk.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=86041)

Thanks for your help and hope you´ll continue replying:beer:

[halo]

no vray cant do mesh based radiosity, but it can make a irradiance map for the model, which can be reloaded for future frames for animation, or if something moved can be incrementally updated per frame

brute force for irradiance map means it doesnt undersample, it works it all out. Undersampling can greatly improve speed whilst not affecting the image output to any noticable degree.

[Rurouni]

If you need to render animation, you should buy vray advanced, because it support incremental add for irradiance map. I would make the GI calculation a lot faster (i think).
And if you want to use distributed rendering, you definately needs vray advanced, cause the basic package can't do it.
And btw, this is just some of the differences between the two. Just go to their website for more information. Try Vray Free. If you don't understand all this terms in the rendering engine, fell free to ask. or better yet, just go to vray forum and ask there.

for FR Stage 1 i don't know. Stage 0 was pretty slow. But i think the GI engine in FR 1 is a lot faster than in FR 0. Can anybody confirm this?

If you want to move to 3dsmax 6 (later this year...), they have included mental ray, n a bunch of shader for architectural purposes. It's written on discreet website.
It support up to two processor per cpu.
If you want to do network rendering, i think you must buy additional licences for it, and from what i heard, it cost a lot.

[Joel Hooks]

They've improved the speed of FR with stage-1. Nobody acctually answered your question. I can't either, but you have a thread comparing Brazil and Vray not FR s-1 and Vray.

Getting the trial versions of the software in question would be the way to go.

[yog]

I have both Vray and FR Stage-1, my main work is architectural visualisation, and I would go with Vray every time.

FR S-1 is quite a bit faster than FR S-0, but the speed increase is mainly the result of better smoothing algarisms that allow a GI render with less samples. The upshot is the render is faster, but at a lot lower quality, especially in the areas of fine shadows (dark areas where an object meets the floor or under an object that is barely off of the floor.
FR S-1's anti aliasing is also quite slow without tweeking.
The view indipendant GI rendering advertised in FR S-1 is also a bit miss-leading, because as the accompanying documentation and videos point out it is meant to be more of a GI approximation and is meant to be used in conjuction with other forms of lighting, i.e. traditional 3D lights.

VRay on the other hand is still about the fastest GI renderer when used at a level high enough to retain fine detail.
Vray also does have a good view-independant rendering method called photon mapping. Photon mapping is a bit rougher than irradience maps, but is a lot faster and when used in conjuction with irradience maps (fast pre-calc with photon mapping and subsequent frames rendered with irradience maps set to incremental add), it produces very fast animation with no flicker.

Up-shot, FR-S1 might be good for exterior shots where you can afford to lose some shadow detail in order to gain more speed, but for internal shots look no further than Vray.

[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.