PDA

View Full Version : Shall I go with Maya's MentalRay?


Machka
06-01-2010, 09:36 PM
I am about to plunge into rendering. In researching tutorials and debates, I can't discern whether Maya's MR is just cumbersome or if there are actual show stoppers in there.

Without having pushed it far at all yet, I like it very much and have totally enjoyed it so far. Seems like the better my hardware, the more I can explore.

Is it just a case of the ol' Max vs Maya debates of old?

Can I take the ABCs I learn about shading/rendering in one renderer to another?

Do the alternatives to Maya's MR pave the way to learn/work in a more sensible way?

Any opinions or threads would be appreciated.

Hamburger
06-02-2010, 12:03 AM
There are a number of factors here, but the best thing to do would probably do a bit of R&D - try out all the demo's for the 3rd party renderers for Maya and test them against mental ray.

I guess the one that works the best and gives you the least amount of grief is the one that you should go with.

Machka
06-02-2010, 12:32 AM
I hear ya on the trials and I always do that before making a choice, but that only gives me a general feel of things.

It's a huge topic and it seemed prudent to ask the forum if, out of all the choices, one stands out as a no-brainer.

cgbeige
06-02-2010, 01:11 AM
I left Mental Ray for V-Ray because of the endless showstopping bugs and poor support/development and there are other people here doing the same. I use other renderers like Maxwell and Octane for what they are good at but V-Ray is the best match and is so much more reliable, with proper support that I'd just say buy that and get the hell away from MR. I can't recommend Mental Ray if you plan on using the Maya variant - it is the worst of the lot and honestly, the way it's being run, you are going to be wasting your time. The learning curve is steep and once you get to the advanced stuff like passes and things, it's a total slow, buggy mess and there's not much hope for change. So, you end up like me, having wasted a ton of time learning a broken system but not regretting leaving it behind you.

If you want an example of how bad mental ray for Maya is, take a look at some of the linear workflow threads. V-Ray's just works and even the half assed solution in Maya 2011 for linear workflows and mental ray is wrong (sRGB isn't actually sRGB). It's so bad, it's embarrassing.

Machka
06-02-2010, 01:41 AM
Haha the scorn! Love it. I can totally picture what you're saying and it does give me pause as I definitely want to render in passes and comp it all.

Again I really know nothing of rendering and to me the MentalRay interface is cool, but you are describing exactly what I would like to avoid at the outset.

Zbrush is the only tool I will wrestle with to get what I want out of it. I just love it that much.

People often pit Maya's MR against Vray. What of the others? Is Renderman too expensive for a private user?

Kev3D
06-02-2010, 01:41 AM
Yeh, there should really be nothing wrong with sticking with Mental Ray, just ask Master Zap. I used to use Max and VRay and now use Maya and Mental Ray. A lot was transferable, it was just a matter of finding the buttons.

I'm of the belief that learning to light well (this can even be in real life with photography) is more important then what software you use.

Stellios
06-02-2010, 01:47 AM
you can get the same results with mental ray and vray. However with mentalray you will be spending a lot of your time understanding the nuances and workarounds that come with the renderer and its poor integration with maya, anyone can tell you that.

My personal experience is after a few years of learning mentalray, reading books some 800 plus pages, and spending long hours figuring out why things that should logically work, simply... dont -- I switched to Vray. Rendering should NOT be about learning the nuances of the renderer to make things work. It should just be about that art, and thats what i get with Vray. Once again this is just personal experience and i cannot speak for everyone.

At the time being I still use mentalray for things like fur and hair, but im hoping to switch to a reyes compliant package soon for those things. I can still get nice results with mentalray, but for me its now become a matter of principle.

Machka
06-02-2010, 02:11 AM
Now that's another thought! I did not realize that they don't all render everything I would like to do.

Morlankey that's exactly what I look forward to: lighting and shading in and of themselves but, like Stellios and cgbeige I need the most straight-forward route.

I'm a make-do kind of guy but it really kills the fire to have so much minutiae in your way. Like modeling years ago when Mirai was going to save us all.

Thanks very much for the responses, very helpful and gives me an informed backdrop as I check out the trials and read a few more debates.

cgbeige
06-02-2010, 02:29 AM
Zbrush is the only tool I will wrestle with to get what I want out of it. I just love it that much.


I am the same - I came back to ZBrush because, despite the goofy workflows, it is an incredible tool with awesome quality and engineering. For mental ray for Maya to be comparable to ZBrush, you'd have to have people actively working on it like they gave a shit about competing .

Hamburger
06-02-2010, 02:32 AM
Another thing, the V-Ray trial is severely outdated unfortunately. Hopefully in the next few months Chaos Group can post the first Service Pack for V-Ray for Maya.

Machka
06-02-2010, 03:35 AM
Duly noted, will keep that in mind about Vray.

And WOW now I'm really glad I posted! They are expensive! Twice what I imagined.

I'll have to content myself with MentalRay basics and wait longer.

After a day's research, Renderman for Maya is looking very good. Renders everything and seems very well integrated.

Still going to try them all in the meantime and check out the learning materials.

cgbeige
06-02-2010, 05:35 AM
RenderMan for Maya is fast and everything but if you're looking for realism, it's not the best renderer unless you know RenderMan, in which case you'll need RenderMan Studio anyway.

irwit
06-02-2010, 10:07 AM
I honestly couldn't recommend Mental Ray for Maya if you have a choice. I use it at my work and the images and animations I see people producing with it are fantastic, however the lengths people have to go to get to the result are painful. Nothings easy, nothings is designed to actually work as it should, it just feels very unfinished. It won't stop you producing good work, I've produced some of my best work since moving from Max/Mental Ray to Maya/Mental Ray but it wasn't the tools helping me produce the better work.

As already said Vray is the better package, there's almost no argument really. I'm sure in a bigger studios with custom versions of mental ray for Maya its a great tool as Mental Ray the renderer is great, but the Mental Ray for Maya is just hugely flawed and hasn't even been looked at for nearly 3 years.

Save yourself a huge amount of hassle and go for Vray. Its not only better integrated but has much better pass system, glossy reflections, bounce light, integration into hypershade ( preview your material), its updated regularly, the support is amazing, its wil take you far less clicks to produce the same image.

Mrguy
06-02-2010, 11:24 PM
I've been working in Mental Ray for about 2 years now. It has been a very long road (even looking at my work I have a Rancor where I was just learning about area lights, and my latest project where I've applied my linear workflow knowlage and am also useing the physical light shader for my MR lights)

But I am still learning new things every week; if not every day. MR is not as straight forward as Vray but it has allowed me to understand concepts better, what is Linear Workflow, what is FG what is GI? If your more of a technical artist I think MR is fine but if your more about the art then Vray might be the way to go.

What I'm saying is that I think MR is going to make you pull your hair out, but will make you tough as nails. Vray will just flat out work, but may make you soft.

For me it's comparable to Zbrush and Mudbox. I'm a Maya user and the transition to Zbrush was and is a little tough. But I took what I learned and stepping into Mudbox and it allowed me to understand concepts clearer and easier.

With all that said and from the multiple threads I've seen cgbeige post I'm going to try and switch to Vray over this summer. There's so much more to learn in MR and right now I just want to have some fun.

cgbeige
06-03-2010, 12:44 AM
I agree that it's good to learn the guts of how rendering works but mental ray for Maya really goes beyond the helpful "this is how it works" into the "this is how it never should have worked and you'll never use this elsewhere." I've said it before but having to specify photon intensity manually, meaning it's literally independent of the actual base light intensity, is ****ing retarded. There are tons of these little things that don't help you learn one bit and are just clearly a product of bad implementation.

V-Ray isn't easy like Maxwell is - it's just good at not wasting your time like mental ray for Maya is.

Mrguy
06-03-2010, 01:41 AM
I couldn't agree with you more CG and that's the main reason why none of my projects use Global Illumination and only Final Gather. It hammers down your point that MR can be broken (ie. messing around with Photons for specific lights can be a headache, so I just won't use Global Illumination) But you should be able to create, light, render something in more then 1 or 2 ways. I can't use certain features, so how can I obtain a good result with what I have.

It may not be the greatest but it sure has made me resourceful, think outside the box, and problem solving.... areas not designed for artists... but then again I'm more technical.

Everyone here is right, but in the end you have to make up your own opinion that is dependent on your time frame and workflow.

And yes.... Vray is what Mental Ray should be. :)

Machka
06-03-2010, 08:48 AM
Mrguy I relate completely but I only enjoy such technica in pursuit of a smooth workflow. You are right but one really needs to actually love the technica. Only love and a special fascination will carry you through that.

I do not love it so. I love expressing myself and all this technica is just a necessary evil. I wager a lot of us are at our best when we can just get in there and have at it. I definitely find the more I simplify the more I progress.

I've now tried Renderman for Maya and 3delight and Vray and I have to agree with everyone. Vray's front end and community and all those shaders ready to rock pretty much takes the cake.

I'm still totally impressed with MentalRay in the meantime. I'm hoping Deex shaders will give me straight-forward passes so I can at least get my learn on.

cgbeige
06-03-2010, 01:00 PM
That's the thing: you have to use third party fixes to get a working pass system and I wouldn't hold out much hope that anything could change on the Autodesk side because it would break everything people have built around their broken system.

rBrady
06-03-2010, 04:36 PM
If you have a gold subscription you can call Autodesk with mental ray issues. They have been very helpful to me. Almost as good as Pixar with technical support. If you don't have a subscription your SOL with mental ray support. VRay is looking better and better if you have the cash.

InfernalDarkness
06-03-2010, 11:21 PM
I haven't made the switch from MR4Maya to another renderer, but after years in arch/viz I can tell you flat-out that, as time is money, mental ray is the worst choice for rendering available. Vray seems to have excellent integration; the price tag is nothing compared to the time it will save you. I still use MR for all my work, mostly because I already learned all the stupid workarounds and bugs to avoid, so it's certainly possible to use it for your work. But shelling out for a full Vray would be a much better choice at the outset. I generally scorn/disagree with people on this topic and tend to "support" mental ray in our conversations, but only from a features standpoint. As time=money, MR=flat broke.

Mrguy
06-06-2010, 07:05 AM
I just made the jump to Vray and I feel re-born. I mean I've only just started working with it but it just feels rock solid.

Still really have a strong respect for MR but Vray is going to be getting alot of loving... sigh... looks like MR is going down into the basement... I'll feed it cabbage every once and a while.. should be ok. :)

arkanoid
06-07-2010, 10:34 AM
:twisted: did't see that it was an old thread. well I'm posting it anyway :shrug:

These threads makes me so blue about all the time I've wasted chasing an illusion; and when I see even the strongest MRfM advocates admitting these things it's even worst.
But it has to be said here a thing that nobody explained me long time ago when I started this jurney: learning to render your own works is not so much related with working with rendering. If you want to apply to a rendering position in the industry, you want to become a rendering TD. This has to deal much more with writing shaders, dealing with a net, a renderfarm etc. You know, it's a half programmer half network/system administrator work. It actually leaves very few time to play with the art a render can produce.
So, if you want to become a professional with rendering yes, you can go with MR for Maya, and your aim will be taking it and just fix it, expand it's features, put it in a network ecc.
But if you're saying "rendering" thinking about using a tool to light a scene and doing your post well, that's totally another story. For that I completely agree with what it has been said in this thread: to stay away from the MR nightmare for Maya and find the most effective tool you find.
That said, 3d is tech. So even the most art-oriented head in 3d have to deal with technical issues of some sort. Maybe in the future that will change and every program will be like Zbrush, but for now I think we're still far from that, and know how to read your scripts doesn't hurts.
So Machka maybe I'm a little bit OT but I hope this can help you.

irwit
06-07-2010, 11:39 AM
If you have a gold subscription you can call Autodesk with mental ray issues. They have been very helpful to me. Almost as good as Pixar with technical support. If you don't have a subscription your SOL with mental ray support. VRay is looking better and better if you have the cash.

Have you asked about why mental ray doesn't work, or specific examples ? Ie, mr pass system is making renders take a lot longer than it should, why is this and when is it getting fixed? Its seems very annoying to me that there's no actual statement as to why it is that the current incarnation or mental ray for maya is so half done and there's no one to tell us why.

cgbeige
06-07-2010, 04:39 PM
They know about all the issues. It's just that proper mental ray integration seems to be the last thing on the list of things to do - right after "Viewcube 2.0". This is what happens when executives with bad ideas trump user needs. There are some nice things in Maya 2011 - skinning improvements etc but the mental ray situation is beyond hopeless. Something significant would have to change with Maya's management for it to become a priority, which likely won't happen since they know the big seat buyers all use their own mental ray to Maya bridge anyway. This is dead tech.

It's true that to become a well-rounded TD, you should have mental ray experience but don't learn Maya's if you just want mr experience. It's a waste of time because you will never get a job with people using it "as-is" (in the eBay sense - broken).

rBrady
06-08-2010, 03:54 AM
Have you asked about why mental ray doesn't work, or specific examples ?

Yes, I have. And you would be surprised about what I heard. When I reported the mr pass bug about 6-9 months ago the person I talked to hadn't heard about it. Upon checking they found that it had been reported as a minor bug in the past. I got a little angry and demanded a fix and asked for it to become a critical issue. They took my test scenes, reproduced the result, and had a fix in a couple weeks. It was a pretty lame fix since it required an additional surface shader for every pass, but it was a FIX, IN TWO WEEKS!

I personally wonder how much of the gripping about mental ray is by people who either don't pay for the software or are to lazy to call support. Mental ray may be the worst renderer in the world, but half the bitching I hear is by people who have clearly never called Autodesk. When I downloaded 2011 and Autodesk sent me an email saying that the buffer store bug has been fix and asked me to verify that for them. My first tests are promising but I don't want to declare it "fixed" just yet.

So my big question is why haven't you asked them? If you have had a bad experience with mental ray, give Autodesk a call. Part of the problem with mental ray is the people not calling Autodesk and being heard. Do remember, I am not saying that mental ray is for everyone, or even the majority, maybe not even anyone. Just don't write complaints here where it wont make a difference until you have at least written a complaint where it does make a difference, on Autodesks website.

I, for one, am overall happy with my mental ray. Vray or RfM may be in my future somewhere, but I am in no hurry to switch.

edit: I was recomended the mayastation by some Autodesk employees, They post some of the most prevalent fixes the find for mental ray issues there.

http://mayastation.typepad.com/maya-station/

cgbeige
06-08-2010, 04:04 AM
When I reported the mr pass bug about 6-9 months ago the person I talked to hadn't heard about it.

actually, when I reported the problem with the two Render binaries on OS X, it was news to them too. It seems that there is so little communication sometimes that this type of thing can go completely unnoticed.

"Hmmm - there's no render binary where I thought it was. I'll just make another and let developers figure out where the render description file goes!"

hur

I personally wonder how much of the gripping about mental ray is by people who either don't pay for the software or are to lazy to call support.

I think that the problem is that they are too swamped and understaffed to read all the bugs. I had to literally get Shawn to tell someone internally to stop shipping Maya with a PowerPC dongle driver for software that's Intel only. I had been reporting that bug for 2 years. Ditto for the Quicktime IFF plug-in, which is PowerPC only and doesn't work, installs by default with 2011 and Maya hasn't been available for PowerPC since version 8.5. I've reported that retarded thing at least 4 times.

sentry66
06-08-2010, 07:42 AM
What I'm saying is that I think MR is going to make you pull your hair out, but will make you tough as nails. Vray will just flat out work, but may make you soft.

I have to say I agree with that.

MR for Maya has some odd workflows at times, but it's obvious who's stuck it out and can breeze through most MR workflow issues and get their project done vs those who would rather complain on forums.

If you're dealing with a technical issue, you shouldn't be afraid to get your hands dirty with a technical solution. If that's not your job, then pass your file onto someone who's job it is. I feel for the artists who don't like technical stuff, but if you started up an entire project using an untested workflow, who's fault is it then if you have a few issues?

Things like people complaining about linear workflow and passes....in the amount of time they spent complaining, I probably could have manually rigged up their shaders to be linear and output their scene in different passes. Even if it takes an hour or two to get everything set up and broken out....that's not all that bad when you consider the days/weeks/months you spent working on that project in the first place.

Most shaders I use don't even support MR passes and I'm not complaining about it. MEL is pretty powerful and can automate most things I might need to do anyway. MR's pass solution is still half baked and IMO don't bother with it unless you know exactly what you're doing and what you're up against.

But yes, a 1-click button solution is always preferred...I'm just so glad I'm capable of finding my own working solutions and work out my game plan beforehand.

DutchDimension
06-08-2010, 08:24 AM
I'm just so glad I'm capable of finding my own working solutions and work out my game plan beforehand.

That's half the fun of doing CG in the first place.... imho. The puzzle element. :)

Mrguy
06-08-2010, 08:34 AM
I personally wonder how much of the gripping about mental ray is by people who either don't pay for the software or are to lazy to call support.

Speaking only for myself. I don't call, or email because I'm new, I'm just now starting to learn about the world of 3D. I've been working in 3D (as a student) for 2-3 years. I'm no where near as experienced as rBrady, cgbeige, royterr or InfernalDarkness. So when it comes to logging bugs.. how could I ever know what's a bug and not a convoluted work around. I've only ever known MayaMR, thats the only thing they teach at my school... and sadly.. but expected, I know more then anyone or any teacher at my school. But in no way does that make me a pro or feeling confident to log a bug. I'd like to think that the average Maya user just doesn't understand anything else. Maybe they gripe because they aren't spending the time to really learn why things work the way they work. Idk.. I just want to defend the the little people, who work in Maya and learn Mental Ray because it's just there.

Thanks sentry66.. I think if your working in a 3D app with a mouse I believe your half way there. Just gotta open up that Material Editor or Hypershade and dive right in to learn just a bit more.

arkanoid
06-08-2010, 10:05 AM
But yes, a 1-click button solution is always preferred...I'm just so glad I'm capable of finding my own working solutions and work out my game plan beforehand.

That's exactely what I meant. In short, MR is just so hacked up that is a good school for TDs.
:beer:

cgbeige
06-08-2010, 03:13 PM
haha - ya, after they show you mental ray for Maya in school, they start the next chapter by saying "so now that we know how not to do it..."

For anyone like me who isn't applying for a job as a TD and only works on 3D illustrations and some animation working solo, there's no sense in learning workaround to things that look like they work but don't (DON'T TRUST THAT sRGB SETTING!!). I didn't learn how to use blends, divide/multiply, facing ratio, adds, and other complex network nodes because stuff was too broken to do it another way. This knowledge also applies across other renderers - knowing how to avoid slow gamma correct nodes in mental ray for Maya 2009-2010 doesn't help me in any way with my work nor does it show me something that enriches my work. It simply wastes my time.

sentry66
06-08-2010, 05:22 PM
I didn't learn how to use blends, divide/multiply, facing ratio, adds, and other complex network nodes because stuff was too broken to do it another way.

yeah different strokes for different folks I guess

Asides from the capabilities those nodes can add to your shaders or setting up relationships between shaders and geometry etc, I've found awesome uses for blend, divide/multiply, and +/-/average nodes in rigging that I'm not even sure how else you could solve without those nodes other than writing expressions.

Set driven key, the connection editor, and maya's commands in the menu will only take you so far. The nodes in the hypershade, at least in the regular general utility nodes in the "Create Maya Nodes" section are massively valuable for all things in maya. If using them helps MR do something on a rare occasion, it seems logical to me since maya is all about nodes to begin with.

I know guys who refuse to use the hypershade, prefering the multilister for everything and they are the ones I hear complaining about mental ray the most...But so far I think it's been cheaper for them to hire me to work on that aspect of their projects than to outfit their whole pipeline and computers with vray licenses and then spend the time learning it

But anyway, dealing with day to day projects, I feel calmer when I run into a technical issue because I feel like I have a full toolbox to solve things with.

cgbeige
06-08-2010, 06:10 PM
I think you misunderstood me. I was saying that hypershade nodes are a valuable part of my procedural/problem solving toolbox, unlike learning fixes specific to one renderer.

rBrady
06-08-2010, 08:52 PM
I've been working in 3D (as a student) for 2-3 years.

Ahh, I apologize, I forget that often students don't have access to the Autodesk support accounts. At least I didn't as a student. Hang in there bro.

I wouldn't feel any reservation about calling Autodesk if you have access to the school support account. Just because your new doesn't mean that they don't care. And hell, even if they do, call anyway. The more people report bugs, or confusing workflow that looks like a bug, the better. They wont mind though, they are friendly up there in Canada.

sentry66
06-08-2010, 10:16 PM
I think you misunderstood me. I was saying that hypershade nodes are a valuable part of my procedural/problem solving toolbox, unlike learning fixes specific to one renderer.

oh, sorry I did misunderstand.:)

I guess that's the price for having access to every little feature for MR

TaKIKO
06-09-2010, 01:48 AM
Learn Both.

Problem Solved.

Machka
06-09-2010, 06:21 AM
Haha right on TaKIKO. That's about it, got a ways to go to save up for an alternative anyway. So far Deex is doing me well and I really am having a blast with Mental Ray. I'll just be careful not to bet the farm on it.

During my exploration of the alternatives, and realizing Maya's junky implementation of MR, I tried the trial of Softimage. It was awesome! So smooth and snappy and the most wonderful node interface ever haha!

Not enough to sway me from such a deep investment and enjoyment of Maya but very interesting to see the commonality of rendering's various attributes across the board.

Now knowing that about Softimage, and the above raised points of Maya's MR, I'm just grinning ear to ear that a bunch of us stayed on point and didn't flame or descend into app vs app.

GREAT thread with great opinions. I now feel totally up to snuff on what's out there and where I'm at. :)

arkanoid
06-09-2010, 11:44 AM
oh, sorry I did misunderstand.:)

I guess that's the price for having access to every little feature for MR

Well, passes and linear workflow are not "little features", are foundations of the rendering process. And correct viewport visualization should be the first priority of all, but it isn't.
I love hypershade and I feel very powerful with it, but I don't want to consider it a "privilege"; and the fact is, there's much more to talk about the poor MR integration with Maya; including incorrect data type flow integration, which is correctable but not working as is, half made shader integration (Ocean, PaintFX ecc.) and many other Maya features that you have to struggle with.
And then also, Hypershade is really great, I love working with it, but think about it.. it's old! If they really cared about it, since it's one of the strongest assets in Maya, they should update it. Maybe taking inspiration from other software like Mapzone or the Vue node based shader editor (not to mention the obvious Houdini). Talking about bases, I want more procedural shaders, I want a full featured layering system that work with every shader. We're not talking about weird new tecnology, we're talking about simple BASE functionalities and normal evolution of one of the leading 3d software in the world.

lightcache
06-09-2010, 04:09 PM
@ the original poster

hmm... well you can only know it's limitations by using it, and getting good at it. i think by simply asking this, you have already answered your own question.
learn mr first (it's free afterall!) then move on if you wish, to anything else.
oh and by the way, some skills are transferable, a shader after all, is still a shader, and unless you want to get really under the hood, youd be better off going to renderman/prman
i use both renderman, vray and mr at work, simply becuase one does something better than the other, and they can complement well.
but i cut my teeth with mentalray,

though my gums are still bleeding a bit from it. ;)

Freshfromthegrave
06-10-2010, 12:21 PM
just thought i'd throw in my 2c to this post. i started off with VRay and have been using it for a long time. i don't think i've ever gotten really bad results with it even when i first started using it. i've recently had to switch to mental ray for maya because that's what i have to use at work and it's just been a constant struggle to get good sun and sky results. because of this whole linear workflow thing which i believe we shouldn't have to deal with i'm spending all my time trying to get renders that actually look like something. what has taken me days at least in mental ray with still no quality results is something i can do in literally 30 seconds in vray with no tricks, no workarounds, no bs. it works out of the box and yet i still have all the control i need. i never feel like i can't get what i want with vray. mental ray is just plain unintuitive and honestly it's just wasting my time that could be spent doing other important work. i'm now having to do tons of research and download training just to try and get what should be a simple sun and sky setup working (yes i've researched linear workflow and i do all the gamma correction on the textures but it's still just plain ugly). something i never had to do with vray, i used the manual and a couple of plain written tutorials available on the web. i don't doubt the mental ray engine at all, but this interface and workflow in maya is just a joke for me. i'm going to try and convince the boss to go vray for maya but i can't see it happening somehow...

sentry66
06-10-2010, 05:05 PM
Well, passes and linear workflow are not "little features", are foundations of the rendering process. And correct viewport visualization should be the first priority of all, but it isn't.
I love hypershade and I feel very powerful with it, but I don't want to consider it a "privilege"; and the fact is, there's much more to talk about the poor MR integration with Maya; including incorrect data type flow integration, which is correctable but not working as is, half made shader integration (Ocean, PaintFX ecc.) and many other Maya features that you have to struggle with.
And then also, Hypershade is really great, I love working with it, but think about it.. it's old! If they really cared about it, since it's one of the strongest assets in Maya, they should update it. Maybe taking inspiration from other software like Mapzone or the Vue node based shader editor (not to mention the obvious Houdini). Talking about bases, I want more procedural shaders, I want a full featured layering system that work with every shader. We're not talking about weird new tecnology, we're talking about simple BASE functionalities and normal evolution of one of the leading 3d software in the world.



Yeah mainly I was meaning every little mental ray node is available to you and having to manually use some of those nodes from time to time to plug into your shader group and camera etc.

I don't know why there isn't a unified linear workflow and pass system that works seemlessly across the board. I just assumed it has to do with the complexity of having the entire back end of MR so open and that autodesk keeps changing the UI around each release.

arkanoid
06-10-2010, 06:08 PM
Yeah mainly I was meaning every little mental ray node is available to you and having to manually use some of those nodes from time to time to plug into your shader group and camera etc.

I don't know why there isn't a unified linear workflow and pass system that works seemlessly across the board. I just assumed it has to do with the complexity of having the entire back end of MR so open and that autodesk keeps changing the UI around each release.

Well yes, it could be. But I can't stand for it nomore. I also suspect to be under the hard influence of Luxology marketing. :drool:
Anyway, Softimage have a perfectly running MR. And Mantra is another very complex engine that is completely open. And as far as I know it works pretty well and comes with Houdini (Escape=2000$) free, exactly like MR for Maya.

bertjenkins
06-10-2010, 07:22 PM
Cant wait for vray for maya 2011 (osx) , i'm holding on to my mental ray pain until it's released

cgbeige
06-11-2010, 05:34 AM
it's already available if you own a V-Ray for Maya license. I have been running it for months - nightly builds, V-Ray framebuffer and all. I noticed that the builds recently added SP1 to the name so I think it could be soon that the official update with 2011 x64 support is released.

arkanoid
06-11-2010, 09:16 AM
Do you know other raytracers that work in maya with hypershade (apart from vray)?

jupiterjazz
06-11-2010, 12:07 PM
Do you know other raytracers that work in maya with hypershade (apart from vray)?

3delight for Maya and RenderMan for Maya?
And yes, they are both also raytracers.

P

arkanoid
06-11-2010, 02:00 PM
3delight for Maya and RenderMan for Maya?
And yes, they are both also raytracers.

P

Thanks Paolo. I'v only looked superficially at 3delight and Mantra Reyes renderers. Yes they are also raytracers. But they're not so efficient with GI compared to MR or V-Ray, don't have a Sun&Sky system and don't have presets (actually Mantra has). Generally I don't like presets, I never used any, but now I have to become productive with a new software in no time. Me to step out of MR, I want a fully featured modern GI based raytracer, since I work alone and I'm more on print-pharmaceutical-arch and only occasionally do animations.

Airflow
06-12-2010, 12:46 AM
The answer is in the thread title, but is missing the word "not" and needs re-arranging. :)

slipknot66
06-12-2010, 01:40 AM
Do you know other raytracers that work in maya with hypershade (apart from vray)?

Theres also FinalRender for Maya.

jupiterjazz
06-12-2010, 02:15 AM
But they're not so efficient with GI compared to MR or V-Ray.

It really depends on what you do.

Me to step out of MR, I want a fully featured modern GI based raytracer, since I work alone and I'm more on print-pharmaceutical-arch and only occasionally do animations.

For this kind of works you have a many choices, and stepping out of mental ray is in any case a step towards freshness.
Definitely VRay offers what you are after. For this kind of works you could also consider LuxRender, which kicks ass and is free, with a completely different shading pipeline.

P.

Gloor
06-12-2010, 08:43 PM
Guys, if I have dynamic sky from visor (clouds) and sea from visor and I would like to render it then what is better for me? Maxwell Render or Vray? What is simplier to learn and very effective? I'm tempted to drop MR after reading your feedback.

Also, I can't find trial of Vray for Maya on Mac. Anybody has a link ?

thank you

cgbeige
06-12-2010, 11:28 PM
The demo is on the site once you log in after registering. There is no demo for 2011 yet though - you have to buy it and get a nightly build if you want to use it with 2011 x64 on OS X.

Gloor
06-13-2010, 01:14 AM
The demo is on the site once you log in after registering. There is no demo for 2011 yet though - you have to buy it and get a nightly build if you want to use it with 2011 x64 on OS X.

I've registered and went to download site but it offers trials (1.50) only for linux, darwin and windows. No mac for any of the version :(

Any idea ? :(

Hamburger
06-13-2010, 01:34 AM
I think Darwin is the mac version.

Gloor
06-13-2010, 09:39 AM
Nope, Darwin is another .exe version so no mac :(

SreckoM
06-13-2010, 11:00 AM
Yes it is Mac, just execute it from command line. In Linux version there is also .exe file that can be executed from shell.

Gloor
06-13-2010, 11:10 AM
Yes it is Mac, just execute it from command line. In Linux version there is also .exe file that can be executed from shell.

how do i execute it from command line? - found it :))

arkanoid
06-13-2010, 02:27 PM
Theres also FinalRender for Maya.

V-Ray and Final Render definitely intrigue me but they are not cheap. Cebas site looks a bit dated though, and there's no mention to Maya version compatibility.

For this kind of works you have a many choices, and stepping out of mental ray is in any case a step towards freshness.

Yes you're right. Currently I'm pondering to step out of Maya too. I already tried at least 2 time without success, because despite its problems there's so many aspects that I like of Maya, that make me come back "home". I'm testing Modo right now; it looks very solid at present; strange very unique beast, but flaws always show up in the middle run..

Definitely VRay offers what you are after. For this kind of works you could also consider LuxRender, which kicks ass and is free, with a completely different shading pipeline.

I don't know Luxrender I'll check out thanks!

sentry66
06-13-2010, 07:42 PM
Nope, Darwin is another .exe version so no mac :(

darwin is the name Apple calls the framework that OSX is based on

cgbeige
06-13-2010, 10:03 PM
I've told Chaos Group that it would be much better to use "mac" instead of Darwin and .command instead of .exe since it shows up as a Parallels Desktop Windows file on my machine. They recently changed the nightlies to be "vray_adv_150SP1_maya2011_leopard_x64.exe" so we're half way there

Gloor - you need to run it as root user, if you don't know how to do that, it's "sudo DRAGTHEFILEINTOTHETERMINAL" and hit enter.

CGTalk Moderation
06-13-2010, 10:03 PM
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.