View Full Version : Vray murders Final Render

08 August 2002, 10:56 PM
Ok guys here, I got Vray vs Final Render.
I have set up two identical scenes using no textures, just reflection from an HDRI map, and here what happened:
Rendered on Dual xeon 2.2ghz 1024 ram, GeF 128

Vray IMG 1
Final Render IMG 2

Vray paramiters:
ISA - Adaptive Subdiv
Global Illumination - on
HSprh - 15
Inter. Sample - 20
Irradience map has - 8230s
Override MAX's env - HDRI map
Resolution 640x480

Rendering time 0:35 sec

Final Render Paramiters:

Ground Plane Shader FR locals:
RH rays: 1024
min/max density 5/75

FR globals:
RH rays - 512
Curve Balance - 93.0
min/max density - 10/50
AA min/max - 2/4
Solution Sam - 7790s
Skylight - HDRI map
Resolution 640x480

Rendering time 6:45min

now think....

08 August 2002, 12:06 AM
well, both got their pro and cons, but I'm using finalRender
since I found out it is in the most scenes more accurate.
Especially if you have a big iluminated wall and want to
have good area shadows it is really hard with VRay.
finalRender is a bit easier to control. VRay is pretty
good if you want to have normal GI and fast rendering,
but for accurate GI and controlable solutions finalRender
is unbeatble. For correct and accurate area shadows
with VRay the Hemisphere Samples and Interpolated
Samples have to be very high and the min. and max.
rate too, this increases the rendertime and it is mostly
equal to finalrender.

VRay is nice, but I go on with finalRender ...
*waiting for stage-1*

BTW: I dislike VRays color bleeding, it's a bit too strong...

08 August 2002, 05:08 AM
nice render time, but i'll also stick with final render, can't wait to get stage 1

08 August 2002, 07:16 AM
I'm presuming the second image is the FR one? IF that's so then your AA settings are clearly borked and need turning up. The image would look much better with a lower curve balance, fewer rays but better AA. With those settings it would probably render much faster too.

I'm not denying that the Vray rendertime is very good, but looking at that second image it looks to me that you don't really know how to use FR all that well, so I'll take your comments with a pinch of salt...

08 August 2002, 08:26 AM
This is sort of interesting... Couldnt one of you FR guys try to set up a configuration that would match the Vray one in terms of "quality"? Would be nice to se a just comparison.

Personally im a "Brazilian" my self, although i havent really had the time to learn the intricacies of any of the renderers really well. :shame:

08 August 2002, 10:23 AM
If Dmitry would post the scene, it would be easier.

08 August 2002, 02:51 PM
That's a good idea: Battle Of The Renderers

everyone renders the same scene trying to get it looking as nice as possible in the shortest possible render time. Tho with people having all different hardware and software setups that could be a bit of a waste of time

08 August 2002, 03:05 PM
I think the easiest way, would be to have one person (or two with identical specs) render at recommended settings.
That would as fair as it gets i suppose.


08 August 2002, 02:04 AM
I think that Mr. Frog is right...

08 August 2002, 10:03 PM
with no doubt, VRay is much faster, but about quality...
i used VRAY & FR for my past challenge thread (BoB) & i choose
VRay version! i prefer VRay's quality rather than FR.
but i only had GI in my scene...i'm not sure about SSS & area shadows...or caustic.
atlast i think it depends on the users.

08 August 2002, 10:15 PM
area shadows and caustics work great as well...but longer rendering time.

08 August 2002, 07:07 AM
I'd say Vray's quality is a bit better... But i use only scanline, cause that's the one I realy know. :thumbsup:

Hey... Playmesumch00ns has a quite good idea.
What if we made a tiny comp in this thread? Everyone renders with they're favorite render, so we can compare the quality...
The quality only... Cause every comp here is different. So it would make no sense looking at the rendering time.
[If only Dimitry could give us the scene, that is... ;) ]

08 August 2002, 07:16 AM
I can post a scene...but i requires an hdri map which does take about 10 i donno
perhaps :bounce:

08 August 2002, 06:09 PM
well, you can take off the HDRI and post it..., so users can test that...

08 August 2002, 10:59 PM
I find it impressive that FR is giving you actual shadows from the sun in the HDRI image. The VRay rendering just has a sort of dark smear to represent the shadows.

I think your parameters on FR are probably off. The RH values seem very very high. Did you follow the procedure in the training videos?

Also, the FR documentation suggests adjusting the GI settings to blur the HDRI image for illumination purposes to speed up HDRI illuminated scenes. High-contrast HDRI images (like this one probably is, with the sun having much much higher values than adjacent pixels) give the adaptive sampler fits.

There is a specific control in FR to blur high-contrast HDRI images for the GI logic, but not to the camera (it stays clear and sharp for the camera).

Truth be told, I've had lousy luck with HDRI illuminated scenes in all sorts of packages. I tried for hours to illuminate a very simple scene in Lightwave, but couldn't get rid of these horrible spots all over everything.

08 August 2002, 10:54 PM
Do you know that Brazil Rulez...:p :buttrock: :buttrock: :buttrock:

but not in render time maybe :drool:

09 September 2002, 02:12 AM
And render time doesnt count? So far ive seen quality and speed from vray. As for fR i sure wish they had a beta i bought fR back when they had the pre-release deal and i feel like such an ass for buying a piece of shit renderer. Atleast i got to test brazil to see how bad it was and Im glad im making a good purchase with Vray

12 December 2002, 02:00 PM

12 December 2002, 10:41 PM
Could it be possible to have this scene then ? Just for some fun tests... Of course not hard to do, but to have same map/lighting etc.

Thks !


12 December 2002, 07:57 AM
Yep! How about testing Brazil? Hmm but i think now that vray kicks asses :buttrock:

12 December 2002, 06:46 PM
this test was done ghm...long whlie ago...i will do a test with brazil and let you know...

12 December 2002, 08:43 PM
Ok so i've done comparisong between Vray 1.09 and brazil 1.03
Here is what I got:
First images is Vray second is Brazil.
The testing was done on Celeron 500 with 320 ram. (hehe not my work station)

Vray Stat:

ISA - Adaptive Subdiv
Global Illumination - on
HDRI - on
HSprh - 25
Inter. Sample - 20
Override MAX's env - HDRI map
Resolution 640x480

Rendering time 10:11 sec

Brazil Stat:

Luma Server - skylight on in both direct and inditect
All objects recieve but do not generate GI
GI AA -3; 0
View Rate : 31
Sec bounce 1
sec b rate : 5
HDRI - on

Rendering time 17:51 sec

I can conclude that the rendering time was longer by almost twice, however brazil gives a better control over the shaders as well as the environment settings and AA.

I can say that vray can be used for test or preview rendering of the models, but if you want to use GI renderer in a heavy project where there is lots of different shaders with transparency and what not, vray is not the way to go.

12 December 2002, 08:44 PM
here is a secong brazil render

12 December 2002, 12:18 AM
thank u Dmitry, but still I perfer VRay over Brazil !
in my exprience Vray has a sharper result, & also less grainy.
if you adjust the exposure control in vray GI menu then you'll
get a brilliant output (shadings & contrasts), the default setting
almost is not good for vray, u should tweak it.

12 December 2002, 09:15 AM
this is all incredibly pointless.

12 December 2002, 09:47 AM
why don't you try render a caustics scene with brazil and vray?
or are u affraid of the Brazil:Glass mat?

And i think everybody knows that HDRI is brazils flaw.

And when u say that "x" murders "y" you must make all kind of tests.. not just one:shame:

12 December 2002, 05:03 PM

I just finished two documents on using HDRi with Brazil r/s, and it couldn't be any much easier, faster or better looking.

As for caustics.. how would you like them ? QMC-based ? Photon Mapped ? pMesh'd ?

Maybe you should work with the product for a while before commenting - and be sure you're not using outdated versions like 1.0 or 1.0.3 :p

12 December 2002, 06:24 PM
wow dudes..this is just a study and comparison... I didnt mean to say that one soft is better then the other and that YOU should use it, I just wanted to show my research, and share it with others...
I dont need you to come in here and tell me what a bullshit...

01 January 2003, 09:55 PM
I've been playing with all three listed here and still trying to make my mind up.

what I'd like to see is some decent tutes and theories on using any of the 3 listed here....and yes I have the manuals.

any takers ?

CGTalk Moderation
01 January 2006, 02:00 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.