Is a REYES render faster than a RAY TRACER render?

Become a member of the CGSociety

Connect, Share, and Learn with our Large Growing CG Art Community. It's Free!

THREAD CLOSED
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 10 October 2012   #16
Originally Posted by bergj: That sounds correct for 3delight. However, you can achieve progressive rendering without raytracing anything - you will need to code it differently, perhaps with a dso. Sorry but I cant go into more specifics. The renderer I'm vaguely referring to is not Relight (which is reyes), but one that I have some affilliation and is being developed. It has the same functionality as this example.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9_pQ...e=results_video

That video is not showing progressive REYES. It's showing first a REYES pass that is a quick non-progressive, unshaded render to a deep framebuffer, then all the progressive passes that follow are using the deep framebuffer that is the output of the REYES pass.
 
Old 10 October 2012   #17
Originally Posted by stew: That video is not showing progressive REYES. It's showing first a REYES pass that is a quick non-progressive, unshaded render to a deep framebuffer, then all the progressive passes that follow are using the deep framebuffer that is the output of the REYES pass.


well, whatever its technical name is, its very, very, very useful and its the best we could come up with
 
Old 10 October 2012   #18
This was a Stupid RAT Trick from 2005

http://www.halbertram.com/trick/index.html
 
Old 10 October 2012   #19
Originally Posted by slebed: This was a Stupid RAT Trick from 2005

http://www.halbertram.com/trick/index.html


Cool link! Hadnt seen that one.
 
Old 10 October 2012   #20
Originally Posted by slebed: This was a Stupid RAT Trick from 2005

http://www.halbertram.com/trick/index.html

Which again consists of bypassing the REYES pipeline entirely and solving the problem with ray tracing instead
 
Old 10 October 2012   #21
Originally Posted by bergj: well, whatever its technical name is, its very, very, very useful and its the best we could come up with

It most certainly is. Interactive relighting is one of the most powerful techniques to appear in the last few years IMHO, it's just such a big time saver.
 
Old 10 October 2012   #22
Originally Posted by yolao: 2-Also, is a renderman render mostly for programers.., it seems that is very technical oriented?


If your only interaction is with the PRMan standalone and a commandline, then yes - it's mostly suited for programmers or technical directors. But that applies to any other renderer that you can think of - how many often do you handwrite your own .mi or .vrscene files? Most of the time you'll be using Mental Ray for Maya or Vray for Maya in order to render your Maya (or whatever) scenes.

As an aside. I'd say it's probably easier for you to learn how to hand-write RIB (renderman scene files) and RSL (shading language) shaders than it is to hand-write scene files and shaders in Mental Ray or Vray.

So it kind of depends on the exporter plugin within your 3d app of choice as to how easy or complex it is to work with Pixar's Renderman.

In terms of off-the-shelf Pixar's Renderman for Maya is pretty well integrated into Maya and relatively easy to figure out. Previous versions put more emphasis on making your own shaders (using RSL, Slim or the Hypershade) but recent versions have started to ship with all-purpose shaders (similar to Mental Ray's architectural shader) in order to ease things for small-studios and one-man-bands.

While on the more complex end of the shelf, The Foundry's Katana is designed for mid-to-large studios which have shader writers, coders, pipeline engineers who can further add to Katana's functionality. Many large studios already have their own Renderman exporters, but a few have started to make the switch towards Katana such as ILM, DD, Laika and MPC.
 
Old 10 October 2012   #23
There is also a big part of subjective feeling on which engine feet you best ! Personnaly i will always prefer engine with Reyes/Hybrid Raytrace functionality like prman/mantra. Because in engine like V-Ray rendertime are close to 15-30 minutes per frames if you need to compress those rendertime beetween 1 min to 5 min you can't (i could be wrong on this point ... but i don't think so ). In prman if you' have an ocean shaders to do , you will be able to fake everything with for ex fake transluscence with shadow maps, fake reflections with environment only ... You can definitly build a photoreal ocean shader that will take 2 minutes in HD1280 to render. Off course create this shader will have ask you maybe 2 hour of work while in vray it would have take you 2 minutes , but the pleasure of control you have in prman is really rewarding if you take the time to learn it ! i advise you to just play with 3delight as a starting point !

But i really think chaos group did a wonderful job on V-ray , it works ! i just miss the feeling of absolute control that prman give you. But for arch-viz / cars / parfum bottle / watches in commercial deadlines i would stay away of prman and go with v-ray ... even if rendertime are long !

( well To sum up having both engine is the best options to me ... )
__________________
emfx.fr
 
Old 10 October 2012   #24
SebKaine, interesting information, as from the others too. It's not quite clear what kind of intention the OP has, whether he agrees to learn programming, to spend a great deal of time, maybe years, to have a fast solution for HD renderings. In my opinion the first engine the person learns should be easy to learn and get good results fast. And Vray is a first thing I would advise on this. Then if you are more experienced, then maybe 3delight is better, if you need to push it far. I agree Vray was never built in mind to speed-up renderings much, and it yields to Mental Ray in this regard and I think even more to renderman family.
But you should understand, not everubody has enough knowledge to learn programming. It's like suggesting "buy this race car, and though upgrading and tweaking it will take some time, it can be faster than the usual city car". But not everybody is able to do that. This is the problem with mental ray: to use it to the fullest, you need to learn its language, and it's very hard and I don't need it personally for my work. I need a working and not buggy solution. Unfortunately I don't use Maya so I can't try 3delight, though surely why not try it, if you can. But also try Vray.
 
Old 10 October 2012   #25
Originally Posted by mister3d: I don't use Maya so I can't try 3delight.


I would go with houdini to use 3Delight , its a really better experience imo !
To me thats the biggest weak point of 3Delight.
- the engine is amazing great raytrace and sss skills
- all the reyes advantages
- very unexpensive

But i really hate the 3delight UI in maya and to me its the reason number 1 why 3delight doesn't get the success he deserves. When you use it with Houdini SHOP its an other story ... a great engine !
__________________
emfx.fr

Last edited by SebKaine : 10 October 2012 at 08:54 AM.
 
Old 10 October 2012   #26
3Delight also has a really seamless integration with Softimage. A nice environment to get your feet wet with RSL etc.

Originally Posted by SebKaine: When you use it with Houdini SHOP its an other story ... a great engine !


Don't want to start a pissing contest, but I'm curious what advantages do you find using 3Delight over Mantra? Unless your shading pipe is already 3Delight based...? I'm a big fan of 3Delight, but Mantra's really solid too.
 
Old 10 October 2012   #27
well in a maya base workflow you are still able to export a .RIB and a .SL for the maya guys. H can export geo but you wont be able to transfer your mantra shader to maya i guess. For ex the fx team that is working on H develop an optimised ice shader with 3delight fast sss, then you will be able to transmit this to the lighting dpt to render it with the characters and sets in maya ... Some companies like to render all in the same engine even if it sometimes add additional (useless?) steps.

I haven't test mantra sss extensively but it would be interesting to compare how it stand against 3delight ? have you tried both ?
__________________
emfx.fr

Last edited by SebKaine : 10 October 2012 at 01:09 PM.
 
Old 10 October 2012   #28
Thanks guy very good info.
Originally Posted by earlyworm: In terms of off-the-shelf Pixar's Renderman for Maya is pretty well integrated into Maya and relatively easy to figure out. Previous versions put more emphasis on making your own shaders (using RSL, Slim or the Hypershade) but recent versions have started to ship with all-purpose shaders (similar to Mental Ray's architectural shader) in order to ease things for small-studios and one-man-bands.


thanks.

I was wondering what kind of results can you get with a REYES render with a workflow similar to vray/mental ray tweaking and refining the shaders that comes by default with shaders networks etc.

I have the impression, by checking some examples, that it`s difficult to get more realistic and great results with the shaders that comes out of the box..., what REYES render, aparty from RFM, came come close to material/shader workflow of those ray tracer like vray and mental ray getting good realistic results with out programing?.., have you check the bakery relight render..?..
 
Old 10 October 2012   #29
Originally Posted by mister3d: ...not everubody has enough knowledge to learn programming. It's like suggesting "buy this race car, and though upgrading and tweaking it will take some time, it can be faster than the usual city car".


But that's the thing - you don't need to know how to program or script in order to use something like Renderman For Maya. It's up to you whether you just want to drive it around the city, through the jungle or around the race track.

Originally Posted by yolao: I have the impression, by checking some examples, that it`s difficult to get more realistic and great results with the shaders that comes out of the box..., what REYES render, aparty from RFM, came come close to material/shader workflow of those ray tracer like vray and mental ray getting good realistic results with out programing?


I find 3Delight pretty good - it will automatically translate your hypershade networks (and the MR arch shader). Personally I think it's better implemented into Maya than Mental Ray is, but if your unfamiliar with it, it might take a bit of getting use to. Things like preprocessing textures, tagging geo with attributes and setting up render passes will be new - but aren't exactly difficult.
 
Old 10 October 2012   #30
Originally Posted by earlyworm: I find 3Delight pretty good - it will automatically translate your hypershade networks (and the MR arch shader). Personally I think it's better implemented into Maya than Mental Ray is, but if your unfamiliar with it, it might take a bit of getting use to. Things like preprocessing textures, tagging geo with attributes and setting up render passes will be new - but aren't exactly difficult.


Thanks. I will give 3Delight a try, even with just two cores that the demo has i can check the workflow, lighting/material quality, etc.
 
Thread Closed share thread



Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
CGSociety
Society of Digital Artists
www.cgsociety.org

Powered by vBulletin
Copyright 2000 - 2006,
Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Minimize Ads
Forum Jump
Miscellaneous

All times are GMT. The time now is 04:22 PM.


Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.