The "AR 2.5 vs the rest" thread!

Become a member of the CGSociety

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

THREAD CLOSED
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  09 September 2005
Lightbulb The "AR 2.5 vs the rest" thread!

So I seem to have been er nominated to start this new thread... Anyway, let's see how the new Advanced Render 2.5 holds up against the competition now that we've got the new area lights, faster blurry reflections and overall speedups!

Here is a scene from the free stuff section at evermotion.org (converted to .c4d with some basic materials applied but no lighting set up yet):

download scene in .c4d format
download scene in .obj format
download scene in lw format
download the (original) scene in .max format


Original image:


You can use this as a guidline but feel free to make it look even prettier.

Use any renderer you like, maxwell, vray, finalrender etc... and of course AR 2.5. Hopefully this will turn into a nice big thread with some hard facts (ie pictures) to look at.

--------
Another edit: forgot to thank Simon Reeves for converting the max scene to obj.
__________________
Janine Pauke
my website

Last edited by Janine : 09 September 2005 at 10:27 AM.
 
  09 September 2005
Very generous, Janine

I'd also like to see 9.5's AR shine.
__________________
David

iMac 3.06 ghz Intel Core 2 Duo / 16 GB / OS 10.13.4 / C4D StudioR12 / CS6
 
  09 September 2005
to get the exercise more accurate, all texture mat should be the same whatever the renderer is, its too easy to get something pleasing to the eye with a decent map and could disturb any judgement...
i'm in for the maxwell test (i dont own the AR 2.5 yet ), i'll run tests this week end

once i'll start, i'll provide some maps.
 
  09 September 2005
Originally Posted by vesalus: to get the exercise more accurate, all texture mat should be the same whatever the renderer is, its too easy to get something pleasing to the eye with a decent map and could disturb any judgement...
i'm in for the maxwell test (i dont own the AR 2.5 yet ), i'll run tests this week end

once i'll start, i'll provide some maps.


Agreed, and the camera angle should stay the same as well.
 
  09 September 2005
Originally Posted by vesalus: once i'll start, i'll provide some maps.


Why maps? Just render the image the best you can without maps. If a program has map-less surfacing, use that. Cinema, for example.
__________________
Ernest Burden III
Acme Digital
 
  09 September 2005
Originally Posted by vesalus: to get the exercise more accurate, all texture mat should be the same whatever the renderer is, its too easy to get something pleasing to the eye with a decent map and could disturb any judgement...
i'm in for the maxwell test (i dont own the AR 2.5 yet ), i'll run tests this week end

once i'll start, i'll provide some maps.


I don't think we should make it too restrictive. It's supposed to be a fun exersize as well. I'd say let everyone apply their own textures and materials (although it seems to me like the original doesn't actually use any maps at all, possibly the tiles, but even they could be procedural).

The only thing I would say - don't apply lots of noisy textures and patterns to all the objects to cover up any artifacts, we want to see nice clean walls. Just keep it simple.
__________________
Janine Pauke
my website
 
  09 September 2005
I've updated the scene so that the camera matches the one in the original pic (see first post).
__________________
Janine Pauke
my website
 
  09 September 2005
janine, could you make a target camera please or the maxwellrender wont match...

thanks!
 
  09 September 2005
Originally Posted by vesalus: janine, could you make a target camera please or the maxwellrender wont match...

thanks!


It doesn't have to match 100%, I wouldn't worry.
__________________
Janine Pauke
my website
 
  09 September 2005
Originally Posted by vesalus: janine, could you make a target camera please or the maxwellrender wont match...

thanks!


create a null object, transfer it to the camera, move it forwared a bit ( away from the camera) give the camera a target tag, drop the null object into the target - Done!
__________________
Renderosity Gallery
 
  09 September 2005
ok then i'll send the file (cinema4D with camera and 2 maps, one for the rug and one for the tile plus maxwell tags applied) tomorrow, still got my work to finish...
i'll be back tomorrow

edit: sorry rick, you were too fast...

so yes i create a null, but you didnt mention that it must be shift-create a null, otherwise it wont work...

Last edited by vesalus : 09 September 2005 at 10:10 PM.
 
  09 September 2005



i'll go first then, quick test -

22 mins

AR 2.5
Strength 100%
Accuracy 70%
Prepass 1/2
Diffuse Depth 2
Stoch Smples 300
Min res 80
Max res 120

colour mapping 2-1 exponential


no area lights for this test or blurry reflections,

lighting = emitter in window, light at camera position - no shadow, sun - hard shadow

might try again with higher settings
__________________
Renderosity Gallery

Last edited by Ric535 : 09 September 2005 at 10:31 PM.
 
  09 September 2005
nope, it just create the null directly within the camera, then a litll tweaking to match a bit and , voila...

sorry
 
  09 September 2005
ha ha. hurry up dudes. I'm already in grainland and test rendering. Large image is @9 minutes.

__________________

 
  09 September 2005
I think it would make comparisons easier if the position/direction of the sun was pre determined.
 
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 11:55 AM.


Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.