Vray vs. C4D Physical Render Engine

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 05 May 2013   #46
Originally Posted by Troyan: Faster, yes. Don't know about the data formats. You should start a thread in their forums, they're quite responsive and good. vray for c4d site


Sure. Thanks. I was hoping for a little additional impartiality here. But I'm sure I can get good info there, too.
 
Old 05 May 2013   #47
Originally Posted by sneather: Sure. Thanks. I was hoping for a little additional impartiality here. But I'm sure I can get good info there, too.


right, but there are some very helpful people over there that I don't normally see here, so it wouldn't hurt.
__________________
2014 Reel
Company website
Behance Portfolio
HyperactiveVR
I reject your reality and substitute my own
 
Old 05 May 2013   #48
Originally Posted by Troyan: I cannot seem to extract z-depth info from my exr file. Can you give a brief workflow on how you got it to work? I get what appears to be a correct interpretation in AE, but I would think Extractor would be able to create something that resembles a traditional depth map? Is this not the case?


I used a plugin, but can't remember which one (sorry, it was literally a 5 minute experiment) aescipts has a couple of useful ones, pixel cloud looks the most interesting especially with the death of normality
__________________
mike griggs : creativebloke : 3D, vfx & digital
creativebloke.com
 
Old 05 May 2013   #49
Originally Posted by Troyan: ok, so, none of this works with the physical renderer. You have to use the standard renderer to generate RPF, RLA and OpenEXR. Took a good portion of my day to figure out that was the problem. Make a note.


What exactly isn't working with PR and OpenEXR. I can easily extract depth data from an EXR rendered with PR. Could you elaborate your problem?
 
Old 05 May 2013   #50
We've been using a VRay > OpenEXR > Composite multipass in Nuke work flow for two years. So yes, VRay supports OpenEXR, including multilayered files. With the upcoming VRay update multipass will only get better.

In my experience for simple scenes C4D is probably a little faster than VRay. As soon as you start using blurred reflection and GI VRay is the only way to go (ducks head, this is based on my experience of using VRay for product and interior rendering, your experience may vary).
 
Old 05 May 2013   #51
Originally Posted by LukeLetellier: I've been eyeing Fusion for a little while now (it's $2400 vs Nuke's $4000); the Adobe CC events have made me wonder if I can get fusion to take over the function of both after effects and photoshop. I also think Fusion has a better future in store vs AE, as Adobe will lean on plug-in developers as long as they can. And if I really need AE for a single job, it's $20 a month.


We moved entirely to Fusion over a year ago and are thrilled with it. It destroys After Effects for visual effects work.

Also the position pass stuff works extremely well with it- it has tools for interactively masking areas of a scene as well as interactive volumetric fog (with turbulence and light support) and more.

It's also even cheaper compared to Nuke when you throw in Nuke X and furnace (which you have to to match Fusion's feature set.)

We use Fusion, Dimension (which is like voodoo magic for some shots- amazingly powerful optical flow tools) and Generation for project management. Honestly, they've revolutionized things for us.
 
Old 05 May 2013   #52
Originally Posted by shoqman: We moved entirely to Fusion over a year ago and are thrilled with it. It destroys After Effects for visual effects work.

We use Fusion, Dimension (which is like voodoo magic for some shots- amazingly powerful optical flow tools) and Generation for project management. Honestly, they've revolutionized things for us.


Are you using Fusion primarily for live action comps or full CG scenes?

What do you use for a tracking solution? I know it has a very decent 2D tracker, but nothing in the ways of a planar/camera tracker. Do you go the Syntheyes route?
 
Old 05 May 2013   #53
Originally Posted by shoqman: We moved entirely to Fusion over a year ago and are thrilled with it. It destroys After Effects for visual effects work.

Also the position pass stuff works extremely well with it- it has tools for interactively masking areas of a scene as well as interactive volumetric fog (with turbulence and light support) and more.

It's also even cheaper compared to Nuke when you throw in Nuke X and furnace (which you have to to match Fusion's feature set.)

We use Fusion, Dimension (which is like voodoo magic for some shots- amazingly powerful optical flow tools) and Generation for project management. Honestly, they've revolutionized things for us.


I'm curious to know the same. I hear about Fusion and Nuke, but I never encounter any outfits or immediate colleagues who use either. I'm guessing these are more in the threshold of special effects, and heavy-duty composting? I have never once seen anything but AfterEffects used in broadcast branding and design. I think there may be a crucial divide between needs and strengths with some of these solutions, based on the targeted work.
 
Old 05 May 2013   #54
Originally Posted by sneather: I'm curious to know the same. I hear about Fusion and Nuke, but I never encounter any outfits or immediate colleagues who use either. I'm guessing these are more in the threshold of special effects, and heavy-duty composting? I have never once seen anything but AfterEffects used in broadcast branding and design. I think there may be a crucial divide between needs and strengths with some of these solutions, based on the targeted work.


Even with pure-3D/design compositing, I think Fusion & nuke would be helpful. Whether those extra features would be worth it for someone focussing on non-realistic graphic work....that's another story.

For myself, I can think of several situations where I've had to render out a brand new element to stick into my 3D scene, and have then had to render out a gazillion masks just to make sure this new object integrates correctly. With the easy to use position pass in Fusion or Nuke, the compositing (theoretically) would be a breeze.

Last edited by LukeLetellier : 05 May 2013 at 06:45 PM.
 
Old 05 May 2013   #55
Gotcha. Thanks.
Besides broadcast, the majority of my work revolves around product visualization work. So, high-quality, hyper-real is what I strive for with those kinds of animations. Which, is why I'm considering Vray. That being said, I almost never deal with full CG scenes / environments, nor matched compositing in practical scenes. Most of the product work (thankfully) lives in limbo, or at least inserted into blurred environments. So, I don't have to concern myself (too much) with the need for keeping a handle on 100s of random components. That is, unless the client's product has that many pieces. But even then, it's generally a single output, with maybe a handful of object buffers for whatever, in AE.
 
Old 06 June 2013   #56
Originally Posted by LukeLetellier: Are you using Fusion primarily for live action comps or full CG scenes?

What do you use for a tracking solution? I know it has a very decent 2D tracker, but nothing in the ways of a planar/camera tracker. Do you go the Syntheyes route?


We use it for both, post comping CG in general gives so much more flexibility to an image.

We use Mocha and Syntheyes. Fusion's 2D tracker is great for 2D stuff though. You can track a shot in Mocha and then just paste the resulting nodes into Fusion.
 
Old 06 June 2013   #57
Originally Posted by sneather: Gotcha. Thanks.
Besides broadcast, the majority of my work revolves around product visualization work. So, high-quality, hyper-real is what I strive for with those kinds of animations. Which, is why I'm considering Vray. That being said, I almost never deal with full CG scenes / environments, nor matched compositing in practical scenes. Most of the product work (thankfully) lives in limbo, or at least inserted into blurred environments. So, I don't have to concern myself (too much) with the need for keeping a handle on 100s of random components. That is, unless the client's product has that many pieces. But even then, it's generally a single output, with maybe a handful of object buffers for whatever, in AE.


Get Vray. That is the easiest answer...it is worth it alone for the sexy multi-layer specular.
But everything else stated as well. GI+Blurry effects Vray gets my vote hands down.
And it already sees a lot of production in the C4D world. The majority of Aixsponza stuff if Vray...even a lot of stuff on the MAXON site is Vray.

The last few music videos I worked on we used Vray as well.

and to end with what I always say...a dedicated app will always be better...as a developer only has to worry about 1 aspect of the whole pipeline, allowing them to focus their efforts.

I have NOT tried M4D though...and so this could be an avenue of exploration...and they offer a demo.
__________________
The views expressed in this post are by no means the opinion of those making the post or of any one person in particular.
 
Old 06 June 2013   #58
Originally Posted by chi: Get Vray. That is the easiest answer...it is worth it alone for the sexy multi-layer
.... a lot of stuff on the MAXON site is Vray.
The last few music videos I worked on we used Vray as well.

So stuff in gallery?
If not, maxon don't like to develop for people and stand by principle of "as is" or indifferent software. We can see really winning thing in c4d or not, hope, can we?
 
Old 06 June 2013   #59
Originally Posted by ilay: So stuff in gallery?
If not, maxon don't like to develop for people and stand by principle of "as is" or indifferent software. We can see really winning thing in c4d or not, hope, can we?


I think I speak for a fair number, when I ask, what?
 
Old 06 June 2013   #60
Originally Posted by chi: Get Vray. That is the easiest answer...it is worth it alone for the sexy multi-layer specular.
But everything else stated as well. GI+Blurry effects Vray gets my vote hands down.
And it already sees a lot of production in the C4D world. The majority of Aixsponza stuff if Vray...even a lot of stuff on the MAXON site is Vray.

The last few music videos I worked on we used Vray as well.

and to end with what I always say...a dedicated app will always be better...as a developer only has to worry about 1 aspect of the whole pipeline, allowing them to focus their efforts.

I have NOT tried M4D though...and so this could be an avenue of exploration...and they offer a demo.


Thanks. But the nice-looking renders from Vray aren't in question. My entire concern, and one of the primary reasons I started this thread, was to determine how well Vray would fit into my existing style of production, and more importantly, post-production. I'm frankly extremely disappointed that there is no demo version available. I can't remember the last time I wasn't able to try out a piece of software before purchasing, and that includes offerings from some extremely small outfits.
 
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 11:17 PM.


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