Maxwell vs C4D (the cigarette pack)

Become a member of the CGSociety

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

Thread Tools Display Modes
  04 April 2005
Ilab, neither me nor Maxon is ignoring the wishes of the users and i think the development of the last years is the best evidence for this.
What i will ignore is useless babble and repeating the same statements over and over again without further use. There have been numerous threads on render comparisons, and many came up with great ideas, insights tips and tricks. But more and more this exercise became pointless. I can't see the sense in just another repetition of things that have been said and shown before. The original point of these threads has long been made and understood.

- -
The views expressed on this post are my personal opinions and do not represent the views of my employer.
  04 April 2005
lllab, I think I´ll have cheese with the whine....
  04 April 2005
I'll second Mash and Srek: there is a point to be made (AR needs an update) and it has been made ad nauseum. I sort of enjoy doing comparison renderings as an exercise and to help explore the strengths/weaknesses of different technologies, but they always seem to degenerate into peeing contests.
  04 April 2005
wew, strong words here...

well i just said what i feel, this is my personal feeling of course.
maybe i missundestood something, but i am NOT gone mad.

and mash, who is bitching here, i have seens some different opinions, but nothing like bitching, most things even interesting.

i appologize of course srek is not maxon, i know that, and maybe i misunderstood him.

Adam: well i just dont like the way some users here treat others, when they complain. for some the longwaited ar update is very important(has nothing to do with maxwell thats right),
so it comes up often. the more other users say its just because we are using c4d wrong, the situation will not improve. but as i said before i might have misunderstood sreks post, and if true i apologize for that- sorry srek!

at the end i am still of the opinion that is is very natural to compare, and that is HAS to do with cinema.

my2cents again

  04 April 2005
Originally Posted by lllab: and mash, who is bitching here, i have seens some different opinions, but nothing like bitching, most things even interesting.

The very first sentence of your last mail was talking about the people complaining in this thread. Maybe we have different definitions but complaining = bitching = moaning.

The reason many people are not keen on how this has gone is because its guarenteed that some people will suddenly come up with "If maxon dont change this in the next version then im changing to xxx" As if they're locked into some terrible relationship where the other party beats them daily and goes out drinking each night.

Everyone is perfectly happy to see what people want, and to see comparisons whether for technical reasons or just for fun, but they almost always turn into some fight about how the program they're using is holding them back, preventing them from doing work and making their life so terrible. Moaning for the sake of moaning. Your post wasn't a million miles from this, stating how maxon apparently ignores this thread and doesn't listen to you.

If you post a suggestion on the toms hardware web forums, are you expecting that a microsoft employee will be reading and take the time to formerly type up your suggestion and submit it to the developers? and would you then complain 5 days after making the request that microsoft is ignoring you and doesnt care about what users want?

I've only replied here because your last post seemed to pull out half a dozen bizarre and unfavorable conclusions from thin air.
Matthew O'Neill
  04 April 2005
I think the point lies int hat the point was made, people like the quality of maxwell and what areas of maxwells look and use, within the first two pages for the most part, now on page 19 its still going on with several off topic discussion along the way. not to mention that this thread really has no NEW points about maxwell versus cinema then the last ones. the message was made and everything else is idle chat that like bjorn I've only skimmed because as a forum leader I have to observe.

Also keep in mind that even if maxon did ignore a thread, there are other ways ot acknowledge them that they have established that are more appropriate then the forum. I'd never post on a forum about any app and expect the company to acknowledge. These forums are about the user community not the companys themselves.

use the suggestion form for sugggestons and requests.

Also consider that beta testers see these discussion and pass on suggestions too though I'd still put more reliability in the suggestion form getting to maxon then a tester t pass it on we try but we do have our own opinions too so sometimes if we don't agree we wont' of course.

Suggestion form, its there on maxon's site for a reason, thats their way of offering direct input to maxon. CGtalk is not related to maxon the simlpy allow a venue for maxon users to discuss, so maxon is notrequired to be here. We should feel greatful that this is one forum that some maxon folk do attend frequently. However i feel we should also provide them with acknowledge ment that they are here for their own sake and not maxon's sake.
Quote: "Until you do what you believe in, how do you know whether you believe in it or not?" -Leo Tolstoy
Kai Pedersen
  04 April 2005
Originally Posted by Kai Pedersen: this thread really has no NEW points about maxwell versus cinema then the last ones.

True. How about this one:

I really think that it's not Maxwells render quality nor the rendering method which is different from AR but the approach. Using real world lights based on SI ( System International ) measurements and getting a real simulation is great IMO. Some people are complaining about its weaker features (you can't just create put in some lights when a room is too dark for example) but I think this could be treated as if was a real world where you need some studio lights, lamps to create a good movie.
I think that the creation of a good CG image is hard because you must get used to a totally new system which is really far away from real-world conditions. So if there are accurate physical theories that describe the nature then why not use them in a rendering software?
So it's not about splotchy or not splotchy renderings. My question is not "will AR images be as good looking as...?" but "can we expect physical simulation AR somewhere in the future?".
  04 April 2005
Originally Posted by supremacy: So if there are accurate physical theories that describe the nature then why not use them in a rendering software?

That's what Maxwell uses and you pay for it through the nose with renders that can take anywhere from 2 hours to a 100 hours just for one high quality interior still. If you don't cut corners on physical accuracy somewhere, the cost in CPU cycles expended makes for extremely slow rendertimes.

What I've been wondering is if AR could be fitted with some kind of fast, probabilistic luminance estimation algorithm. By that I mean that you don't bother to bounce rays around an interior but rather estimate, based on the position of lightsources in the room and positive/negative space in the space (one being air and the other 'solids') roughly how much luminance is likely to end up where. No good for accurate simulations, but I wonder whether something like this could be used to quickly fudge an approximation of real world lighting behavior.
The cow is of the bovine ilk; one end is moo, the other milk.
  04 April 2005
hi people!
Actually I started this "fight". he he, I am the one to blame.

My feedback from this thread (at least the beggining of it) is that:

a. There are VERY talented, creative people out there, that any tool in their hands can produce brilliant art.
b. AR is capable of excellent rendering and in some cases very close to reality.
c. You can't beat knowledge.
d. I can produce real CRAPPY renders with maxwell (nearly as bad as my C4D renders)
e. Maxwellrender is a great product and can expand my services towards my clients.
f. I love C4D!

I guess you all agree with the above. Actually I don't even know why I wrote this...
  04 April 2005
Whatever you think of these types of threads, having options is definitely good. With the Maxwell plug, Cinema 4D essentially winds up having 3 different renderers - AR, Sketch and Maxwell. (I'm countring Sketch as a third renderer because its output really does look totally different from regular raytrace renders, even if its just a plugin module).

With three distinctly different render options under your belt, it becomes more feasible as an artist to take on a wider range of tasks. If a motion graphics task comes along, you do it with AR. If someone asks you to make an educational animation showing how a car engine works, Sketch might be just the thing to nail that 'animated schematic' look. If some architect comes along and wants of a beautiful render of that new building lobby with the specially designed skylight, Maxwell might be your ticket.

Choice is good not just for existing users, but also people who are considering jumping into a new 3D animation software. Knowing that once you buy it you'll have at least three different ways of rendering something out (four including Flash output) is a big plus I think. Gives you more confidence that the platform you pick won't lock you into just one way of getting something done.
The cow is of the bovine ilk; one end is moo, the other milk.
  04 April 2005
Thread automatically closed

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.
CGTalk Policy/Legalities
Note that as CGTalk Members, you agree to the terms and conditions of using this website.
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
Society of Digital Artists

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

All times are GMT. The time now is 04:37 PM.

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