Generating intellectual discussion on renderers - non-attack mode :)


We call it the quarter of “Rendering Technology and the Cyclops Wave!”
See Blog post November 24, 2017

It’s been quite a month for rendering software this last quarter, first Chaos Group and Render Legion (Corona) merged in August. Rumours abound but we are not at liberty to make comments on the whys and the then what…? We do know that there are users who were with Corona because they didn’t want to be on Vray. Then on November 19, one year after relaunch, NVIDIA announces the demise of Mental Ray.

Edwin Braun, founder of cebas Visual Technology (, writes about his view on the changes in response to many emails to him. You may know that finalRender trueHybrid recently launched (September 15, 2017) offering a powerful option to those seeking a faster, upgradeable and affordable renderer : full blog article @

What are your views as a frequent user of rendering technology?

Russell Thomas, Founder of 3dAllusions, Architectural Visualizer Studio, once an avid user of Mental Ray (MR) has this to say:

" I see the two events as detrimental to the CG community as it strengthens the monopoly that VRay enjoys. For Chaos Group to get to where they are today, they had to win over customers through steadily improving products. Now, they are on top. Before, New rendering engines arrive on the scene and try to challenge VRay, and VRay had to continue to improve their game and surpass what was offered. Sadly, Mental ray was living off past laurels and the fact that they were shipped with Autodesk products; in the past, when Maya and XSI weren’t owned by Autodesk, Mental ray was well packaged as well. So, Mental images/NVIDIA had years of enjoying those benefits and somehow gotten lazy in my opinion. "

“However, Now VRay has no real competition from Mental ray anymore (with NVIDIA announcing its eventual closure) and the one software that was being heralded as the new upcomer namely ‘Corona Render’ is now bought out by Chaos Group, again gone is a powerful player in the market pushing the big guys. To the layman, there seems to be only one obvious render engine to purchase and that is VRay. So, I worry about the field a bit, and hope for success for other independent render engines out there and under development, but they will have a hard time to break into markets like architectural visualization because of all the content out there made specifically with VRay, for VRay.”

"Focusing on this issue of Mental ray being dropped by NVIDIA: it came as no real surprise to me, the writing was on the wall. There was a lack of interest in helping to support/promote MrMaterials when we launched and not much activity was outgoing to the User Base, it seemed to me. When NVIDIA finally purchased Mental Images, it seemed that they were buying them to capitalize on Mental ray’s past accomplishments and packaging with Autodesk products, but more importantly to obtain iRay. Then I started seeing them package off iRay technology to other vendors… much like SketchUp Podium Walker; or like the render engine ‘Light Works’ did in the past. And I saw render technology being treated as a commodity and not proprietary content to be proud of ! "

“At (WIP), which I have been steadily developing, I intend to continue to support Mental ray materials by maintaining the huge materials repository we have accumulated through the years, as well as the tutorials by Jeff Patton up as best as we can, but I also plan on moving pass this. So, when I was interviewing Edwin Braun of cebas Visual Technology recently, it was brought to my attention that the New finalRender can render scenes using 3DS Max’s default materials as well as all of Mental ray materials! This I saw as a way that we could move forward while using the MR content we already have but appealing to another target demographics as well. Up to this point 3DAS uses VRay, Mental ray and Maxwell to do renderings, I still used Mental ray quite frequently, but I have to move pass that now. As I see it, if finalRender works out and I am doing tests as we speak, it can very well assists in the smooth transition of MR and Maxwell materials and projects (since both are also unbiased) in our line up to finalRender. I think finalRender has great potential and I look forward to learning it and helping that community and maybe helping put together a road map for Mental ray users who need something that can use all the digital content they have accumulated.”

Please feel free to communicate with me, Russell Thomas at I am busy so be patient.

Thank you for checking in and I hope this will spur some input from the 3dsMax rendering populations in a positive way, please be constructive, no need attack mode.
For FR tutorials, check in at Vimeo/cebasvt


You name some render engines, but you forgot to name Blender Cycles, very advanced, real CPU+GPU (simultaneous I mean, not just capabilities), Principled Shader based on Disney standard, advance volumétrica capabilities, denoiser (yet not as great as Corona’s one) and a long etcetera of features and capabilities, pretty good render engine evolving fast and available for anyone for free.



So is this post an ad for Vray or an ad for FinalRender?

No mention of any other engines besides mental ray or Corona, and we’re supposed to really think these guys have their finger on the pulse of modern technology. They probably still can’t even tell you what a photon is.


Is it a coincidence that the company known for attacking other renderers and the companies behind them needs to explicitly state they’re in ‘non-attack mode’ when they want to start a discussion?

If you watched the market you have realized that mental ray AND finalRender were abandoned by their users years ago already. One of them, mental images/nividia, was passive-dismissive towards the community by getting used to their lead role through inclusion in AD’s portfolio.
The other one, cebas, was active-dismissive by pointing out how they - and only they - revolutionized the render market by as early as the year 3000 a.d. with their truely-TM-revolutionary-TM-realworld-TM-younameit-technology elitary BS-talk, all wrong and misleading btw. Users don’t like that attitude and many have started to look elsewhere.

Also, both companies forgot to talk to their users and stagnated over the years. They’re so desparate that one of them tries to cannibalize the other now - disgusting, isn’t it?

Having said that, I should maybe add that I’m not even a regular Vray user but… From what I can tell, Chaosgroup always tried to be a bunch of polite people, caring about rendering technology, react to feature requests fast, providing excellent support, taking care of a good integration into host packages, adding current tech fast, having an eye on pipeline issues and solutions in general. And most important, not taking any opportunity to point out their leading role and dismiss other companies. Btw, I believe Vray in Max supports A&D materials out of the box now, and there are various converters.


[b]To the layman, there seems to be only one obvious render engine to purchase and that is VRay.

[/b]How did he get to that conclusion?
Shouldn’t he be more concerned about Redshift?


i did a comparison on the latest ligthing challenge with my four candiadtes i would use in production… and redshift isnt there yet…
its the most promising but to much is missing for me…


Redshift is most definitely there already…

…all you have to do is Post the rendertimes between these 4 engines as proof.


if “fast” is the thing you need go with redshift… yes…


Radeon Pro Render could be a strong contender ?


Its free. Its built by GPU maker AMD. It will come built into every version of C4D as standard from now on, the same way MentalRay was built into Max, Maya, XSI.

So yes, ProRender is strong contender.

Even if it doesn’t succeed brilliantly elsewhere, tens of thousands of C4D users will use it as their default renderer soon.


If “accuracy” is the standard, then Maxwell is the most accurate of all renderers…why isnt Maxwell the industry leader then?


cause everyone needs a different standard…


Yes, and the current standard for most is when they can replace their entire Farm with a single machine using Redshift, as many Shops have done.

…still waiting on those rendertimes from your comparison btw.


if thats the case they should jump on redshift…
its just not what we need at the moment…

i wont post rendertimes… if someone needs a comparison only for speed do it by yourself…n


V-Ray continues to release new great features, so for now at least their position at the top of the pile is well deserved. Resumable rendering and being able to render separate passes for user-defined groups of lights has done more to change my workflow than anything since progressive/interactive rendering. Speed of final render isn’t the end-all be-all. Speed to iterate, and produce roughs for review is way more important (at least for me) and for that it doesn’t matter if there’s a lot of noise. It just needs to be good enough to convey the lighting and materials without any major surprises when it does go to final. At that point, if I have to wait 12-36 hours for the final high resolution image, it’s not an issue. It would be different if I was doing animation, but for visualization, which is where V-Ray is most dominant, the math is different in my experience.


Ok it isn’t what you need at the moment, but it is what dozens of others need.
If you are up to huge racks full of dual xeon machines sucking power for rendering and cooling and also waiting hours per frame … then sure you don;t need redshift
If you want to get fantastic interaction during lookdev phase and also have couple render nodes replace 30-40 cpu render nodes… heheh

So why is the issue posting time per frame as well?
If you are offering comparison so it could even help someone decide why not giving full picture?
Oh yes render A is the best of all of them… (small print ofc you will need to plan couple months of rendering alone, and forgot about multiple versions, once it is on farm that is it no time for changes)


fast answer… i dont have time to bring them all at the same noise level…
throwing out some numbers wont help…

edit:: and i need directionality for area lights in redshift…
at the moment the lighting is a bad hack in the redshift scene…


hehe - honestly, this was the dead ringer for me - a comparison has already been done between those 4 renderers on a more difficult to clean Interior scene…and its not even close. You can render an Animation of the Interior scene with Redshift in the time it takes the other 3 engines to reach the Single Frame noise level of Redshift.


For crying out loud, Redshift is a one trick pony. It’s fast and that’s about it. Seems like nobody mentions the very very bad way of doing ambient occlusion AOV. I let it slide, but for those people who are so excited that is fast, do the following:
Make some nurbs objects, they can be pimitives, I don’t care. Render them with redshift. Is it possible? Of course not. While I understand the industry moved away from nurbs, there are situations were nurbs were the best solution. So from my point of view your fastest renderer alive is actually crippled from the start. Not to mention it lacks the flexibility a general purpose renderer should have.
So we all agree, it’s fast, we get you, ok? Some of us simply don’t care, because speed is not always a good measure of performance.
Most renderers are fast if the scene management is good. Granted, not as fast as a GPU renderer, but decent times in the hands of those who know their jobs. This is why not everybody is falling on their back when they hear “fast rendering”


if redshift takes care of 99% of production needs and do that much faster and better then others, who cares about nurbs or similar stuff that is never used.
Keep nurbs and render in hours, or convert them to poly and render in seconds hehehe
You are also pointing to your personal needs and that redshift is not good because of those.
Redshift users are also pointing same thing, it is best for our needs and honestly to the needs of most productions out there.
It is not JUST fast.
So you point one thing that is not supported properly and that majority of people are not even using… so what… keep using other renders but you can’t say that whole render engine is not good because it isn’t supporting one niche thing that doesn’t really matter much.

Finally… all those other renders are being developed for how many years now? Redshift just recently was in alpha… and look where is it now.

It is not point to start flame wars as it was asked at the start but doing comparison render and don’t showing numbers and admit that render speed is one of important parts of render engine… that is just silly. You can easily have all frames hand painted to the level of photo realism… it will take weeks for each frame but hey it looks great and there is nothing that painter can’t make, nothing is unsupported :slight_smile:
Hehehe render farm consisting of 100s of painters, painting frame by frame. Take that redshift! :slight_smile: