Nox Render, a new free renderer


#1

Nox Renderer is a rendering software based on unbiased methods.

Development is currently in beta stage.

Nox is a free software, even for comercial purposes…

i found interesting

www.noxrender.com


#2

it must be pretty easy to code unbiased render engines, as there are already more new unbiased engines than biased ones.

but looks quite nice.

thx for the link


#3

makes sense. biased ones have to do a bunch of tricks to achieve a realistic look, while a physical engine’s units and techniques are mostly based on established parameters from the real world


#4

is it just the beta that will be free, or will the final version also be free?


#5

hm anyone else having problems with the download page?


#6

“Please log in to the site to download NOX Renderer”


#7

This has nothing to do whatsoever with real-world parameters. Biased renderers are based on exactly the same assumptions and in any case most of them can be put into “unbiased” mode. It is simply very easy to code an unbiased engine. Students write these for computer graphics courses at university. There are a number of open-source engines to get you started. Even Intel released a full unbiased path tracer together with its source code. Anyone who knows a bit of coding, can get a basic unbiased engine out in 2 months. To implement a (good) biased renderer, on the other hand, requires quite a bit more resourcefulness.

Best regards,
Vlado


#8

it seems so, you can do one even in softimage ICE lol

http://vimeo.com/20652466


#9

Exactly. It’s very easy to build a noisy grainy path tracer, whereas tweaking the subtleties of an irradiance cached renderer or a photon mapper can take much longer.
Remember, step 1 of writing a biased renderer is writing an unbiased renderer. You can’t build a photon mapper until you write working path tracer first.

Two things that caused the popularity of path tracers these days are the PBRT book and cheap multicore CPUs. They’ve made writing a usable render engine easier than ever before.


#10

I seem to remember that it has been in the works for quite some time, and has always been intended to be free for commercial use.


#11

I played with NOX yesterday for a bit and really like the handling of post work, DOF, Exposure, Light Passes, etc. Integrates pretty easily into Max for an early Beta. I would note that the renders are watermarked which is why I would call this a Beta Trial with no time limit, not “Free”. I plan on doing some comparisons with Maxwell regarding speed and output when I get a chance. Oh also there is a rather in-depth section in the NOX Manual on memory consumption, optimization etc. which is very handy.


#12

NOX! i have a NOX Carbon Mountian Bike “made in Berlin”.

http://www.noxcycles.com/

and here my Bike:

Sorry… :beer:


#13

I assume this Nox bike was rendered with Nox Renderer :smiley:


#14

It seems cool. Not supporting atleast bump mapping was a too bad. But I thought it’s bloom/glare and DOF stuff was pretty original.

The materials seem maxwellish, which is fine. I think I’ve just grown to really love the vray materials. It’s so simple to get what you want.


#15

the website is so incredibly slow, I’ve tried viewing the gallery like 5 times already at different time of the day and I can’t get past the first image…


#16

This is only true if you stick to the simplest algorithm: Path tracer. It becomes hell of a lot more complicated if you try to get some sophisticated sampling algorithms to cut down the rendering times which you will need pretty soon for example if you are thinking about using a Bidirectional Pathtracer. And it gets a hell of a lot more complex if you go even for Metropolis path strategies. There are nearly any MLT based unbiased rendering engines (either commerical or non-commercial) out there in the wild. So two months my ass!


#17

Wow relax man, he said ‘basic’ unbiased engine.


#18

Any videos available?


#19

I did write “path tracer”, didn’t I :wink:
I don’t think anyone would claim that writing a MLT renderer is a cakewalk, at least no one who has tried to do so. But this whole “unbiased” thing is way overblown, there’s no inherent achievement in writing an unbiased renderer over a biased one. I consider the whole point of biased vs unbiased moot anyway, since models built from flat triangles with phong interpolated normals with their surface properties represented by finite resolution square pixels is already such a gross approximation of reality that it’s almost absurd to be obsessed with the bias discussion. Rendering anything with bump maps and RGB colors is already so far detached from reality that it’s not going to become “physically accurate” just by shoving it through the right render engine.

In production, all that counts is how good it looks and how long it takes me to get there.

The fine details of how QMC sampling or mip maps introduce bias is something for those of us who optimize with SSE prefetch instructions in their spare time, but the other 99.99% of the world couldn’t (and shouldn’t) care.

I haven’t had a chance to play with Nox yet, but from the screenshots, it does look like many months of full time work (UI doesn’t write itself either) and I wish the authors a lot of success and fun.


#20

Looks promising :slight_smile: I might check it out later.

Cobra 6