Vray vs Cororna Renderer


#1

I don’t know if this is discussed before I searched and didn’t find the topic between these two render engines

No doubt Vray is great production proven renderer and is very reliable and has a great performance and quality.

but recently I have seen this battle of “Biased vs Unbiased” and people trying these unbiased Physically based render engines, many who are Vray users for years may like them in first look because they have been looking at vray GI for years and sometimes it may feel boring to work with same setup. but not only that I have seen good GI details in CORONA and some other unbiased render engines but they are fast to setup as well with no tweaking of setting.

Vray recently introduced the the Progressive Path tracing algorithm in Vray (which is sort of unbiased feature). but I am not that impressed with it as compared to these unbiased renderers with no setup time.

Both Biased and unbiased techniques have there strength and weakness but do you guys think Vray needs to improve on this area? (not talking about RT here) or is there already a workaround this, I like the Vray dev team as they are the fastest to implement the new technologies. but I also like the corona and its dev team but they are very new, I have tried the Alpha V6 and is great.


#2

Without getting into a “this engine is better than that” type of thing, many users will find that Corona works well for their type of work; as with everything, try it out and if you find that it works for you, by all means use it.

Best regards,
Vlado


#3

Vlado is too modest… :wink:

Corona seems to be really amazing, and very fast set up to get some nice photorealistic images. The speed at which you see your first pixels popping up is also second to none! I’m really looking forward to see where its going

Vray on the other hand is a lot more mature as a renderer, its saved my ass on production more times than I can count, and rendered things that other renderers choked on time after time. Because its been around for longer, you will find a lot more solutions for the problems that you encounter, because invariably someone has already had the same problem, and chaos group has implemented a solution.

Also - Matting as an object property :applause:


#4

Also allot of ppl say corona renders so fast but in my experience its just an illusion because the incremental renderer updates fast but final rendertimes are still faster in vray (in my opinion!)


#5

download.3daily.de/Download/vray_14min.jpg
download.3daily.de/Download/Corona_42min.jpg

i made a test with an identical scene to compare the speed between corona and vray.
I tested many different vray settings to get the best speed/quality result.

for me vray is still the better choice because i can optimize many settings to get the best result.
But corona is easy to setup and you get very fast a nice looking image...if you have enough time and power ;)

#6

Hi !

On your image vray is interesting in time of render less noise i think … and glasses on the table looks realistic, more thane corona but maybe it’s just IOR who changed…

And on the corona you’ve got really nice reflections on objects and GI that you don’t get in the Vray Img, it looks like if there is no environment strange !

I tried Corona too and I agree with CHRiTTeR you can see in first time quickly than vray but at the end vray is maybe faster than corona less noisy and more beautifull sometimes but guys are able to do beautifull images with Corona and it up fast so, follow !

Sorry for my bad English …


#7

download.3daily.de/Download/test_006_15min.jpg

sorry think that was the right version…you can now see the reflections too :slight_smile:

i agree with you, in corona its a bit easier to get a nice looking image after some clicks…


#8

Ah !!!

Strange on the floor on the right Corona versionmaybe bump or something like that …

for Vray this time this is much better ! with a litle postprod it will be perfect but i think your sun on the couch is maybe too hard for a post-production but i don’t know try it :wink:

which is unfortunate on the Vray render is that you lost reflection in picture frames i don’t know why ??


#9

I am more concerned by the light leak in the vray image behind the light fixture.

-Eric


#10

I use VRay at work and have started using Corona at home for personal stuff. So far I’m pretty pleased with Corona, it reminds me of a simplified brute force version of vray. Corona might be a bit faster but honestly it doesn’t seem to be a huge difference when using progressive rendering with vray. But of course the biggest benefit is you can still download the corona alpha build for free and pay nothing whereas you have to pay for V-Ray, so there you go :wink: I’d say also that I guess a big difference between the two, like you said, is that vray has been around for a long time and is good at integrating new tech whereas who knows if Corona is going to be around in 2 years and could get Splutterfished :-D. If this is just for personal projects I’d go with Corona cuz it’s free and good, if this is to build a pipeline in a company or group of people, I’d go with VRay, much more fully fleshed out.


#11

Vlado, since you’re here, this reminds me: In Corona you can output gbuffer passes like rgb masks and zdepth almost instantly w/o having to render the beauty passes. I think this would make a great vray option. It sucks to have to fix masks or those technical passes and spending time rendering the beauty pass. I know I could probably use scanline or modify my scene, just a thought that I liked about Corona.


#12

Rendering with an override material and lighting+GI disabled will give you very fast access to g-buffer channels without having to render a full-fledged beauty.


#13

is corona vor Animation useful. Rendertime? The Images in this post Vray or Corona is not working for a Animation. Vray GI Settings to low, you see artefact, and Corona Looks to grainy and many Highlight Errors, possible it´s the Artist.

But if i see only the two Images. i prefer vray, that need only better GI Settings and more contrast in the post.


#14

I love these VS threads. Try both of these renderers and use whichever you liked more.

      I would say if you're lazy, want fast results with the fewest clicks possible and have [b]a lot[/b] of rendering power to spare, then use Corona. If you want to have the most flexibility on your fingetrips and don't care if you spend a bit more time on tweaking, go for Vray. For me it's like this:
      
      [u][b]CORONA:[/b][/u]
      [b]pros:[/b] easy to use if you like one-click solutions, a bit cheaper than Vray, you get a bit more realistic lighting simulation out of the box
      [b]cons:[/b] still not mature enough, requires [b]a lot[/b] of rendering power to get "clean" renders in reasonable amounts of time, not animation-friendly. Also, since it's intention is to emulate real-world lighting as closely as possible, it's sometimes hard to fake certain things in order to create more "abstract" or task-specific renders.
      
      [u][b]VRAY:[/b][/u]
      [b]pros:[/b] industry-leading and proven in production, much more mature, large team of developers, animation-friendly and equally as important - an outstanding customer support. You can also pull off a lot of "fakes" which has saved my @ss on numerous occasions.
      [b]cons:[/b] a lot of parameters to fiddle with, requires a bit more knowledge to operate it at full potential, more expensive (in this case though you really get what you're paying for - an outstanding piece of software).
      
      I personally have tried Corona (the last free alpha version) and liked the way you can get good looking results with fewer clicks. I've even used it in production on 3 real projects and was very satisfied with the results. However, I had to wait a lot longer in order to get the renderings to a clean noiseless state.
      
      I am going to continue using Vray since I already own it, my pipeline relies on it, and I still don't see Corona offering something that Vray doesn't. If at some point it gets more features than Vray, starts making noiseless renders in less time than Vray and on top of that it remains affordable, I might consider using it.

#15

I did a couple animations with it, worked fine. YOu can use brute force secondary so all you get is noise, or precalc your GI and use the precalc cache. Set up is pretty similar to VRay, same ideas. What Sasho said pretty much.


#16

I would also know how good is corona for animations?!?


#17

Then why don’t you try it? There’s 45 day trial. :curious:


#18

And that’s enough time to render a whole 45 frames long animation!

(i kid i kid!)


#19

I use Corona quite a lot for animation, pleasure to work with, fast and no flickering etc. Here’s a funny one I did some time ago: https://youtu.be/nIakNPGkoX0


#20

Cool animation !
Did you use Populate to animate the stadium crowds by the way ? :stuck_out_tongue: