I'm no way an expert MR !
I'm doing very little jobs, with very small power in computing.
An image rarely exceed 5min to render.
I rarely go the photorealistic route (although sometimes I wish). Its
rather a mix of NPR and other tricks that makes the pic looks acceptable.
The classroom example here doesn't match my everyday reality.
45min ? I'd go nuts :)
BTW, what's your average render time per pic in production ? (I
understand it's pretty vague and may vary a lot)
Le 26/02/2013 10:22, Mirko Jankovic a écrit :
Hmm Arnold long way for production?
I'm not sure but from what I saw, having more predictable results with
faster tweaking times with Arnold is waaaaay more production ready
than anything with MRay.
Unless you are some king fo MRay genius ofc.
Experience of having to sit through whole rendering waiting if MRay
will crash on scene or not... ugh.. not something I would EVER wanna
get back to.
With Arnold if nothing else I'm sure that it will chew through
whatever is thrown to him.
But everyone got their own reasons and in any case happy rendering :)
On Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 10:17 AM, olivier jeannel
<[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
I'm quite the opposite.
I'm rather happy I can still use MR, even if it's rather slow if
you compare to LW renderer (as far as I remember).
MR is tweakable to death, and I can always manage to get my
definitive render to have a "decent" look at afordable time.
I do start Arnold from time to time, yes it produces much better
results but its still way to long for a production, specialy these
days when every body ask for 1080P.
Le 25/02/2013 20:31, Vladimir Jankijevic a écrit :
I think it's still worlds apart from anything that comes out of
Arnold and/or Maxwell. Yes I know it's only envAO, but still. I'd
rather let it render twice the time to have a
really beautiful render than have to fake all of the illumination
and get something like this.
Oh man, I'm so happy I'm not in Mental Land anymore...
On Mon, Feb 25, 2013 at 8:04 PM, Tim Leydecker <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Thanks for the hint to unified sampling!
Nice.
Here´s a mR unified sampling version with DOF.
*Switched to Gaussian (3) for Filtering.
*1/8/1/0.032 unified sampling settings...
*mia_lens_bokeh used 4 samples, should have been 6.
*global Ambient Occlusion Rays = 64, should have lived with
48 as before.
*mib_lens_clamp (0-1) added to get rid of some hard to filter
hotspots.
MacPro2008//2.8GHz//7cores rendering in low priority
' INFO : RC 0.10 info : rendering statistics
' INFO : RC 0.10 info : type number per eye ray
' INFO : RC 0.10 info : eye rays 15449600
1.00
' INFO : RC 0.10 info : reflection rays
61512093 3.98
' INFO : RC 0.10 info : refraction rays
1421904 0.09
' INFO : RC 0.10 info : shadow rays 4232441256
<tel:4232441256> 273.95
' INFO : RC 0.10 info : environment rays
3727286053 241.25
' INFO : RC 0.10 info : probe rays 3777812169
244.52
' INFO : RC 0.4 progr: rendering finished
' INFO : RC 0.4 info : wallclock 3:22:12.48 for rendering
I like the unified sampling, it is indeed easy to use and can
be a real speedimprovement!
The same image without DOF took ca. 45 minutes...
Cheers,
tim
On 25.02.2013 09 <tel:25.02.2013%2009>:58, Arvid Björn wrote:
It's pretty easy, and it will change everything. Dof
could even speed up your render due to the more clever
sampling scheme. I usually go with mia-bokeh, stopped
using post-dof
quite a while ago. Similar thing with motion blur, it's a
different game with unified sampling.
--
---------------------------------------
Vladimir Jankijevic
Technical Direction
Elefant Studios AG
Lessingstrasse 15
CH-8002 Zürich
+41 44 500 48 20 <tel:%2B41%2044%20500%2048%2020>
www.elefantstudios.ch <http://www.elefantstudios.ch>
---------------------------------------
