Here are just some more recent tests using Vray baking, you can see the problem with dark corners agains the wooden ceiling in the first image, the second image is with the brute force technique. The last image is using a dynamic spotlight and a dynamic point light for scattering, in Blender Game Engine.
Difference Between 3DS Max vs RhinoA commercial 3D computer graphics and computer-aided design(CAD) software are popularly known as Rhinoceros (Rhino). It was invented in 1980 by an American, secretly held, employee-owned company called Robert McNeel & Associates. Rhino generally comprises of NURBS mathematical model, whose aim is to produce a precise mathematical depiction of curves and freeform surfaces in computers graphics. Rhino has no limits on complexity, degree, or size in translating NURBS curves, surfaces, and solids. It is known for creating, editing, rendering and animating graphics.
The geometry created can also be exported to laser cutters, milling machines or 3D printers.A professional 3D computer graphics program used for making 3D animations, games, models, and images. It was released in the year 1996 and was created and produced by Autodesk Media and Entertainment. Is compatible with using 3DS Max.
3DS Max is a factory of tools and features and is perfect for interior architecture, industrial design, jewelry models, animation models, organic forms, etc. It is also used for movie effects and movie pre-visualization. In addition, for rendering like; Material Editor and V-Ray. Valuation, Hadoop, Excel, Mobile Apps, Web Development & many more.
Without the intention to sound offensive, the comparison points you mentioned between this two software are wrong, very wrong. That's not the way you compare two render engines, these software are way more than that, also there are plenty of tutorials, classes and training material for both render engines.
Arnold may sound new to you but it been for a while already.The main point for you should focus first is your target market, Arch Viz, industrial Viz, Motion graphics, FX? Depending on that then you can narrow your tools such render software.In a nut shell if you work at a small studio and only with do furniture rendering, then Arnold is out of the question. V-Ray may be a better choice, or Corona or any other render engine.If you do FX, well then Arnold may be your choice but even with that V-Ray may go a long run. Just to clarify here, you can use any render engine you can afford or please, really.My point was directed to trying to fit the best tool for the right job.Arnold is a very powerful raytracer, but it was designed originally with large productions demands in mind. With the purchased of Autodesk, we can have access to this engine now, and they are trying to make it more simplified to use.
But it is a 500-pound gorilla, not Enscape.VRay has a proved long-standing record for Visualization, hundreds of preset scenes shaders and others. For the speed of scene setup, it may be better to go with VRay.But again, to the original question, I thought they were no valid points to compare a render engine, a render engine should be valued by what it does, how it does it, what options it has, scalability, flexibility, market share, easy to exchange to collaborate with others, customisations, learning curve and many other factors.If you fancy Maya and Arnold, well that's your choice, good for you. If you rather work with Blender and Cycles, it is a good choice too.Diversity is a good thing.What is bad is not do your homework, choose a tool just because a Movie was made with it when in reality you only need it to do simple door renderings. It will be in your budget?? Or the learning curve will be the right for you?Besides, we all know that final quality is not 100% about the render engine. I am not saying it's out of the question.
Quite the opposite. One of the previous posts in this thread said it would be out of the question and that doesn't make any sense to me either. It is a standard photo realistic rendering engine used by the entire film industry. Photorealism is the name of the game when it comes to architectural rendering. So far Arnold is extremely easy to use. It was designed with the artist in mind rather than having to be a programmer to understand things like final gather.Personally the only reason I am going to learn v-ray is because so many architectural firms use it.
So I'm just confirming. But I think overtime more will start to use Arnold. I used Vray for 3 years before switching to Arnold. Arnold has more intuitive render settings (16 AA, 1 Diffuse, 1 Spec, 1 Transmission) versus assigning samples to each material separately in Vray, and then trying to wrangle the DMC engine.There’s no flickering or render glitches in Arnold, and no need to cache BS stuff like photons or light cache. Plus the materials in Arnold are vastly simpler and more realistic than any other renderer. The new Random Walk SSS will make your characters look insanely good, and the car paint shader is just bonkers.The Russian Roulette makes high Ray depth surprisingly fast to render, and it’s linear workflow by default. I used Arnold as a freelance animator and just creamed the competition.
Now that I work on staff and migrated my company over to Arnold, we’re doing incredible work with just a few dual Xeon PCs.Buy Arnold. Oh, and get 64GB of ram for your Xeons and skip the Nvidia Quadros.
The GTX 1070 is way faster for apps like Maya and Houdini. Just to clarify things a little, you can choose the render engine you feel more comfortable.But some comments here are not correct. Arnold is based on Brute force approach to calculating raytracing images, the same method is been in V-Ray from day one. It has the most efficient rendering, and is actually Noise Freefor anything in Direct Light.
So far I know that Vray seems to be the most difficult, I am used to Keyshot but it is very limited when it comes to rendering 3d environments with high polys. Vray is used a lot but I have heard time and time again it has a very steep learning curve. I am unsure about which of the other engines would have a similar interface to key shot. The one that seems the easiest is corona since it goes off of natural light settings which is all I really need to look for. Here is the breakdown I have so far:VRAY-highest qualityCorona-easiest to useRedshift-scalabilityOctane-swiss army knifeArnold-photorealism and easy to useAnyone correct me if they disagree with these short analysis.
This is what I gathered from the company websites, they would know themselves best and all seem to have their little niche in the market.Thank you for the info on Arnold, it seems to be a great engine: easy to use but very versatile as well. That is definitely one of my top picks right now, it seems to be going places! As mentioned earlier, for V-Ray or any other raytracer engine that is using some way of brute force system. The most important controls are Number of samples and Noise threshold. The more samples the better, the noise threshold will control how many of the total samples the system will use.V-Ray is an old render engine (technology time) there are millions of tutorials online, most of them are from the old era of V-Ray, I've seen some tutorials from VRay 1.5. In that case, from that time, yes V-Ray was overwhelming, because it was designed to be flexible, a swiss army knife.
Same thing with Arnold, the first version aren't simple to use, same for the Mental Ray or Fry and Maxell render, even Octane render, by no mean is a Artis friendly interface.