arnold or redshift? h18
39647 97 5-
- druitre
- Member
- 65 posts
- Joined: May 2006
- Offline
-
- mandrake0
- Member
- 649 posts
- Joined: June 2006
- Offline
goatDaryl Dunlap
GPU is the future for Production render engines
I don't know of any production using non-biased rendering that finishes on the GPU. Everyone uses CPU to render final quality, as it scales and the renderer is fully featured. Please let us know if this is incorrect.
In the advertisment market yes in the movie industry no but coming. That is what i have heard…
-
- anon_user_37409885
- Member
- 4189 posts
- Joined: June 2012
- Offline
-
- druitre
- Member
- 65 posts
- Joined: May 2006
- Offline
-
- anon_user_37409885
- Member
- 4189 posts
- Joined: June 2012
- Offline
-
- Werner Ziemerink
- Member
- 1268 posts
- Joined: March 2014
- Offline
-
- chrism
- Staff
- 2562 posts
- Joined: Sept. 2007
- Offline
Who could have forseen that a forum post along the lines of ‘should I use product X or product Y’ could have gone badly? Those usually go so well…
Reminder: Please keep it civil if you don't want your lively debate to get locked down. Lookin' at you, Daryl.
Just to clarify: SideFX and Redshift (and other renderers as well) have a friendly partnership. We work well together and support each others efforts. Juanjo and I aren't meeting up for tea and crumpets on the daily and we don't share code but I do e-mail him once a month when we update our production build and they try to sync up on that when they do their next release. Syncing up on production builds is as good as we've got right now.

Reminder: Please keep it civil if you don't want your lively debate to get locked down. Lookin' at you, Daryl.
Just to clarify: SideFX and Redshift (and other renderers as well) have a friendly partnership. We work well together and support each others efforts. Juanjo and I aren't meeting up for tea and crumpets on the daily and we don't share code but I do e-mail him once a month when we update our production build and they try to sync up on that when they do their next release. Syncing up on production builds is as good as we've got right now.
Chris McSpurren
Senior Quality Assurance Specialist
SideFX
Senior Quality Assurance Specialist
SideFX
-
- Midphase
- Member
- 833 posts
- Joined: Jan. 2018
- Offline
Werner Ziemerink
I must be the only person earth that do not like Redshift. The speed is great, but I am not sold on the quality.
There is definitely a “look” issue that I believe the RS team is aware of themselves (and have publicly acknowledged to some degree).
At the moment, the closest equivalent to CPU images that GPU renderers seem to be able to achieve is probably Octane who for some reason has gotten really maligned, perhaps unfairly so.
Is this all because of the biased vs. unbiased? I don't think so, although that's probably part of it. I feel the big elephant in the room that nobody is talking about is that GPU rendering requires workarounds and cheats that are inherent with the technology and which, at least for the time being, are simply not on par with the CPU equivalents. A good case-in-point is the overly-hyped RT ray-tracing that Nvidia RTX GPU's promise. Many people bought into it as providing the equivalent of CPU renders, except in real-time. The truth is that it doesn't, it relies on an extremely low sample count to extrapolate visual information that normally requires a lot more rays being cast. GPU rendering of course is different than RT, and considerably more refined, but still heavily reliant on workarounds in order to achieve what it does.
Ultimately what is production-acceptable or isn't depends on the needs of the production. I have seen extremely believable work done in RT engines, and I have seen extremely crappy and unrealistic renders done with Arnold. I think a lot depends on who is driving!
Here's one of the most impressive examples done with RT tech that I have seen, in this case EEVEE:
https://youtu.be/qG31WSioSxk [youtu.be]
But…Ian is a big fan of texture projection, and I suspect that he's using that technique extensively in this video. I doubt that something like this would work when a massive amount of polygons are needed.
>>Kays
For my Houdini tutorials and more visit:
https://www.youtube.com/c/RightBrainedTutorials [www.youtube.com]
For my Houdini tutorials and more visit:
https://www.youtube.com/c/RightBrainedTutorials [www.youtube.com]
-
- jarenas
- Member
- 146 posts
- Joined: Jan. 2018
- Offline
MidphaseWerner Ziemerink
I must be the only person earth that do not like Redshift. The speed is great, but I am not sold on the quality.
There is definitely a “look” issue that I believe the RS team is aware of themselves (and have publicly acknowledged to some degree).
At the moment, the closest equivalent to CPU images that GPU renderers seem to be able to achieve is probably Octane who for some reason has gotten really maligned, perhaps unfairly so.
Is this all because of the biased vs. unbiased? I don't think so, although that's probably part of it. I feel the big elephant in the room that nobody is talking about is that GPU rendering requires workarounds and cheats that are inherent with the technology and which, at least for the time being, are simply not on par with the CPU equivalents. A good case-in-point is the overly-hyped RT ray-tracing that Nvidia RTX GPU's promise. Many people bought into it as providing the equivalent of CPU renders, except in real-time. The truth is that it doesn't, it relies on an extremely low sample count to extrapolate visual information that normally requires a lot more rays being cast. GPU rendering of course is different than RT, and considerably more refined, but still heavily reliant on workarounds in order to achieve what it does.
Ultimately what is production-acceptable or isn't depends on the needs of the production. I have seen extremely believable work done in RT engines, and I have seen extremely crappy and unrealistic renders done with Arnold. I think a lot depends on who is driving!
Here's one of the most impressive examples done with RT tech that I have seen, in this case EEVEE:
https://youtu.be/qG31WSioSxk [youtu.be]
But…Ian is a big fan of texture projection, and I suspect that he's using that technique extensively in this video. I doubt that something like this would work when a massive amount of polygons are needed.
And yet, although impressive results for the tech used, to my (admittedly trained eye), it looks like 10-15 years behind what offline rendering offers…
-
- Midphase
- Member
- 833 posts
- Joined: Jan. 2018
- Offline
jarenas
And yet, although impressive results for the tech used, to my (admittedly trained eye), it looks like 10-15 years behind what offline rendering offers…
Of course, but it depends on what your needs are. For instance, if you're using something like EEVEE or UE to render some spaceships that fly off in the distance and are only on screen for a few seconds, that quality discrepancy might not really matter that much.
Having watched and studied Quixel's Rebirth short film, I think that some landscapes can work just fine as a RT render, while things like interiors (conspicuously absent in both Rebirth and Dynamo Dream) can be considerably tougher to sell due to their heavy dependency on accurate shadows, reflections and global illumination.
We have to remember that VFX are for the most part smoke and mirror magic tricks. The technology that we currently herald as state of the art will look downright cheesy to our eyes in a decade or so.
>>Kays
For my Houdini tutorials and more visit:
https://www.youtube.com/c/RightBrainedTutorials [www.youtube.com]
For my Houdini tutorials and more visit:
https://www.youtube.com/c/RightBrainedTutorials [www.youtube.com]
-
- anon_user_37409885
- Member
- 4189 posts
- Joined: June 2012
- Offline
-
- Midphase
- Member
- 833 posts
- Joined: Jan. 2018
- Offline
Call me crazy, but I'd rather go by how the renders look. Out of all the GPU renders at the moment, Octane wins hands down in that department. As far as CPU renders are concerned, I'd split it between Arnold and Vray.
I have no idea if any of them are integer renderers.
I have no idea if any of them are integer renderers.
>>Kays
For my Houdini tutorials and more visit:
https://www.youtube.com/c/RightBrainedTutorials [www.youtube.com]
For my Houdini tutorials and more visit:
https://www.youtube.com/c/RightBrainedTutorials [www.youtube.com]
-
- BrianHanke
- Member
- 452 posts
- Joined: April 2018
- Offline
Midphase
Octane wins hands down
Octane is great! Been using it for years in C4D and Houdini.
Subscribe to my Patreon for the best CG tips, tricks and tutorials! https://patreon.com/bhgc [patreon.com]
Twitter: https://twitter.com/brianhanke [twitter.com]
Behance: https://www.behance.net/brianhanke/projects [www.behance.net]
Twitter: https://twitter.com/brianhanke [twitter.com]
Behance: https://www.behance.net/brianhanke/projects [www.behance.net]
-
- mandrake0
- Member
- 649 posts
- Joined: June 2006
- Offline
-
- TwinSnakes007
- Member
- 649 posts
- Joined: July 2013
- Offline
Since I “modified” my post….I thougtht I'd get back to sharing…
https://www.facebook.com/ayman.abolilaa/videos/692503571485752/ [www.facebook.com]
https://www.facebook.com/ayman.abolilaa/videos/692503571485752/ [www.facebook.com]
Hi, I need to tell how I amazed about redshift as it fast and beautiful. I get same exact render from that simulation I did and rendered with mantra inside of houdini, here is the link of mantra version : https://vimeo.com/398311316 [vimeo.com]
Houdini Indie
Karma/Redshift 3D
Karma/Redshift 3D
-
- anon_user_89151269
- Member
- 1755 posts
- Joined: March 2014
- Offline
the Mantra version looks more realistic imo - the light reflected on the fence from the lightning arcs is much more believable. albeit, the quality of the video is worse, but I'm not sure whether it's due to vimeo's encoding or the sequence being rendered at a lower res to compensate for the slower Mantra's rendering speed.
either way, the statement “I get same exact render from that simulation” is, I think, false.
either way, the statement “I get same exact render from that simulation” is, I think, false.
Edited by anon_user_89151269 - March 18, 2020 16:24:16
-
- anon_user_37409885
- Member
- 4189 posts
- Joined: June 2012
- Offline
@Daryl - thanks for sharing these posts, but in reality they represent hobby projects and don't show the GPU as a replacement for CPU renderers.
It would be great if you could link to the very best GPU rendering example you know of. We can then compare it to all the Hollywood work that is rendered on CPUs. That is what we class as a Production renderer. Thank you!
It would be great if you could link to the very best GPU rendering example you know of. We can then compare it to all the Hollywood work that is rendered on CPUs. That is what we class as a Production renderer. Thank you!
-
- TwinSnakes007
- Member
- 649 posts
- Joined: July 2013
- Offline
-
- anon_user_89151269
- Member
- 1755 posts
- Joined: March 2014
- Offline
-
- anon_user_89151269
- Member
- 1755 posts
- Joined: March 2014
- Offline
in the spirit of separating the wheat from the chaff - one doesn't even need a big production scenario. in your posted example, Mantra realistically evaluates the lighting solution, while RS, doesn't.
light from lightning is a lot brighter than that from sparks, yet in the RS render it doesn't seem to be the case.
it might be user error, I don't know, but please don't pretend that it's not real.
I'm being genuinely puzzled, I don't presume any bad faith from your part…
light from lightning is a lot brighter than that from sparks, yet in the RS render it doesn't seem to be the case.
it might be user error, I don't know, but please don't pretend that it's not real.
I'm being genuinely puzzled, I don't presume any bad faith from your part…
-
- Quick Links