39
« on: 2018-04-20, 01:14:28 »
The article from the Redshift guys was very interesting, it feels as if we are approaching a crossroad in the market. It can't be easy positioning a product like Corona on a 2-3 year outlook with all this market chatter and noise. I think it is a general impression that real-time alternatives are progressing faster than traditional render engines, and not only due to hardware.
Enscape for Revit is an incredibly automatic solution compared to anything I've seen so far, and although I personally dislike Lumion's workflow it too can generate decent imagery close to real-time. The Redshift guy seems to argue that real-time such as Unreal/Nvidia RTX is faster because they don't have to consider extensive code support for heavy render algoritms. Blender's Evee is further complicating the landscape by offering a real-time modeling environment, and then supposedly a similar in end result renderer in Cycles, when you want to squeeze out extra quality.
This makes me worried about the approach by Chaos/Corona. VrayRT seems to be a Vray offer for GPU but still uncompromising and therefore not that real-time, and Corona seems to reject the whole GPU trend altogether.
If 3ds Max would announce something like Evee, with the option to render and bake in Vray or Corona, I would be fine but right now I'm wondering what the value proposition is in 3 years when some of the things we've seen in Evee/Unreal is more than good enough for 99% of the architectural market. Our clients want VR today, not tomorrow.