Chaos Corona Forum
Official Stuff => News => Topic started by: Ondra on 2014-06-29, 23:24:56
-
Rawalanche was so kind to release his scene used for the Corona A4 benchmark (https://forum.corona-renderer.com/index.php/topic,559) in original .max format. It is a small, nice example of complete scene, ready to render with Corona.
(http://i.imgur.com/nVTUmmp.jpg)
You can download it here: https://download.corona-renderer.com/sample_scene.zip. You will notice that the render settings are left to defaults except for exposure, as there is really no need to change anything to get nice renders ;).
NOTE: since the settings, lighting, and materials are slightly different between this scene and the one featured in the A4 benchmark scene, there is no point in comparing the results or rendering performance directly between the A4 benchmark and this scene.
Licence: Permission is granted to use the scene for personal learning purposes. It is strictly forbidden to sell the scene or any of its parts, or to claim the scene or its renders as own. Name of the original author (Ludvik Koutny) must be attached to any renders of the original or modified scene.
-
up ;)
-
Max 2012 x64. File Open Failed. Anyone else?
PS Congratulations with new Alpha!
-
Finally a way to check the actual performance difference for various CPU's! Thank you very much! ^_^
-
failed to open!!! 3d max 2012 x64 :(
-
Keymaster some weird problem ....is it not compatible with A6 &2014????
(http://s28.postimg.org/pan13338t/problem_Image.jpg)
-
Same here, 2012 does not work
-
No, it is compatible with A7 only
-
Is this means that scenes, created with A7, isn't backward compatible with previous versions?
-
No, it is compatible with A7 only
Ok waiting for A7 .........................!!
-
romullus: I did not test for backwards compatibility. In some cases it is probably not possible. But there is no reason why to use A6 now ;)
No, it is compatible with A7 only
Ok waiting for A7 .........................!!
https://download.corona-renderer.com/a7.html
-
romullus: I did not test for backwards compatibility. In some cases it is probably not possible. But there is no reason why to use A6 now ;)
No, it is compatible with A7 only
Ok waiting for A7 .........................!!
https://download.corona-renderer.com/a7.html
A BIG THANKS SRI Keymaster
(sri is sir in India its more than that)
-
Thanks for shared scene!
I've done a test render and noticed that picture rendered with alpha7 (100 passes) is more noisy compare to the picture I've got from Corona Alpha4 benchmark scene. A7 did same 100 passes a bit faster. I've tried to render it with the same time as Alpha4 benchmark rendered 100 passes, but the picture is still more noisy. Should it be so?
-
Same problem on 3ds Max 2012 x64 , can't open scene.
-
Thanks for shared scene!
I've done a test render and noticed that picture rendered with alpha7 (100 passes) is more noisy compare to the picture I've got from Corona Alpha4 benchmark scene. A7 did same 100 passes a bit faster. I've tried to render it with the same time as Alpha4 benchmark rendered 100 passes, but the picture is still more noisy. Should it be so?
Are you comparing to the benchmark (standalone corona)? Because not everything can be exported to the standalone, so the scenes can differ. The benchmark was also more optimized (for example portals were given higher sampling weight). This is not done by default so it is robust (and the A7 version uses defaults to demonstrate the point that you DONT need to change any settings ;)).
-
Same problem on 3ds Max 2012 x64 , can't open scene.
I'm uploading an updated version saved for max 2011
-
Thanks for shared scene!
I've done a test render and noticed that picture rendered with alpha7 (100 passes) is more noisy compare to the picture I've got from Corona Alpha4 benchmark scene. A7 did same 100 passes a bit faster. I've tried to render it with the same time as Alpha4 benchmark rendered 100 passes, but the picture is still more noisy. Should it be so?
Are you comparing to the benchmark (standalone corona)? Because not everything can be exported to the standalone, so the scenes can differ. The benchmark was also more optimized (for example portals were given higher sampling weight). This is not done by default so it is robust (and the A7 version uses defaults to demonstrate the point that you DONT need to change any settings ;)).
Thanks for your answer!)
-
not working
-
still
-
Is there anybody else with max 2011 that can confirm if it works or not? Here it opens fine
-
download http://corona-renderer.com/stuff/sample_scene.zip. Result : error. 404: Page Not Found. Please fix download link
-
ok, now I know why it probably did not work for some people ;) the link in the first post was wrong, it was to an older version that was eventually removed. I've fixed it.
-
Very well!
-
I opened the scene in max 2013 and saved in 2011, it's attach here. And my test in max 2014! :)
-
Hello,
this is my test:
-
Hello!
Here is my test:
i7-4930K - 05:59
-
I of course can not understand something, but in my opinion everything became much worse... :(
A4 bench
(http://s7.hostingkartinok.com/uploads/images/2014/09/d280104ee562bf44a5ee10580502427b.jpg)
Build timestamp: Sep 8 2014
(http://s7.hostingkartinok.com/uploads/images/2014/09/97c5ac133f5032ac57732df5f942efb4.jpg)
gif
(http://s7.hostingkartinok.com/uploads/images/2014/09/819bf4cbd1b89d861816a71ba5030d03.gif)
-
Are you comparing exactly the same scene? There are bound to be some differences, because from A4 released 1.5 years ago, a lot have changed. I have tried to keep the shading similar, but some changes did happen. If you just take a scene fine-tuned for A4, it will not look as good in A7, but you should be able to achieve the same look if you made the scene from scratch in A7.
BTW: The scene in benchmark is not the same as .max, the .max has all settings reset to demonstrate that you dont need to change anything, so there is different color mapping
-
*Nevermind, wrong thread - thought it was the benchmark one. My mistake.
-
It's obvious that in the new build, secondary GI does not work. You can see there is just first GI bounce... That's why it's so slow. It's just a bug. Ondra has changed so many things recently it will take at least few weeks to stabilize everything back.
-
Are you comparing exactly the same scene?
A4 result - from "A4 benchmark"
Build timestamp: Sep 8 2014 result - from this thread. I opened file and click render butoon.
I don't know precisely, than two scenes can differ. But absolutely not incorrect global illumination, a noisiness and, as a result, the increased time - me confused.
If it is only temporal, I will wait and trust =)
I began to panic because to release not and long it was necessary to wait. And "regress" as it seemed to me, was strongly expressed.
-
Build timestamp: Aug 6 2014 - working fine, only 09/07 - have a bug with SecGI(but! working fine with HDRI lighting).
https://www.dropbox.com/sh/g4qz1fh98mycjg6/AADYLXbvXE6w6trSU2lSPnaga?dl=0 (https://www.dropbox.com/sh/g4qz1fh98mycjg6/AADYLXbvXE6w6trSU2lSPnaga?dl=0)
Testing: same scene ("max" edition) in all versions, no reset, no change any parameters
-
ok, there was a weird bug. In some of builds it did nothing, in others it made the scene brighter, in others darker (like the one I released as daily build). It is fixed now.
-
OCTANE and CORONA comparison
Hi! I take the scene and converted to Octane Render, so I can compare the quality and speed of the two renderers.
(http://i60.tinypic.com/219b33n.jpg)
They are some differences but they are because the values for specular/ glossiness and reflection are very different in Octane.
I had some problem with the portal, because with the version of Octane I have can't change the environment when use the Sun.
In render time it's 3 time faster with a gtx 590 in Octane than a i7 2600k in Corona to get similar image quality with the same amount of noise.
In Octane I used Pathtracing with a maxdepth of 1024 to be totally unbiased, but i can get the same quality with faster render times with a maxdepth of 8 or 10.
-
Can you post your render times and do the Octane test with a 21 ray depth?
Cheers.
-
Can you post your render times and do the Octane test with a 21 ray depth?
Cheers.
Why 21 ray depth? Where you get that number? In my experience with Octane go further than 16 doesn't make any difference. I had renderer water and fruits with 16 max depth and don't have any clamp on the reflections.. So, 21 doesn't make any sense for me... If I want to be sure I go for 1024 that take the same time to render than 21.
-
Yeah, matching ray depth is completely irrelevant, as long as ray depth is larger than what Corona uses. And even if it wasn't, anything above 8 does not make very big difference.
Anyway, sure Octane is fast, but you are still comparing very expensive GPU with monstrous power consumption and quite restricting memory limitation to quite cheap CPU with moderate power consumption.
-
Yeah, matching ray depth is completely irrelevant, as long as ray depth is larger than what Corona uses. And even if it wasn't, anything above 8 does not make very big difference.
Anyway, sure Octane is fast, but you are still comparing very expensive GPU with monstrous power consumption and quite restricting memory limitation to quite cheap CPU with moderate power consumption.
The intention of my post wasn't to compare which renderer was the fastest, but to compare the render quality.. I think they are pretty close.
I don't know why you talk about the cost and the power consumption. Who cares? You are not buying a Lamborghini... It's only a few bucks less or more.
I like Corona Render very much.
But as an art director, Actually I prefer Octane because have instant preview and can make a lot of changes very fast to get the style I'm looking for. And that time is much more valuable for me than the final render time.
I can spend a lot of money on a computer or send my Corona renders to a render farm.. but I will not get instant preview anyway.
-
...but I will not get instant preview anyway.
You will...
(http://i1257.photobucket.com/albums/ii503/johncmolyneux/soon-horse.jpg)
-
(http://joxi.ru/Y82QDX9VIjJJmd.png?d=)
-
My test
How long should I wait to get the results in your gallery?
-
Do I use the Obj File to load in Max. Obj is the only one that makes sense to me.
Thanks
-
For maybe someone like me, who interested with some old AMD CPU speed with this...
Phenom II X6 1100T
Time: 0:12:26
-
Just tried this out in Max 2016 on my 12 core Xeon v3 using the UHD cache for the secondary bounches (as opposed to the old HD Cache). Result is 3 minutes 17 seconds.
-
Just tried this out in Max 2016 on my 12 core Xeon v3 using the UHD cache for the secondary bounches (as opposed to the old HD Cache). Result is 3 minutes 17 seconds.
Same max, same Xeon = time 03:03
-
Hi,
Possible to have this scene in OBJ or in C4D... to check in my Mac Pro...!!!
Thanks.
...
-
Possible to have this scene in OBJ or in C4D... to check in my Mac Pro...!!!
You can get free C4D scenes at https://corona-renderer.com/resources/models