Messages

1

[C4D] General Discussion / Re: Very very slow development of new version of Corona, why?

« on: 2023-08-30, 01:06:34 »

I don't know of any other survey at this scale. It does say a lot.
I do feel it aligns with the situation in The Netherlands. Most studios that do Archviz still use traditional render engines like Vray. It's very hard to change to something else too. It's not just the engine but alle the assets and resources, plugins and platforms like Max that come in to play as well. Twinmotiom and Lumion are more or less in-house solutions.

2

[C4D] General Discussion / Re: Very very slow development of new version of Corona, why?

« on: 2023-08-29, 19:08:39 »

The new survey is out already for some time.
https://www.cgarchitect.com/features/articles/450b3b68-2022-architectural-visualization-rendering-engine-survey-results

Exactly as I predicted here a few posts before.
Vray is not growing really, Corona just a little. Both are still the top two render engines by far. I think because of all the available assets and resources.
Lumion is loosing a lot of customers to Twinmotion and Unreal. I think this is because of bad pricing policies.
Cycles/Blender is also slowly growing. But Blender is not really for Archviz at a professional level. Slightly larger models stall Blender rather quick. Don't see that changing anytime soon.

It's going to take at least several years if at all before Twinmotion/Unreal will get to the same user-percentages as Chaos. All depending on the market for resources.
Surprised to see Red Shift basically not part of the market. Maxon putting a lot marketing in to it.
Also surprising to see Enscape almost at the same level at Lumion. That was once 4.9% versus 28.8%.

3

[C4D] General Discussion / Re: mac studio / mac pro m2 ultra

« on: 2023-08-03, 20:48:04 »

I wonder how much difference is that. I think you have a few years to go before you've made up for 3000€.

4

[C4D] General Discussion / Re: mac studio / mac pro m2 ultra

« on: 2023-08-03, 16:35:44 »

Just benchmarked my Mac Studio M1 128Gb / 2Tb ssd.
9144775

20% slower than the M2 ultra posted here. 20% is also the difference in cores, 24 to 20. So the m1 or the m2 is apart from the core count more or less the same. I think Apple had to raise the cores from 20 to 24 otherwise there would not have been a noticeable difference.

I wonder if there is a difference between the 128 and the 196 model for the benchmark. The same for 60 or 76 GPU.

Looking at the benchmarks the much higher core/thread count of the i9 and the 7950 only makes a 20% difference compared to the m2. The m2 cpu could be much more effective compared to the i9 and 7950 considering the workflow before rendering.

What takes a bit out of the fun working with Apple is that you can buy a 20% faster PC for less than half of the price of a Mac Studio not even considering the much less expensive monitors you would most likely get for a PC. You can get two PC's for the same price as a Mac Studio and be over a 100% faster......or keep working on the other PC while rendering....

Just checked prices:
AMD PC 7950x cpu / 4070ti gpu is 2800€ incl. vat
20% slower rendering for the Mac Studio m2 at 6300€ incl. vat


I just benchmaked my late 2015 4 core (4000MHz) 32Gb iMac. 1533353. 6 times slower than my 20 core m1 Studio. So for the benchmark processor speed per core hasn't changed much over 8 years......I am a bit surprised actually. Apparently core count is all that matters. Hence the scores of the threadrippers.

5

[C4D] Daily Builds / Re: Corona 10 - CRASHES A LOT

« on: 2023-06-30, 21:31:16 »

I am using a new Mac Studio Ultra 128Gb ram and v10 seems very stable. Did a project just a few days ago and never had a crash with 1 Gb file lots of vegetation, scattering and so on. I don't remember a crash actually and been working for days.

I do notice materials not rendering occasionally and the project asset inspector often not finds the assets even though the Corona PB materials render just fine. Even after relinking the assets still show red. Especially with assets obtained by the asset browser.
Scatter does not update always in the viewport. There are little blibs here and there like that but nothing that slows me down much.

6

[C4D] General Discussion / Re: IR renders fine but not at full in VFB

« on: 2023-06-20, 18:46:59 »

It works for now. But Corona changed to PB materials and I needed to convert the legacy materials of the hedges and bushes. After conversion the hedges rendered white although in the IR window they seemed ok.

It took me a long time and it seems that sliding the material from left to right over the polygon tag, UV tag and vertex tag and back again in the object manager did the trick.  No idea how those tags interact in the newer PB materials and mixture shader of Corona and if they still work as supposed when Darstellungsart set them up.

Anyhow, I find the mixture shaders rather complicated icw vertex maps.

7

[C4D] General Discussion / IR renders fine but not at full in VFB

« on: 2023-06-20, 16:16:36 »

Hi,
I have Darstellungsart hedges and bushes. They render fine in IR but all white (no textures) in the CR VFB. It's been doing this since version 9 or 10. I used these a few years ago so I don't know since when this problem started.

Anyone any idea ? I asked Darstellungsart but got no reply.
I can send the file but best only to Corona staff.

Mac Studio Ultra
CR Daily build RC3
C4D 2023.2.1

8

General CG Discussion / Re: AI what are peoples thoughts ? I think we are in for big change.

« on: 2023-05-28, 01:28:12 »

AI is not replacing anyone really. BIM was the next  big thing years ago but no matter how big the project all involved in any meeting are folding out A1 or A0 sized prints to discuss. At least that is my experience. Even when clients hire human intelligence or experience they still do what they want regardless of the outcome...

9

[C4D] General Discussion / Re: Very very slow development of new version of Corona, why?

« on: 2023-05-23, 01:04:42 »

I think we will see Twin Motion gaining marketshare along with Unreal. I predict Lumion has lost some to both mentioned.

Vray and Corona will will most likely still be first and second. High end rendering with real time render apps isn't just there yet especially considering the assets and resources.

I do see a trend among students in architecture and smaller younger studios to skip traditional platforms like Max and C4D for apps that require a less steep learning curve and less costs for assets.

10

[C4D] General Discussion / Re: Very very slow development of new version of Corona, why?

« on: 2023-05-22, 16:38:20 »

Good to read that Tom, thanks. I enjoy working with Corona for now. CGArchitect does a survey each year which gives an impression on where things are going. I just took the survey and looking forward to see if Unreal Engine is still at the forefront and Corona still as much used as before (2 behind Vray).

What I need is short times to first pixel. In other words, the quickest way to interact with color and light. I have never been able to see if GPU would help or even real time renderers like Unreal. The way I work now is still mostly in wireframe and in separate files for vegetation and the building itself. I feel like a dinosaur but maybe that's where things still stand in 2023.

11

General CG Discussion / Re: AI what are peoples thoughts ? I think we are in for big change.

« on: 2023-05-21, 02:42:19 »

AI in architecture will work the same way as design competitions with hundreds or even thousands of submissions.
The client gets caught up in the hassle of so much choice and wishes he had hired just one architect. Someone with some social skills to guide him or her through the whole proces of construction with the local officials and contractors.
That you can generate hundreds of versions of the same proposal has np purpose. It's like going to a restaurant with a menu of a thousand dishes. If one day AI in architecture will be really good it will show the one and best option. A bit like Google Maps showing you the best route with the shortest drive or the one most scenic.

12

[C4D] General Discussion / Re: Very very slow development of new version of Corona, why?

« on: 2023-05-21, 02:21:52 »

The OP I think is right. It does seem a little silent or slow as of lately.

If I look at Lumion , Twin Motion and Unreal things seem to be going fast forward there.

I would love to see where CR is going the next few years to compete with mainstream archviz going in the direction of realtime renders and sophisticated generated assets and content. I also see Vray and Enscape joining in a combined workflow. Anyhow, Coronarender feels like a great but an end of life product. Could also be the team is just small with little time or money for marketing.
I am on a Mac, a fast one with 20 cores and 128Gb ram. Coronarender is really the only option on a Mac. If Coronarender is indeed at the end of its life it's time for me to move on before I am forced to. I have seen many render apps fade in to oblivion over the past 30 years. Stratavision, Maxwell to name a few. I don't think the OP is wrong to sense something is off a little.

13

[C4D] General Discussion / Re: ///// 3dtools.info v2.0 & DNA|Materials for Corona /////

« on: 2023-05-16, 01:38:24 »

With 128Gb no problem indeed. But its weird that with 16Gb ram swapping needs 400+Gb...

Importing into the asset browser was easy too and very handy with the previews in the asset browser.

14

[C4D] General Discussion / Re: ///// 3dtools.info v2.0 & DNA|Materials for Corona /////

« on: 2023-05-14, 22:54:15 »

Had some problems login in to get the assets but Stefan solved it quickly.

15

[C4D] General Discussion / Re: ///// 3dtools.info v2.0 & DNA|Materials for Corona /////

« on: 2023-05-14, 01:36:32 »

I will surely buy some more. Concrete and plaster I use a lot as well.

In my project I have a lot of rough sawn timber which is almost knotless. Platowood Fraké. See attachment. I haven't found any textures on the web with fine or rough sawn surfaces.

I am not aware what a lineair color profile would do or how to set that. I do play with the displacement depth in regard to model size. I also noticed you set the bump at only 2%. Is that still useful. I never really see much result in my materials below 10 or 20%.

My Mac book air with 16Gb M2 has one problem with these materials. C4D after the second render crashes with an enormous amount of ram swapped. Over 500Gb...  When I render you textures at about 3600 pixels wide. I will try next week with my Mac Studio 128Gb.