Messages

1

Work in Progress/Tests / Re: Corona vs Vray: moving object animation and rendertime comparison

« on: 2014-09-19, 23:55:55 »

I've checked albedo render element, and no problem with that ( some slight pink area on the windows ( white 210 or 220), otherwise everything great).
We've test filtering option on the dev panel, but it produce some fireflies on the moving guy...
I've read this thead https://forum.corona-renderer.com/index.php/topic,3649.0.html about geometry vs opacity render time, and this one https://forum.corona-renderer.com/index.php/topic,4640.0.html about filtering theory...
Well, quite a lot to study!! Thx for your advices and comments, great to see such an active community!

2

Work in Progress/Tests / Re: Rolleiflex animation preview

« on: 2014-09-18, 22:52:37 »

Great render, really nice!
Good job!
Can't wait to see your final animation... ;)

3

Work in Progress/Tests / Re: Corona vs Vray: moving object animation and rendertime comparison

« on: 2014-09-18, 15:19:13 »

Key to time might be hidden in the materials.

First things eating rendertime are opacity maps and CoronaAO

Yes i agree... I've tweaked quite a lot materials in this scene, cause it was roughly converted from Vray...
Unfortunaly, we have a limited full geometry trees and plants library, and our clients often have specific requests about vegetation.
We have a blend material driven by AO for walls, I reduced its sampling to something like 8, don't remember.
Maybe I'll do some tests without...

4

Work in Progress/Tests / Re: Corona vs Vray: moving object animation and rendertime comparison

« on: 2014-09-18, 12:57:53 »

Yes we tried, but render time to avoid noise were way too high (about 35-40 min)...
Still testing different setting found all over differents threads on the forum, but it's quite hard to find an effective method...

For the moment, we are quite happy with our frame render time, but we keep searching great setting to reach fast render..

5

Work in Progress/Tests / Re: Corona vs Vray: moving object animation and rendertime comparison

« on: 2014-09-18, 09:51:18 »

We tried some lower settings for HDCache, but frames took 3 to 4 min more to be calculated.
And some low settings give us flickering in some dark spots...
We are learning Corona, maybe we could be better next time...

6

Work in Progress/Tests / Re: Corona vs Vray: moving object animation and rendertime comparison

« on: 2014-09-18, 09:22:40 »

Frames were rendered by a render farm (6racks with bi-xeon E5645 @2.4GHz).
We used PT-HDCache, default settings for PT, we precompute HDCache first (about 20 min with settings below).

Please share some optimizations if you see some!

7

Work in Progress/Tests / Re: Corona vs Vray: moving object animation and rendertime comparison

« on: 2014-09-17, 14:13:08 »

After some days tweaking and testing differents setting, we've reached to render frames in 11/12 min, without flickering or big noise problem.
We are quite satisfied with the overall quality.

I attached raw render and one slightly denoise with Nuke.

8

Work in Progress/Tests / Re: Corona vs Vray: moving object animation and rendertime comparison

« on: 2014-09-13, 16:19:04 »

Wow!! 13 min, that's interesting!

For sure i'll try your settings monday to see how effective it is!
On our render farm i'm sure we can get that 10 min render time/frame with good quality.

Will post the result asap it's ready

9

Work in Progress/Tests / Re: Corona vs Vray: moving object animation and rendertime comparison

« on: 2014-09-13, 14:28:11 »

Great render, and interesting setup, for sure we'll try this, thx for sharing...
I'm sure we can have decent render time, even with PT-PT.

10

Work in Progress/Tests / Re: Corona vs Vray: moving object animation and rendertime comparison

« on: 2014-09-12, 14:00:28 »

Yeap... Intel knows how to make people dream....

This 40 min render time is actually made on one bi-xeon...
we have 6 machines like this, with DR it take 10min to render. (quite fast)

But it's with 6 computers, and we are searching to have optimized render time for one machine at a time (today 40 min/frame...).

We are testing other setup, I'll upload results on monday.

11

Work in Progress/Tests / Re: Corona vs Vray: moving object animation and rendertime comparison

« on: 2014-09-12, 11:51:51 »

Hi, we are testing this weekend different solution (PT-HDCache, PTPT with less sampling...). We are here very interested by Corona, and we try to find the most efficient way to render animation, and not comparing 2 differents methods...
We just compare workflow and efficiency in our pipeline.
For me, Corona produce much more beautiful reflection, light, etc...  It would be great if we could render animation in the "same time" as we did with Vray for production. (something like 10 min per frame would be great...).

12

Work in Progress/Tests / Re: Corona vs Vray: moving object animation and rendertime comparison

« on: 2014-09-12, 10:41:53 »

Yeap, probably... But we are testing Corona to see if it's possible to use it as effective as we use Vray for our production (short deadline...). We can't wait 40 min for a single frame, and maybe some users will be interested with some settings tests...

13

Work in Progress/Tests / Corona vs Vray: moving object animation and rendertime comparison

« on: 2014-09-12, 09:58:04 »

Hi all!

Here at work, we decided to test corona for animation, and compare the results both in quality and rendering time.
For the same number of frame, Vray took only 3 hours to render this scene. Preset were quite low, rendering first the animation in flythrought mode, then the moving object with sphere fade method.
In corona, it was quite much longer.... At 9 hours of render time, only 83 Frames were rendered...
Our setting were PT-PT, PTS at 64 and MSI at 5.0 (in our test, the best setting to avoid noise in some dark part...), 50 passes for each frame.

It is rendered on a 6*bi-xeon render farm.

Corona result:

Really good lightning, no flick or weird moving noise, but 40/45 min per frame at 720p, it 's way tooooo looonnnngg....

Vray result:

Fast, but still noisy in reflection, but faaassstt....

No PP for both animations. At the moment we are rendering again with default PT-PT setup (still 50 passes), and we'll see the result. We also expect to test PT-HDCache test to see if we could reduce rendering time.