Messages

1

General CG Discussion / Re: 3D Gaussian Splatting

« on: 2025-06-03, 15:08:02 »

Keep up the enthusiasm and passion!

I personally agree about the rendering of Gaussian Splats, and see it as useful regardless of whether V-Ray has recently done it or not. But we do get that criticism leveled at us, which makes it tricky, how will users interpret it - as a fantastically useful new feature and who cares if someone else did it first it's about time Corona had it regardless, or as another err... reason? to just complain that we don't innovate any more.

It is still high in the user votes, I do think it is incredibly useful for archviz, so it is very high in the running either way :) I do encourage folks to vote over the next week or two, as it won't be long before we sit down and decide what is happening next, and we'll be pulling up those votes during that process. So if you want Gaussian Splats, go vote! Or indeed vote for whatever other features you'd like to see given priority. Influence what 14 will be :)

Totally agree Tom — and appreciate your transparency here.

I get that the "innovation vs following V-Ray" narrative can create friction, but to me, Gaussian Splats are not about competitive feature matching — they’re about embracing where visual workflows are going.

For architectural visualization especially, this isn’t just a new toy — it’s a tool for speed, iteration, and storytelling. The ability to scan a context or object on-site with a mobile phone and light it in Corona's beautiful renderer? That’s not a gimmick. That’s power.

I’ll definitely encourage my team and peers to vote on AHA. Because if this is a matter of priority, I believe the future of context-aware, capture-driven rendering deserves to be high on that list.

Thanks again for being open to the feedback — it’s this kind of conversation that keeps us all excited about Corona’s potential. 🙌

2

General CG Discussion / Re: 3D Gaussian Splatting

« on: 2025-06-03, 11:01:16 »

Thanks for the reply Tom — fully respect that you and the team are tracking this, and that it’s in the AHA roadmap.

That said, I want to clarify one key thing:
This isn’t about “adding what V-Ray added.”
It’s about not missing what real-time, capture-based workflows are becoming for us in 2025.

Gaussian Splats aren't just another rendering trend — they're a new layer of creative input.
For many of us working in architectural and environmental visualization, the ability to bring scanned or AI-generated splats into a physically-based renderer like Corona would be a gamechanger.

Octane and others have already opened this door. Corona has a chance to do it with better lighting realism and artistic control.

So yes, we want innovation — and in this case, innovation also means adapting to how the craft is changing.

Appreciate all the work the team’s doing. Looking forward to seeing how you approach it!


As a fanatic corona user, I can sometimes overreact a little. :))))))))  Thank you for your understanding.

3

General CG Discussion / Re: 3D Gaussian Splatting

« on: 2025-06-03, 10:26:22 »

Title: Why Corona Needs Gaussian Splat Support — Now

As someone who works daily in architectural visualization, I was excited to see Octane 2026.1 Alpha introducing native Gaussian Splat support. With just a 15-second iPhone video, you can create rich, light-reactive spatial data — and use it directly in your scenes.

Meanwhile, Corona Render — which prides itself on photorealism and lighting precision — still has zero implementation or roadmap communication regarding radiance fields or Gaussian splats.

This is not just a missing feature anymore. It's a strategic blind spot.

With tools like Luma AI, Polycam, and Gaussian Splatting libraries becoming mainstream, artists now expect to combine capture-based workflows with physically accurate rendering.

Corona’s lack of support here creates a growing gap for visual artists who want to move fast, iterate interactively, and integrate real-world detail into their work.

Dear Chaos team, if Corona wants to remain relevant in the future of rendering, neural data like Gaussian Splats shouldn't be ignored.

The tech is there. The use case is clear. What are we waiting for?

4

Work in Progress/Tests / Re: Realtime vs Offline: Corona render vs D5 Comparison

« on: 2025-05-22, 22:53:37 »

That is a good initiative.

If possible, please try including Vantage in comparison too - there is a very wide support of Corona maps and materials with the live link or export.

And if you are really into it, you can try Envision too ;)
You can export the Corona scene to .vrscene and import it to Envision.

If rendering (maybe raw export/import, and little currection-setup too?) times are included, it will be a great comparison!

Thanks again for the input — I see your point about Vantage and Envision.

At this stage, my main focus is on testing production pipelines that are fully self-contained, meaning the renderer must handle the entire process:

material creation,

lighting setup,

asset integration,

and final output — within the same environment.

That’s why I’m currently comparing Corona and D5 Render directly — both are (in different ways) full rendering ecosystems.
Vantage is a great real-time preview tool, but it still heavily depends on the V-Ray/Corona environment for scene setup.

So for now, I’ll stick with these two for clarity and efficiency. But I appreciate the Vantage reference — it’s clearly evolving as a solution.

5

Work in Progress/Tests / Re: Realtime vs Offline: Corona render vs D5 Comparison

« on: 2025-05-22, 22:48:33 »

Hi everyone,
We’ve been testing both Corona Renderer and D5 Render on the same architectural scene, using identical camera angles, lighting, and geometry.

🖼️ The images below show a direct comparison between the two engines.
We are not focusing on technical specs here, but rather on:

visual feeling,

atmosphere,

and what the client might actually perceive.

6

Work in Progress/Tests / Realtime vs Offline: Corona render vs D5 Comparison

« on: 2025-05-22, 16:22:43 »

Hi everyone,

I’m starting this thread to share a side-by-side comparison between D5 Render and Corona Renderer, using the same architectural scene rendered in both engines.

The goal is not to declare a "winner", but to explore how these engines handle:

Lighting & shadows

GI & reflections

Material realism

Edge sharpness / aliasing

Rendering time & workflow speed

🖼 I’ll be rendering identical camera angles and lighting setups in both engines.

I’m using:

Corona 12 (3ds Max)

D5 Render 2.x (with RTX acceleration)

Any feedback, technical insights or questions are welcome. I believe this could help others who are torn between realtime and offline workflows in professional archviz projects.

7

General CG Discussion / Re: Have you seen Unreal Engine 5.5?

« on: 2025-05-15, 10:12:23 »

In terms of both quality and speed, D5 Render is clearly beginning to dominate the architectural visualization market. Chaos Vantage, while technically capable, lacks the content depth and aggressive marketing to match what D5 currently offers.

Engines like Unreal Engine may appear fast and flexible for Archviz workflows, but they often become impractical when dealing with large-scale, detailed, and serious projects. That’s why we believe D5 will continue to gain momentum in the coming months. As the largest visualization office in Turkey, we've already shifted around 45% of our pipeline to D5.

We are now entering a market where seamless technical control and ultra-optimized workflows are more important than ever. Corona Render will always remain an artistic tool that I personally can’t give up — it has soul. But it’s also true that the market is changing at an incredibly fast pace.

Unfortunately, Corona has begun to lag in technical innovation, much like what happened with Mental Ray and even V-Ray at certain points. There’s been little movement recently in terms of speeding up workflows (e.g., no integration with Gaussian Splatting, minimal real-time development, lack of AI-driven enhancements, etc.).

Today there are dozens of real-time enhancement tools — very few professionals even open Photoshop anymore. At this stage, I believe Corona may face a long-term challenge if it doesn’t evolve fast enough.

And no, I won’t go down the path of complaining “why Corona doesn’t have GPU support.” That would be like arguing whether Tesla should make a diesel model. It’s irrelevant. The discussion is about pipeline efficiency and market direction, not nostalgia.

8

General CG Discussion / Re: Point Cloud Data rendering. ( While waiting for gaussion splating)

« on: 2024-12-02, 15:00:49 »

There are no firm decisions for what is planned for next year, but Gaussian Splat support now that the innovation teams have solved certain technical hurdles for it in order to get it working in V-Ray, is high on the list of probabilities.

Is there a way to use vertexs  that render point cloud data with corona?

9

General CG Discussion / Re: Point Cloud Data rendering. ( While waiting for gaussion splating)

« on: 2024-12-01, 12:20:09 »

I'm currently experimenting focusing on vertex color. Viewport is ok, but what will be the next step?

10

General CG Discussion / Re: Point Cloud Data rendering. ( While waiting for gaussion splating)

« on: 2024-12-01, 12:04:41 »

 Some postshot examples....If there will be a trial such as beta testing, I would be happy to take part in this gaussion splatting

11

General CG Discussion / Point Cloud Data rendering. ( While waiting for gaussion splating)

« on: 2024-12-01, 11:59:29 »

Hi everyone,

Recently, I’ve been experimenting with V-Ray’s Gaussian Splatting feature and Corona Render’s 360 panorama capabilities. Both tools provide powerful solutions for visualization, but I’ve noticed some advantages and disadvantages worth discussing:

I am reading the other topic about gaussion splat, but here I will share my working method with examples.

V-Ray Gaussian Splatting: I didn't expect such a development and attack from Vray. It's a nice feature that can change the game.
 This feature delivers impressive results, especially when working with point cloud data. Its speed and quality are remarkable, even when dealing with very large datasets, which is a significant advantage during the visualization process.

Corona Render 360 Panorama: The quality Corona Render offers for 360 panoramas is excellent, particularly in terms of details and lighting. However, I find it less flexible than V-Ray when it comes to directly processing point cloud data or integrating it into scenes using a method like Gaussian Splatting.

This brings me to a few questions:

Does the Corona Render team plan to introduce a feature similar to Gaussian Splatting in the future? If so, what advantages would this bring to users?
When working with point cloud data, what methods or settings would you recommend for achieving better results in Corona Render?
Could Corona Render’s existing 360 panorama capabilities be extended to work more effectively with point cloud data?
From my tests comparing the two approaches, I’ve observed that Gaussian Splatting provides a significant advantage, especially when working on large city models. However, I prefer Corona Render due to its superior visual quality and lighting processing.

I’d love to hear your thoughts on this and learn more about any development plans for such features in the future. 😊



Thank you!

12

Gallery / Re: Avisgrafik-2023 works Part 1

« on: 2023-12-19, 11:26:38 »

Contry Urla project.

magnific-oUgVXbBzFoUuPr6q447D-62instagram (1) by tolgahan güngör, on Flickr

coronaforum12 by tolgahan güngör, on Flickr

coronaforum11 by tolgahan güngör, on Flickr

13

Gallery / Re: Avisgrafik-2023 works Part 1

« on: 2023-12-18, 09:06:10 »

Terra project...

terra pool by tolgahan güngör, on Flickr

14

Gallery / Re: Avisgrafik-2023 works Part 1

« on: 2023-12-15, 19:06:47 »

Part 3 works

15

Gallery / Re: Avisgrafik-2023 works Part 1

« on: 2023-12-15, 13:19:16 »

Part 2 works ( coming soon )