Convince me that corona is the way to go!

[boumay]

Hello,
I have a short CG film to render. No easy task.
I want to choose corona for it but!..
Some scenes are just too problematic to render quickly and it takes easily more than one hour or even two to remove the noise to an acceptable level, so...
I planned to get a second pc to cut render times by half, the problem is that it still won't be enough for certain scenes (mostly interior ones). I can't afford more than one additionnal machine and I don't want to rely on cloud renderfarms.

What I wanted to know here is: is the speed of corona susceptible of being significantly faster in the next future, or a technology being implemented to remove noise (like I read once) in the next future? If yes, then I'll jump in and pick my second pc and corona.
If speed is going to stay more or less the same (which is more than acceptable as it is, you just need more power and that's normal), then... :?
If I could get a final argument in favor of corona! Or if it is just the way it is, I'll accept it and hope that I'll get a big renderfarm.

Thank you for helping.

[JoeVallard]

I don't know how long your CG film is but with simple math. If you had a 3 minute scene of rendering, at 30 frames per second. And IF you were able to get render time down to just 1 minute. Your still looking at 3.75 days of rendering time. No matter what render engine you use, its gonna take a lot of time. A online render farm could get this to you in a day, but you are gonna pay a lot for it. A big render farm really seems to be the only option for speeding up completion.

As for decreasing render times, if your lighting doesn't change in the scene, i'm pretty sure there is a way to save the GI. So it doesn't have to compute every frame.

[boumay]

I know it'll a lot of time, no matter which renderer, but sometimes, when you see the render time of just one frame, you just come to the conclusion that it's not only that it'll take long, but that it'll impossible so, I have to pick the fatest renderer I find.
I wanted to suggest redshift here, it seems that it can do the job in reasonable time, but I'm kind of leaning towards corona even if it is slower than redshift, so I thought that maybe I'll find an argument here that would push me forward this direction.

[borisquezadaa]

I like to add a very good render farm to the idea.
The most honest one.

www.garagefarm.net

This guys really rocks.

So if you consider doing some render farm, this is the way to go.

[romullus]

Yeah, if only they'd provide Corona rendering...

[juang3d]

Our scenes take around 25 minutes to be clean enough in a 2600k, so far is really good, we use bucket rendering mode and we use initial samples to 1 and secondary passes up to 5/6 or 7, depends on the scene.

Try those settings and check how it goes.

What CPU are you using?

On the other hand, using a renderfarm is a must with Corona, it's quality requires time, a much more reasonable time than for example Maxwell, but it still requires time, so for animations you need a renderfarm.

Cheers.

[boumay]

Thank you everybody.
My hardware is dual xeon 5650, slightly oc'd, whcih are fine, but, as said, corona is faster than others (maxwell, etc), but still requires time.
I want to avoid renderfarm because I can't afford that sadly, there are just too manty shots that it would cost me too much, but I know this is the must. Btw, amazon ec renderfarm service seems to be the cheapest ever, did anyone try it?

[longhard]

Rendering the animation is very slow, how to 1280p controlled within 15 minutes of clean effect!