An important point from the Cafe thread, at least for me: “...it should be possible to specify [Carrara Surface Replicator] instances as instances to LuxRender and save a ton of bits.” Yes, yes, yes! Can you feel that?!?!
Un-biased renderer Vs. Carrara’s biased renderer. There’s been whole threads going back and forth. Personally, I’ve seen just as good results out of various biased renderers including Carrara’s. Mostly I think it’s a new toy. One that takes six days to render a scene that Carrara could render in a fraction of the time.
The claim is that it’s a more real world like renderer. Maybe it is, maybe it isn’t, but that doesn’t mean squat if you don’t understand how to optimize your shaders, compose a scene, or light a scene. No matter what render engine you use it’s still a simulation. If you want photo-real, buy a good camera.
Its not better, it’s different. Every render engine will have its proponents and detractors.
I like Carrara for Animation, and for its replicators. (call me shallow, lol!) Otherwise I work in Poser (and DS sometimes). I have never been able to get a good handle on Carrara lighting. Not sure why, but for me, I don’t like the “look” I get. Seems I need to put in more work in shaders and lighting to get what I think is compatible to Poser (firefly). I also like Cycles. I don’t like 3delight.
Lux…I find lighting easy. Materials are straightforward.
I also have an i7 machine, so it takes about 1 hour for a good final render….versus those that apparently take 6 days, running a 386 processor…...seriously, LOL?
So, if this brings together 2 things I like, its a win-win for me!
it seems to be a great announce!... hope it’s going to be developped!...
I’m not sure to understand the limits about the surface: they say that lux surface has only one channel… does it means: just color or texture? or, as usual, refletion, transparencies, sss, etc…,?
for me. the advantages of an unbiased renderer is the real-time feedback while working with shaders, lighting and camera’s,.. and seeing those adjustments directly on the rendering image. ....although I’m not sure that applies to the way luxus / luxrenderer works.
The disadvantage, is that the “shaders” need to be adjusted for that render engine, and the render time (if you let it keep going) can be hours,. since the renderer constantly improves the image with each pass.
but,.. normally you can get a good image in a very short time, with a few hundred passes.
quick test,.. it seems to override, or disregard any multiple shading domains, and uses the main “global” shader, which would normally be the default (grey) shader,... also, the image area seems to be smaller than the “production frame” area in Carrara.
Personally, I’m really finding it refreshing how incredibly outgoing this fellow is about meeting the needs of the Carraraist. He certainly is going to make it into a nice choice, and I truly appreciate that. Will I ever use it? Of course I will. Give me a new fun toy and I’ll set it where I can see it every day. Give me a fun new toy for Carrara… well now… There you’ve got me thinkin’
And I’ll take some time to mess with it. Perhaps a whole day or more. If it turns into an option that I really want to keep using, then I’ll be busy copying all of my Carrara scenes over to a new spot and adding them to yet another new spot of my browser - so I can start working them into a new Lux way of life. Gotta give my little buddies the same dose of fun as I get, right?
The other exciting thing that’s making my stomach feel like I’ve just crossed the threshold of the top arc of a roller coaster, is that art, especially art with Carrara, and even more so, art with Carrara and Dogwaffle… variety is an important piece of equipment. Carrara (and Dogwaffle ) are variety-centric. Adding an entirely new way of shading, lighting and rendering to Carrara is like doubling everything you have for Carrara. Imagine the mix and match possibilities it opens up!