what is considered the absolute best program for the type of work done in poser and daz?

DrekkanDrekkan Posts: 64
edited December 1969 in The Commons

When I mean best I mean best in terms of the realness and sharp smooth graphics of your renders with your figure and scenes. What would be considered the 'Rolls Royce' or absolute BEST program to do the types of renders we do on Daz only 1000 times better.

While Daz is good I have seen some pretty incredible works with other programs but have been unable to find out what ones were used for them but they were so good to the point of thinking they were actually real. Like I said I know Daz is good but I don't think its capable of being that good.

I know also the definition and sharpness of the renders you do are subject to the capabilities of your PC. So lets assume you have a decent/good PC which could create some really impressive works.... what would be the best program?

«13

Comments

  • VaskaniaVaskania Posts: 5,113
    edited December 1969

    I'm assuming you're wanting a physically based renderer. Look into something like Octane.

  • Herald of FireHerald of Fire Posts: 3,384
    edited December 1969

    The 'best' program...? Probably 3D Studio Max because it's compatible with countless different rendering solutions. It has multiple plugins for animation, particles and soft-body physics. It's a modeler as well as a manipulator, has a swiss-army knife's worth of features and has been used for countless feature movies, both fully animated cartoons and live action CG.

    Of course, you also pay a lot more for it, and have a lot more to learn and master.

    A tool is only ever as good as the craftsman. Give a carpenter a chisel and you'll get your Pinocchio, give those same tools to someone like me and you end up with a misshapen hunk of wood covered in splinters. The same is very true for Poser and Daz Studio. Both are powerful pieces of software but both have very different ways to achieve their results. Some artists favour one, some favour the other.

    All the power in the universe is pointless if you don't know how to use it. Daz and Poser make it more accessible for the end user.

  • KaribouKaribou Posts: 888
    edited December 1969

    A tool is only ever as good as the craftsman.

    Agreed. Max is great for modeling and rendering, but VERY steep learning curve because it has a zillion features. If you wanted to keep scene setup in DS or Poser, though, the Poser/DS-to-Max workflow isn't great. I'm blessed to have Max for free because I mentor a robotics team, and Autodesk provides free software for the students and mentors. Having said that, The plugins which import scenes from DS or Poser are buggy and don't work with complex scenes very well.

    Octane is the best-looking render engine, IMO, that works with Poser/DS as a plugin. It's also very expensive, unless you are a student and can get the single, free student license for the render engine. You still have to pay for the plugin, though. Luxrender (via Reality or Luxus) is a close second, and far more affordable. The DS-to-Carrara workflow isn't too bad, and Carrara has some modeling and other features which make it very versatile. It is comparable to the Poser-to-Vue workflow, with similar results. Having said ALL of that, I still prefer Poser's native Firefly because it can tackle complex scenes with IDL and SSS very quickly, and with very high-quality results. With the advent of AoA's SSS and advanced lights, DS with 3Delight is also on-par with Poser's IDL. It takes a more subtle mastery of the software to achieve photorealism with DS or Poser, but it's completely doable.

    I have pretty much every software mentioned above, plus Maya (thank you, Autodesk!) Since I'm not a professional and the finer points of 3DS Max and Maya escape me, I've found it better to master the software I'm comfortable with than to fumble with tools which may indeed have more functionality, but will only frustrate me because I feel like I'm trying to write an essay with my toes upside-down in a dark room.

  • DustRiderDustRider Posts: 1,027
    edited December 1969

    A tool is only ever as good as the craftsman.

    Agreed. Max is great for modeling and rendering, but VERY steep learning curve because it has a zillion features. If you wanted to keep scene setup in DS or Poser, though, the Poser/DS-to-Max workflow isn't great. I'm blessed to have Max for free because I mentor a robotics team, and Autodesk provides free software for the students and mentors. Having said that, The plugins which import scenes from DS or Poser are buggy and don't work with complex scenes very well.

    Octane is the best-looking render engine, IMO, that works with Poser/DS as a plugin. It's also very expensive, unless you are a student and can get the single, free student license for the render engine. You still have to pay for the plugin, though. Luxrender (via Reality or Luxus) is a close second, and far more affordable. The DS-to-Carrara workflow isn't too bad, and Carrara has some modeling and other features which make it very versatile. It is comparable to the Poser-to-Vue workflow, with similar results. Having said ALL of that, I still prefer Poser's native Firefly because it can tackle complex scenes with IDL and SSS very quickly, and with very high-quality results. With the advent of AoA's SSS and advanced lights, DS with 3Delight is also on-par with Poser's IDL. It takes a more subtle mastery of the software to achieve photorealism with DS or Poser, but it's completely doable.

    I have pretty much every software mentioned above, plus Maya (thank you, Autodesk!) Since I'm not a professional and the finer points of 3DS Max and Maya escape me, I've found it better to master the software I'm comfortable with than to fumble with tools which may indeed have more functionality, but will only frustrate me because I feel like I'm trying to write an essay with my toes upside-down in a dark room.

    +1 for both posts!!
    It also depends on what you want to do, how much your willing to invest (both in terms of funds, and in training). Going from "simple" pin-ups to epic landscape or village type scenes will favor one solution over another. As will the materials/shaders used in the scene. Point us to some images showing what you would like to accomplish, and give more details about the types of renders you want to do (and how long your willing to wait). This info might help focus on solutions that could work well for you.

    I'm a big fan of Octane. The workflow with it is so much faster than anything else I've used that making better renders is easier. But it isn't cheap, requires a good Nvidia video card, and has some texture limitations (as well as your scene needs to fit into the RAM on your video card). So, it isn't a solution for epic scenes, but is great for scenes with 1-3 figures (or more if you have a card with 4-6 Gb of ram).

    I'm also a fan of Carrara, having used it since version 2. It renders faster than DS/3Delight, and in many ways the mats/shaders are much easier to use. But, most content isn't designed for Carrara, so to get the most out of your renders, you need to edit the mats/shaders and be able to set up your own lighting (this is true for Octane or LuxRender also). Carrara also does landscapes, and you can use Daz content in it very much like you do in DS.

    The lowest cost external solution to great renders is LuxRender via Reality or Luxus. They both do a great job of converting shaders to Lux, it really is a matter of which interface you prefer. But, using LuxRender typically means longer render times (with outstanding results).

    The cheapest solution is to learn RSL, and dig into the nuts and bolts of 3Delight. You can get fantastic renders out of 3Delight, but it does take a bit of investment in learning how to use it, and in DS it is rather slow.

    If your interested in seeing what the average person with a bit of effort can do with Carrara, DS, Poser, LuxRender, and Octane, take a look at my gallery over at rendo (link in my sig line below). Lux and Octane renders can be found in the DS, Carrara, and Poser categories (because they are plugins) as well as native application renders.

  • DrekkanDrekkan Posts: 64
    edited December 1969

    Thanks for all your awesome replies! I am thinking when I get some money I may get the Octane plug in. Looks impressive.

  • StratDragonStratDragon Posts: 1,808
    edited December 1969

    with a " decent/good PC" you may consider investing in a high end video card as well. Octane is great if money is no object but it does not give "better" results than LuxRender, it gives faster results provided you have sufficient hardware.

  • ChoholeChohole Posts: 19,861
    edited June 2014

    And of course if you consider getting Octane then also check whether your video card will actually run it, as Octane needs a specific type of card

    What are the hardware requirements for Octane Render?
    Octane Render requires a CUDA enabled NVIDIA video card. An up to date list can be found here http://www.nvidia.com/object/cuda_learn_products.html

    Post edited by Chohole on
  • StonemasonStonemason Posts: 482
    edited December 1969
  • Jason GalterioJason Galterio Posts: 915
    edited December 1969

    chohole said:
    And of course if you consider getting Octane then also check whether your video card will actually run it, as Octane needs a specific type of card

    What are the hardware requirements for Octane Render?
    Octane Render requires a CUDA enabled NVIDIA video card. An up to date list can be found here http://www.nvidia.com/object/cuda_learn_products.html

    And, if you plan to use the DAZ plug in, have a lot of patience with the developer.

    I don't subscribe to the "it's one guy working on it" so he (or she) deserves patience. In my mind, the minute you charge for something then it is a job. A certain level of professionalism (equated to the price of the item) should be expected.

    Not trying to sling mud (or start the mud slinging). I made the investment, tried the plug in, was disappointed in the support, requested my money back.

  • Kevin SandersonKevin Sanderson Posts: 653
    edited June 2014

    No matter what you use, you will have to experiment and compare your renders to real life subjects.

    Wowie has recently shown that you can get really nice skin renders with DAZ Studio using the UberSurface2 Layered Shader and appropriate lighting. And it can be actually quicker than many think, especially with the new version of 3Delight in Studio, and Age of Armour's lights can make it even faster. You just have to remember to experiment with the settings and dig for some good render advice here and over on the 3Delight forums. 3Delight is used in motion picture work by major studios, so it is good. Granted we don't have easy access to all the features, but to have that really work you would have to be a coder (see some of the code the Softimage users put together for their version of 3Delight). But, there are more features available to access with more of the plugins by AoA, Ominfreaker, DimensionTheory and others than we used to have. There is a reason why you have to pay a ton more for the commercially available version of 3Delight than what DAZ has paid for, and you are getting for free at the moment, but it's basically the same render engine, now only a few minor steps back. And the DAZ version is unlimited cores on a single PC!

    If you are planning on using DAZ content, it's wiser to spend your money on a much better PC and really learn and experiment with Studio. You'll be amazed by what it can do and save some of your hair, sanity and cash in the process.If you have a better PC and you decide to move on to other software, you'll be really glad you have the better PC.

    EDIT: Adding: Something interesting to keep in mind, the sharper cameras are becoming with 4K, etc., many filmmakers are using software or special lens filters to soften the images so it looks more like film. So sharpness is something that's not always sought after or wanted, especially if you don't want the too crisp CG look or you are blending CG with film or video.

    Post edited by Kevin Sanderson on
  • BendinggrassBendinggrass Posts: 577
    edited June 2014

    A tool is only ever as good as the craftsman.

    Agreed. Max is great for modeling and rendering, but VERY steep learning curve because it has a zillion features. If you wanted to keep scene setup in DS or Poser, though, the Poser/DS-to-Max workflow isn't great. I'm blessed to have Max for free because I mentor a robotics team, and Autodesk provides free software for the students and mentors. Having said that, The plugins which import scenes from DS or Poser are buggy and don't work with complex scenes very well.

    Octane is the best-looking render engine, IMO, that works with Poser/DS as a plugin. It's also very expensive, unless you are a student and can get the single, free student license for the render engine. You still have to pay for the plugin, though. Luxrender (via Reality or Luxus) is a close second, and far more affordable. The DS-to-Carrara workflow isn't too bad, and Carrara has some modeling and other features which make it very versatile. It is comparable to the Poser-to-Vue workflow, with similar results. Having said ALL of that, I still prefer Poser's native Firefly because it can tackle complex scenes with IDL and SSS very quickly, and with very high-quality results. With the advent of AoA's SSS and advanced lights, DS with 3Delight is also on-par with Poser's IDL. It takes a more subtle mastery of the software to achieve photorealism with DS or Poser, but it's completely doable.

    I have pretty much every software mentioned above, plus Maya (thank you, Autodesk!) Since I'm not a professional and the finer points of 3DS Max and Maya escape me, I've found it better to master the software I'm comfortable with than to fumble with tools which may indeed have more functionality, but will only frustrate me because I feel like I'm trying to write an essay with my toes upside-down in a dark room.

    Interesting points you make about Reality/LUX compared to Octane. Both produce very stunning results.

    However when you begin to compare costs of software and hardware required, it might be a bit more complicated or even a tie.
    You need a good video card for Octane, and the better/more expensive, the better your results.
    LUX runs on your CPU so if you have more processors/cores you get faster results, plus you have the horsepower to do more on your computer in general. A video card might be more restricted in its uses in general computing on your machine.

    Plus I think it is only a matter of time until LUX is able to run on video cards as well.

    Hope this helps out.
    Just thinking out loud.
    R

    Post edited by Chohole on
  • StratDragonStratDragon Posts: 1,808
    edited June 2014

    ....Wowie has recently shown that you can get really nice skin renders with DAZ Studio using the UberSurface2 Layered Shader and appropriate lighting. And it can be actually quicker than many think, especially with the new version of 3Delight in Studio, and Age of Armour's lights can make it even faster. You just have to remember to experiment with the settings and dig for some good render advice here and over on the 3Delight forums. 3Delight is used in motion picture work by major studios, so it is good....

    Excellent point, UE2 is overlooked in many cases as a fantastic production tool and it comes with DS4.5 advanced, Once you get comfortable with it (it's not crazy hard, but it does take patience) AoA's add ons are the perfect complement to it, the distance cameras have come in very handy for me on outdoor shots and 3Delight has some insane power under it's hood and if Renderman goes free public in the next few weeks I'm sure we will be seeing exporters for that as well.

    .EDIT: Adding: Something interesting to keep in mind, the sharper cameras are becoming with 4K, etc., many filmmakers are using software or special lens filters to soften the images so it looks more like film. So sharpness is something that's not always sought after or wanted, especially if you don't want the too crisp CG look or you are blending CG with film or video.

    Sit up close to the screen the next time you see the CGI blockbusters and you will see first hand how unconvincing those effects look when they skip that step.


    ...
    However when you begin to compare costs of software and hardware required, it might be a bit more complicated or even a tie.
    You need a good video card for Octane, and the better/more expensive, the better your results.
    LUX runs on your CPU so if you have more processors/cores you get faster results, plus you have the horsepower to do more on your computer in general. A video card might be more restricted in its uses in general computing on your machine.

    Plus I think it is only a matter of time until LUX is able to run on video cards as well.
    ...

    In some cases a higher end GPU wont work will with a smaller PSU so it's not uncommon to need a power supply upgrade as well. If money was no object I would be really interested in Octane however turns out money is an object and I'm very happy with what I can do with Lux.

    http://postimg.org/image/uujkc9fu1/
    01h16m to render, no post work and it's cropped.
    This was done on a 4 year old dual CPU mac pro with 8 GB RAM.

    Post edited by StratDragon on
  • KaribouKaribou Posts: 888
    edited June 2014

    Interesting points you make about Reality/LUX compared to Octane. Both produce very stunning results.

    However when you begin to compare costs of software and hardware required, it might be a bit more complicated or even a tie.
    You need a good video card for Octane, and the better/more expensive, the better your results.
    LUX runs on your CPU so if you have more processors/cores you get faster results, plus you have the horsepower to do more on your computer in general. A video card might be more restricted in its uses in general computing on your machine.

    Plus I think it is only a matter of time until LUX is able to run on video cards as well.
    Agreed. They are both physically accurate render engines capable of stunning results. It's hard (in the hands of someone who know what they're doing) to tell which engine has rendered which image. I'm also tremendously pleased with the support that Reality has provided. I've used it both in Poser and DS. If I had more patience, I'd dig in and learn how to improve.

    As for Octane, I tend to forget that I'm spoiled, lol. I already have a fantastic PC with a really nice video card, so I'm lured by the prospect of GPU rendering. I'll be happy when LUX has this -- I know it's been under development. Since I haven't actually purchased the Octane plugin, you can tell I haven't been convinced it's worth the investment.

    EDIT: Adding: Something interesting to keep in mind, the sharper cameras are becoming with 4K, etc., many filmmakers are using software or special lens filters to soften the images so it looks more like film. So sharpness is something that's not always sought after or wanted, especially if you don't want the too crisp CG look or you are blending CG with film or video.


    I have to agree with the principle of this -- stunning realism and physically accurate renders aren't always the best. I frequently break laws of physics when I set lighting in my scenes, lol. To be honest, I am more of a fantasy artist than a photorealistic one. Poser's IDL can produce enough realism to satisfy me almost 100% of the time, if that's my goal. And Firefly is waaaaaaaaaaaaay faster than anything else. I've done benchmark renders across multiple programs, and (at least on my machine), render times were up to twice as fast in Firefly than anything else. Having said that, I did those benchmarks before the advent of AoA's amazing lights, so I'd be willing to bet the playing field has been significantly changed. The speed improvements aren't even my favorite thing about AoA's lights -- it's the CONTROL. In Vue, you can select which surfaces are illuminated and which aren't. With the AoA advanced lights, I have that same control in DS. (And we don't have that in Poser yet!)

    Asking which 3D program is best is kinda like asking me to pick which of my children I love most, lol. Carrarra has modeling, dynamics, and environment features. Vue has physically accurate lighting with astonishing ecosystem features. DS has AoAs advanced lighting and the incredible native versatility of the Genesis figures. Poser has (useful/universal) dynamic cloth simulations, IDL and speed. 3DS Max, to me, feels like a famous athlete -- looks SO COOL, capable of SO MUCH, but completely beyond my ability to replicate. Lol. (I did once create a 12-second animation in Max of a teapot knocking over a pyramid of boxes...)

    And I like being able to have these discussions without people ranting with religious fervor about why X is better than Y. :-)

    Post edited by Karibou on
  • Paradigm67Paradigm67 Posts: 973
    edited December 1969

    I'm amazed nobody has said Lightwave! Their pedigree is impressive.

  • Herald of FireHerald of Fire Posts: 3,384
    edited December 1969

    There's a lot of Lux vs Octane comparisons going on. It's worth mentioning that Octane has limitations which Lux does not have. The main one being that you can only use a far smaller number of textures, and often in a limited resolution. The reason is because it needs to fit it all into graphics memory rather than RAM.

    Luxrender doesn't have this restriction since it uses your RAM and thus can have up to 32Gb of RAM and beyond for textures and models giving you scope for more complex or detailed scenes. It's also worth noting that Luxrender CAN in fact use your GPU via hybrid rendering or SmallLux GPU. The latter is lightning fast, much like octane, but also limited in features. The former is slightly faster than pure CPU rendering, but still gets the benefit of having your system RAM to play with.

    Both provide stunning results, but it's important to remember they're very different beasts in how they go about that.

  • StratDragonStratDragon Posts: 1,808
    edited December 1969

    and there was an ad for Daz Studio at the bottom of the page!

    Now tell me there is no Illuminati!

  • ToobisToobis Posts: 175
    edited June 2014

    Yeh I was looking into Octane before coming across this useful thread but now am considering Luxrender also. Do you think its worth saving a lot of money and just using luxrender rather than Octane? Octane looks good but its very dear and am wondering if the extra 300 or whatever dollars would REALLY be worth it?

    Also anyone know when reality 3 is out? its taking forever.

    Post edited by Toobis on
  • StratDragonStratDragon Posts: 1,808
    edited December 1969

    Toobis said:
    Yeh I was looking into Octane before coming across this useful thread but now am considering Luxrender also. Do you think its worth saving a lot of money and just using luxrender rather than Octane? Octane looks good but its very dear and am wondering if the extra 300 or whatever dollars would REALLY be worth it?

    Also anyone know when reality 3 is out? its taking forever.

    Reality 3 for Poser has been out for a while and Paolo C. who is the developer has been working with a few other programmers and testers on Reality 3 for Daz Studio. The progress has been posted on the RDNA forums and at preta3d dot com, it's "mostly" done but no one has publicly been given an ETA as to when it available. At that aside Paolo has been really on top of troubleshooting, maintaining and listening to suggestions on this product and I highly recommend it if cost and Nvidia GPU horsepower are a concern.

  • ToobisToobis Posts: 175
    edited December 1969

    Toobis said:
    Yeh I was looking into Octane before coming across this useful thread but now am considering Luxrender also. Do you think its worth saving a lot of money and just using luxrender rather than Octane? Octane looks good but its very dear and am wondering if the extra 300 or whatever dollars would REALLY be worth it?

    Also anyone know when reality 3 is out? its taking forever.

    Reality 3 for Poser has been out for a while and Paolo C. who is the developer has been working with a few other programmers and testers on Reality 3 for Daz Studio. The progress has been posted on the RDNA forums and at preta3d dot com, it's "mostly" done but no one has publicly been given an ETA as to when it available. At that aside Paolo has been really on top of troubleshooting, maintaining and listening to suggestions on this product and I highly recommend it if cost and Nvidia GPU horsepower are a concern.

    K cool I will look forward to it coming out. Is Octane much better than Lux ender generally speaking?

  • Jason GalterioJason Galterio Posts: 915
    edited December 1969

    Toobis said:
    Toobis said:
    Yeh I was looking into Octane before coming across this useful thread but now am considering Luxrender also. Do you think its worth saving a lot of money and just using luxrender rather than Octane? Octane looks good but its very dear and am wondering if the extra 300 or whatever dollars would REALLY be worth it?

    Also anyone know when reality 3 is out? its taking forever.

    Reality 3 for Poser has been out for a while and Paolo C. who is the developer has been working with a few other programmers and testers on Reality 3 for Daz Studio. The progress has been posted on the RDNA forums and at preta3d dot com, it's "mostly" done but no one has publicly been given an ETA as to when it available. At that aside Paolo has been really on top of troubleshooting, maintaining and listening to suggestions on this product and I highly recommend it if cost and Nvidia GPU horsepower are a concern.

    K cool I will look forward to it coming out. Is Octane much better than Lux ender generally speaking?

    Octane is supposedly faster, but the results are essentially the same.

    I do echo that Paolo is extremely responsive and transparent in his efforts. He probably spoiled me in expecting the same from the Octane people.

    The issues that Paolo is having is probably the same issues that the Octane plugin is experiencing. But personally I expect the Reality plugin will be out well before the Octane one. The Octane one is already significantly late and also has no ETA.

    The Octane render itself just received a major update, but the rumblings I've read indicate that a similar major update is in the works for Luxrender.

  • FirstBastionFirstBastion Posts: 2,408
    edited December 1969

    and there was an ad for Daz Studio at the bottom of the page!

    Now tell me there is no Illuminati!

    That's just cookies tracking your every move... important to clear out the browser regularly

  • starionwolfstarionwolf Posts: 2,726
    edited June 2014

    Drekkan said:
    I know also the definition and sharpness of the renders you do are subject to the capabilities of your PC. So lets assume you have a decent/good PC which could create some really impressive works.... what would be the best program?

    I wasn't aware that the definition and sharpness of my renders that I do are subjected to the capabilities of my PC. I do not have a decent/good PC but I can create impressive works. I thought the definition and sharpness are subjected to the render settings. I must be missing something. Feel free to enlighten me.

    edit: nevermind, I misread your post. You are talking about Octane and Luxrender, not 3Delight. :red:

    daz_studio_5.jpg
    530 x 701 - 67K
    Post edited by starionwolf on
  • frank0314frank0314 Posts: 8,779
    edited December 1969

    Increasing your pixal sample to 12-16 will make a difference

  • starionwolfstarionwolf Posts: 2,726
    edited December 1969

    Funny, I thought my renders look sharp. Plus, another website/blog said that increasing pixels samples won't make much of a difference. Thanks for the tip. Ok, I'm going to get ready for lunch now. Bye

  • StratDragonStratDragon Posts: 1,808
    edited December 1969

    Toobis said:
    Yeh I was looking into Octane before coming across this useful thread but now am considering Luxrender also. Do you think its worth saving a lot of money and just using luxrender rather than Octane? Octane looks good but its very dear and am wondering if the extra 300 or whatever dollars would REALLY be worth it?

    Also anyone know when reality 3 is out? its taking forever.

    http://preta3d.com/reality-development-update-62514/

    updated today btw
    06/25/14

  • Herald of FireHerald of Fire Posts: 3,384
    edited December 1969

    Toobis said:
    K cool I will look forward to it coming out. Is Octane much better than Lux ender generally speaking?
    Octane is faster, but is restrictive in the number of textures you can use, since it uses graphics memory for everything. Luxrender doesn't have this restriction, and as a result can render much larger scenes with modest graphics cards but it takes longer to get there. Lux can use pure GPU rendering via SmallLuxGPU, but it's incredibly basic and only recommended for simple scenes. It is, however, comparable in speed.

  • ToobisToobis Posts: 175
    edited December 1969

    I see. Seems from what I can gather that what octane has going for it the most is its way better for its sheer rendering speed.

  • starionwolfstarionwolf Posts: 2,726
    edited June 2014

    example: 1 GB of memory is restrictive for Octane. I can only put one character and a really simple background in Octane. Trust me. You will need at least 4 GB of memory on an NVidia card to create a medium sized scene with two characters and a room and some furniture. I can't even use a high quality HDR texture. Yes, octane is fast but as HeraldOfFire said, Octane relies on the Video Card's memory to hold the data.

    Samples of my Octane renders to show you how much memory Genesis 1 and 2 can use:
    Teegra in Boudoir Bliss

    Genesis 2 in underwear - You have been warned. lol

    Young Genesis - I forgot which texture I used. 785 MB

    Teen Julie with her bump map set too high.

    Post edited by starionwolf on
  • kyoto kidkyoto kid Posts: 16,143
    edited June 2014

    ...personally, as I do most of my work in Daz Studio, I tend to work with the native 3Delight render engine and push it as much as possible. Like KaribousBoutique, I am not so much into totally photorealistic rendering, and prefer a more "personalised" look to my finished work with minimal postwork as possible (I do not have a steady enough hand for detailed "digital painting" due to severe arthritis). Hence, I try to capture what effects I need within the actual render itself as much as possible using lights, "billboard"/transparency effects, surface adjustments, and effects cameras.

    While I have Reality/Lux (2.5 for Daz Studio) I am somewhat put off by the extremely long render times involved which make even rendering in Bryce seem quick in comparison.

    I agree that AoA's Advanced lights and SSS Shaders have opened up a whole new dimension for Daz Studio. While they involve a learning curve of their own to deal with the more I have been working with them, the better the results I am getting in return (and at a fraction of the render times with UE/HSS). As I have mentioned elsewhere I rarely use UE much anymore save for creating mesh lights with the Uber Area Light.

    I am actually looking forward to the Renderman offer in August. True, I can only use it for non commercial work, but it will be interesting to experiment with a professional grade production based engine, and maybe it might even help give more insight into how to better optimise the Daz built in version for the best results.

    Post edited by kyoto kid on
  • DustRiderDustRider Posts: 1,027
    edited December 1969

    Toobis said:
    Toobis said:
    Yeh I was looking into Octane before coming across this useful thread but now am considering Luxrender also. Do you think its worth saving a lot of money and just using luxrender rather than Octane? Octane looks good but its very dear and am wondering if the extra 300 or whatever dollars would REALLY be worth it?

    Also anyone know when reality 3 is out? its taking forever.

    Reality 3 for Poser has been out for a while and Paolo C. who is the developer has been working with a few other programmers and testers on Reality 3 for Daz Studio. The progress has been posted on the RDNA forums and at preta3d dot com, it's "mostly" done but no one has publicly been given an ETA as to when it available. At that aside Paolo has been really on top of troubleshooting, maintaining and listening to suggestions on this product and I highly recommend it if cost and Nvidia GPU horsepower are a concern.

    K cool I will look forward to it coming out. Is Octane much better than Lux ender generally speaking?

    I have both, and since they are both unbiased render engines, the results are very similar. The biggest differences are the speed and resource limitations. If you usually make larger more complex scenes, then Octane may not be a good fit due to VRAM and texture slot limitations. If you tend to use modest scenes (say 1-3 figures), then Octane may be a great fit. Personally speaking, I don't have a bit of buyers remorse regarding my Octane purchase. The only "remorse" I have is when, due to either scene size, content compatibility, or other "restrictions" (like contest entries) I have to use another render engine. :roll:

    The speed of Octane is amazing, not only for final rendering, but also for scene and materials setup. The almost instant feedback I get with Octane really improves my workflow and overall render quality (I'm a test render-oholic). I used to measure render times in hours, a 1 hour render was fantastic, a 2-8 hour render was great, and a 12-24 hour render was common. With Octane my final renders are typically measured in minutes (I have done one 14 hour render), with final output image sizes typically in the 3000+ range.

    A long render for me with Octane is a couple of hours. A long render for me with Lux is when it goes over 18 hours (I've done 70 hour renders). The results in either one are very comparable. It really depends on if you can work within the memory constraints that come with pure GPU rendering. I wouldn't recommend using a card with less than 2Gb at the bare minimum. 3-4Gb is much better. You can get a card that will do extremely well with Octane for around $200-270 (3-4Gb RAM and 900+ cuda cores),

    To get an idea what can be done with good texture management, the attached SiFi image took just under 2Gb of VRAM (just having fun, was done for a contest) I would guess it has at least 150-200 materials. most are using shaders without unique texture maps. It used 44 color textures, and 8 gray scale (bump), so I still had room for another fully clothed human figure, or other stuff with 20 color slots and 8 gray scale left (with a Kepler based card you would have room for a little over 3X more textures than what I have in this scene). It took about 30 min to render, and it has a ton of reflective surfaces, and the large window is architectural glass. This scene took about 5Gb of RAM in DS, so the amount of VRAM required by Octane will be less much less than the RAM consumed by DS.

    A couple more examples.
    This post shows Faveral's Medieval Docks, which is pretty big. A "straight out of the box" render in Octane, done in 2 min. I was just seeing if the scene would fit into Octane in response to a question, so it's not and artistic render, just a quick example of rendering a scene with no mat/shader work at all.
    http://www.daz3d.com/forums/discussion/31201/P68

    The image in the link below was rendered in Octane via the DS plugin. Took about 40 min. at 2500x3000. I really liked the way the lace turned out on the top. Unfortunately it’s a bit difficult to see, even in the “full size” view in the linked image, so I attached a higher resolution sample here. Transmap lace like this always brings DS/3Delight renders to an extreme crawl, No post-work on the image other than re-sizing and adding the sig.

    (warning - modest nudity) http://www.renderosity.com/mod/gallery/index.php?image_id=2489672

    Here is one of my best Lux renders, done with Poser & Reality 3. it took 70 hours, but could have been faster had I optimized the scene a bit more.

    (Warning Nudity) http://www.renderosity.com/mod/gallery/index.php?image_id=2440008

    One other thing to note is that if you decide to get Reality or Luxus, a lot of the lighting and scene optimization techniques that you learn are easily transferable to Octane. So you could use LuxRender now, and if you decide to, get Octane later, and you wouldn't have to re-learn everything (but there is still a lot to learn with either one).

    Bottom line though, you can get awesome jaw dropping renders out of DS/3Delight or Poser/Firefly. Utimately, what you use really depends on what you feel most comfortable with, what you want to do (render), and how much you are willing to invest (both in time learning and money).

    lacesample.jpg
    335 x 267 - 25K
    Aiko_SiFi3sm.jpg
    1400 x 1167 - 462K
Sign In or Register to comment.
Rocket Fuel