Daz 3D is part of 
Connect
DAZ Productions, Inc.
7533 S Center View Ct #4664
West Jordan, UT 84084
Licensing Agreement | Terms of Service | Privacy Policy | EULA
© 2026 Daz Productions Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Comments
Yes that is weird!
Just because a LuxRender render is left for six hours or more doesn't mean it actually took that long to clear. There comes a point in a render when leaving it past a certain point is just wasting energy.
I finally got around to installing the upgrade - just to keep current. I thought I'd give it a quick spin, but my disappointment was almost immediate. I had somehow got the idea that Reality 4.1 could convert iRay materials - yet when I look in the Materials tab of my simple test scene I found that the vast majority had not been converted (simple things like the iRay Uber metals) and had been left as glossy white. Honestly, I just gave up there and then. Maybe I misunderstood, but to me "converts iRay materials" implies either that it automatically translates an iRay material to LuxRender, or that it has a right-click menu option "Convert from iRay to Lux". Sadly, neither are true. Black mark.
On a positive note it did recognise the OpenCL drivers for my laptop's Intel HD Graphics and NVidia Graphics - but as you're not allowed to use SSS in those modes because it doesn't work, I guess the point is moot. Maybe 4.2 will be better but, for now, it's back to iRay.
yeah. I started before i went to bed, stopped it after i woke up.
this one i started before work, and stopped it when i went on break, about 2 hours for this.
i am still getting see thru results in photoshop, but not anywhere else. odd.
6 hours how long would it have teken in iray 1/2 hour? Lux is still not as fast, but has improved my average time with R4 was 6 to 10 hours. Acanthis SSS will work in cpu accelerated but not GPU modes. I am with you though I too m steering more towards iray.. Decoy there is still alot of noise on the skin. At the end of the day there a speed improvement but not 20X I doubt it's even 10...
Your rmore modern processor probably has something that iRay is making use of. Unless you are using GPU? Because my experience is a lot different than yours. iRay is extremely slow. Even when rendering a bland scene like my White Fox/Ninja Infiltrator. I am using CPU only as I don't have an nVidia card or an AMD card capable of descent speeds or with enough memory.
There really is no point in using Iray with a CPU, there are better render engines for that such as Lux or Vray. Iray is so awesome because it utilises GPU's so well.
I agree I have 2 machines my ROG laptop that has GTX980M getting those iray speeds. My 2 1/2 yr old tower had an AMD fire pro and those same renders take 2 hours. Hence why I am replacing it with a GTX980 under a service plan since it has been acting up.. In either case going from 6 to 10 hour average to 20 minute PBR rendering is pretty sweet!
So I'll ask again. Are on of the settings above responsible for making the final render look blurry? If so what settings do you recommend to fix the blurriness? I don't mind a little softness to the over all image but it was a bit too out of focus for my taste.
Thanks folks!
That doesn't make any sense. Some of us have to use a CPU because we don't yet have a compatible GPU, iRay can be used with a CPU.
The problem I am having is that people are posting but not making it clear when they are speaking GPU vs CPU when using Reality/LuxRender. Some are getting confused wih the SSS calling it a bug when it was clear Paolo was talking about what features are available when using a CPU vs a GPU. All this makes it clear to me now why LuxRender was never going to be considered a default render engine when compared to the more feature complete render packages such as iRay, et al. LuxRender needs to bridge the gap. I am not wondering anymore.
Agreed I find not having SSS after finally getting it with R4 a step back
I am happy enough with Iray using only the CPU.
I have an i7 Intel chip with 16GB RAM, and I think it is quite nippy for a non-biased renderer. I don;t see Luxrender as being any faster on my set up at least.
cause of our machines only have 2 cards in them an the minimum string is 3, it always changes back to 10 or 11 depending what I have selected cause I only have 2 cards on my laptop. Keeps changing back to "opencl.devices.select = 01" and fails again. Any ideas?
Now im getting gpu open cl errors. counts stay at 0 nothing starts. GPU boost gives a runtime error nuff of this sh*t
bob, not going to read 11 pages of posts but are you trying to network a gpu render? if so the node machines need the same opengl version running.
Go into the Light groups tab inside LuxRender and turn off the lights one by one and see if that helps :)
If you're using OpenCL, I find that it takes time for it to load everything into your GPU memory before starting. As well, LuxRender may be throwing an out-of-memory error for your GPU so check the log tab in LuxRender. The GPU boost also fails when the CPU is selected too so make sure that is deselected.
Additionally: the metropolis algorithm takes up ridiculous amounts of memory with OpenCL so don't use it. Choose Sobol instead.
bloom is not enabled in the lens effects inside Lux is it?
Oh, before I forget: I'd like to re-emphasize that Reality works *much* better if you use IBLs or their meshlight objects. As per their user guide, distant lights aren't great and spotlights are somewhat okay.
Yeah, the numbers are not high. The skin is taking along time to clear, maybe another light would help. I am using one reality mesh light and one of the new single ibl lights that come wiith 4.1
Wow, this thread really exploded! Glad to see so many in the LuxRender spirit, even if many seem to be having troubles. I love communities like this where people just help out like this. No douching about, just good, simple people helping each other out.
I've been doing a lot of comparison renders and have hit a wall.
How do you create a glossy translucent material with IOR values? I'm sure there was really easy with previous versions, but I'm just not seeing it. Looked in the manual and it makes no mention of IOR settings for glossy surfaces. What the hecks? I'm sure this is a slow-brain moment. Anyone help me out here?
Sorry just venting no matter what some of the things promised are not living up to the hype IMO. I was not trying to diss anyone. Fact is if it was 20X faster it should at least tie or break iray times which it does not. Iray you dont need to hide what you dont see you can have several lights. Reality 4.1 is a bit faster then R2 IMO. You still need a few hours on average. Better then 6 to 10 or days mind you. I also started grouping my lights to have 1. I was not network rendering. It does not take this long to load. Lets face it GPU rendering has always been flaky with Lux. At least CPU boost seems to be stable..
Yes, it certainly isn't Iray fast on my machine, but it is so much faster than it was. Decent implementation of metropolis on GPU, yes please (and thanks)! I like rendering shiny and transparent things, so metropolis is my go-to here, and GPU rendering saves days for a lot of that stuff.
Other advantages like not losing the render if you PC has an accident, You can start on one machine, resume on another which I usually do with lux to spare the life of my laptops...
Nope, I did look at that but didn't turn it on. I tell ya, iRay is the clear winner here for ease of use. Sheesh....
@RAMWolff - You turn on bloom in the Lux GUI. Lots of cool features hidden away.
Bah, gave up on trying to setup a decent glossy translucent and went with a "glass" material with PET settings. Does more-or-less what I want.
Using the volume settings to get thin translucent surfaces seems to require human sacrafices.
Agree 100%
Interestingly enough, there seems to be a dramatic difference in sample quality when I did CPU Accelerated versus OpenCL. I'll have to do a few more tests to confirm but Sobol seems to be incredibly noisy on OpenCL.
@mtl1 - Sobol is great if you have to use CPU or probably on older cards. Right now I'm doing some outdoor comparison renders and the Sobol render on CPU boost is looking near complete in a fraction of the time it took metropolis (CPU) to clear up.
Both images took about 20mins to render on CPU. The Sobol (CPU boost) render was ready much sooner, but you can see that left to render the metropolis image would be far better quality. As it is the metropolis render is still very noisy.
By comparison the GPU metropolis looked good after a couple of minutes, though did have a few typically metropolis related hotspots.