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
Cool thanks for the tip. They need to fix adjusting on the fly. Having the draw prior helps alot. Its actually working I just passed my old record of 72 minutes I will put it up to 50 from next render on. I just popped a GTX980 in there most of it was mostly covered under an extended plan after my AMD fire pro failed. However not sure I am getting its full potential since it has DD5 memory and my 2 1/2 yr old tower has DDR3..
LOL... I don't know that you need to set it to 50, but at least we now know you can force it to render longer.
I've been out of the hardware loop for so long, I have no idea if it makes any difference when the memory on the video card is faster than the memory for your computer. With render times like you're reporting, I know I wouldn't care! Congrats on the GTX980.
No, it doesn't make any difference if the video memory is faster. If anything, the faster the video memory, the better.
Thats good to know. With my Asus laptop that has the 980M its all synched together since its a newer system. The tower does run much cooler (But much hotter then with lux since it was cpu rendering). The laptop will be more for setting up with the draw window and crank the odd render. Thanks alot for the tips it was driving me apesh*t..
My settings are always Max Samples: 150000, Max Time: (I just add zeroes to it), Rendering Quality: 3, Rendering Converged Ratio: 99. My CPU rendering will go on for hours with those settings. I guess with a GPU those hours are cut short.
The late 2012 iMac I have is one of the last with the Nvidia card but it really isn't up to the demands of Iray. However, my problems seem to be common to both Iray and Luxrender - long render times and grainy results. I suspect it may be something to do with the materials and/or lights because simple scenes with a figure and a backdrop render reasonably quickly.
The Cycles render I tried for my complex scene was very quick (a few minutes rather than hours) but the materials need some work. I'm leaning towards doing some intensive Blender learning which might save me time in the long run.
Something like that with the AMD fire pro it would run for hours as well. This only happens on my 2 systems with the 980's. Its kind of what I suspected. As decent as my systems are, there are some folks have better set ups like 2 cards titans Quadros ect... Still I can't complain..
Marble how do you think I feel. With my newer systems lux runs about as fast for me as it does for you.
Just to update. I took the scene back to Reality and deleted objects not in view (instead of making them invisible). I also made sure I had materials with "standard" shaders - for example, those used by the product "The Fabricator". I used 2 lights instead of 3 but made sure they provided enough light.
Sure enough, the simplified scene rendered in a fraction of the time (my previous attempt was still grainy after 8 hours) and the image was noise-free within an hour on CPU plus Boost. I would expect that I might get similar results from IRay but I haven't tried it yet. If I can use Reality, I will, because I like the fact that I can work on the next scene while Lux is rendering.
Cool, thx for this tip, I didn't know about it.
EDIT
I had the convergence set to 81%; when I upped the quality to 2, I resumed and the quality was 74; what is it actually looking for when it does that, any idea?
I use one light whenever possible and then use planes to reflect light at the object. Seems to render faster than adding extra lights.
I have used this technique with iRay as well. In this image rendered with iRay you can see that her left side is brighter than it should be. That's because I have a plane bouncing the sun light back at her.
Augmented Teen Girl.
Okay folks... I'm not sure why this finished this way, as you can see, snow and spots in too many places to post this... help? I did a copy prntscrn of the scene tab as well.
Is that done using the Iray renderer? Seems 3Delightish to me.
If it is Iray it looks like you could use a bit more light. As that's a classroom, I'd imagine there'd be somewhat strong overhead lighting, but it seems like the main light source is coming from our left, perhaps through a window? That's a bit strange as theres a window (granted with louvres on it) on our right that doesn't seem to be having quite as much impact as it should. Adding light to the scene should help a bit, so maybe add (or turn up) the overhead lights.
Also, if this is an Iray render, try using some of the stock physically based material shaders on the floor and walls, I think there's a marble iray shader that either comes standard with studio or I got for free somewhere that would work for the floor. You could also start with the stock stucco shader for the walls - seems like much of the noise is in the walls and floor so that might help clear it up a bit.
Great scene - I love the poses and expressions.
http://www.daz3d.com/forums/discussion/54019/marble-texture-shader-preset-daz-4-8-beta
So last night I decided to try and re render the scene that would not pass 70 minutes. Reset all the render setting cogs, then set the same values I posted above it would still not go beyong 70 minutes. Im curious is there a way to wipe iray data out?
Have you used the "Default" button nrxt to the renderer-selection dropdown menu, or manually reset everything?
I had done every setting manually but see what you are referring to...Still I get the sneaking suspicion that it would not of passed 70 minutes don't know why..
What degree of convergence had it reached at the 70 minute mark? The log should tell you.
It just happened again with a new scene just passed 90 minutes tough to make it run as long as you want
@Bobvan
Still not sure what you really think you get with "infinite" render. With very large max samples, render time, and convergence set to 100%, if the render stops it would imply that Iray can't do anything more. That is no improvement.
Rendering Quality can be set to very high numbers. I don't know what impact that has, if any, past 10 or so, but something to try if you haven't been down that road.
So its not true unbiased rendering then
Yep, Iray... that's the problem I have using Iray... with Reality I can place the lights where I want them, the sun as well. In Iray... I'm totally lost because I cannot SEE the lights to place them. Totally agree they should be coming from above, but... IRAY is NOT user friendly in lights control... not for me. In Reality... I can see them, direct them, and at least have a bit of understanding on how to use them. NOT so with IRAY... I try it, and then end up going back to Reality because I just don't get it.
You can view the scene through the light as if it were a camera. I find it very easy to set the lights where I want that way.
I gave up on Reality pretty quickly. It did a very good job of making me feel incompetent. lol
I agree, I think the light and camera interfaces could be a bit better in Studio (I'm a relative Studio newbie immigrating from Poser and it seems like Poser's light and camera interfaces are more intuitive, but that could just be because I've used them for so long).
For light objects in studio, you can actually select them as the viewport just like you would a camera. That can be somewhat helpful to fine tune the positioning (though even then the view can get oddly distorted depending on your light settings), but it's not very helpful setting their position in the overall scene much of the time.
What I've started doing to place lights accurately (and place everything else in the scene for that matter) is creating my own isometricish camera(s). Its easier to get those in to good position to view what I want than it is using the built in isometric cameras as I haven't figured out how to manipulate the buiilt in isometric cameras via keyboard input (i.e. typing in exact coordinates).
So I create a top camera (or a top camera pose that I can apply to a camera) and move its y value up high enough to take in the whole scene from above and point it down. That camera helps me place the lights on the x and z axes pretty accurately.
I create a front (or back, or side, any will work) camera moved out far enough to take in the whole scene from that perspective to help me place the lights on the y axis and point it towards the center of the scene.
If you like that approach, you can save the cameras to your library as camera presets (object or pose). That way they'll be there for you any time for any scene.
Once you've got them roughly in place, then you can use the lights' perspectives in the viewport to do smaller adustments to target/position them more exactly.
I mostly use spotlights, and they display with an indication of the radiance angle/cone they'll provide to the scene, so it gives you a good idea of where the light will be, and a notion of how it will fall off. Mesh lights/emissive objects won't give you that feedback - unless you enable the realtime iray preview in your aux window. I don't because my machine can't handle it, but if yours does I recommend enabling it so you can get a pretty quick idea about how your lighting is working.
In your scene, an intuitive approach would be to use a few cylinder props transformed (via x,y,z scale adjustments) to flourescent tube light forms and put those up near the ceiling. Put the emissive shader on them (one of the stock Iray shaders), making them mesh lights, and play around with their luminence to get the lighting intensity you want, you can google for accurate lumens values for this type of light as a starting point. In my notes I have one quote that a "Fluorescent tube of 40w is about 2400 lumens, at around 5000K (color temperature)." Alternatively, I'd probably try to fake it with spotlights set to a rectangle or cylinder geometry and then adjust the spotlghts' size axes to approximate the tubes, as I think spotlights render a bit faster than mesh lights.
You could also try an HDRI approach, but then you're going to have to remove the ceiling and part/all of the walls that aren't in your view to let that light in. There's a couple of good indoor HDRI light sets for sale in the DAZ store that I picked up (http://www.daz3d.com/iradiance-studio-hdris-for-iray) and (http://www.daz3d.com/daz-studio-iray-hdr-interiors) - seems like each is on sale for about $11 right now which is a decent deal. For myself I find the results a bit more satisfying if I can set up physical light sources in the scene effecively. Plus the more I try that, the more I learn about lighting and how it impacts the image. I generally use the HDRIs for quickie renders where I'm not trying to include a "true" physical set/stage and don't care about missing walls/ceilings/etc. It looks like you've already got the ceiling and a few walls hidden, so an HDRI approach might work well for your purposes here.
And definitely look into using some IRAY material shaders on the floor and walls, it'll really up the impact of your scene. This (http://1drv.ms/1EiQDiq) was the free shader set I was thinking of, but it doesn't have the marble shader I thought it did (it does have a damaged marble tile shader that might work for you). It does have a ton of other useful shaders. I think the marble I was thinking of is a stock shader that comes with studio, but I could be wrong.
I hope that helps/makes any sense at all. Stick with it, you'll get it. Good art doesn't come easy.
L'Adair
I used Reality / lux for 3 years its not that bad it does produce a bit better quality IMO but I obviously set up my system to run iray. It's good enough for my needs. I was disaapointed when Reality / lux was not as fast as advertized. Otherwise I would still be with it. I still have it should I get results that do not work in iray. The good thing is for the most part 6 plus hour render times are behind me..
I do view thru the lights that show up in the viewer - as the camera. But I don't know how to see THOSE lights that way, or see thru them that way.
Hahahahahaaaa - OMG - are you kidding me? Just reading this made me want to take a nap, LOL. No sweet, my brain is not wired this way. I may as well have been reading German... - but thank you anyway. I may print it out and read it more slowly to try and understand it. But I need pictures and a next step approach. Cheers... Oh and by the way... checking out the light links.
Hmm... In the drop-down that defaults to Perspective View, I select the light I need to position. That shows me the scene from the perspective of the light. I then use the controls to change the scene around, (though not all of the controls work with the lights,) just as I would in Perspective View or Camera 1, (etc.,) and when I'm looking at the area/side of the scene I want lit up from the angle I want, I change the view back to the camera I'm using. I then do a test render to see if the light is where I want it. If not, I go back and tweak.
Does this help any?
Yeah... I'm getting there... just takes me a bit to wrap my head around it. But the more I do it, the more I began figuring things out. However, I did buy this lighting set.
http://www.daz3d.com/iradiance-studio-hdris-for-iray - and I like it... so far so good. It's lighting for IRAY dummies... and this image is rendering up much better than before.