Interior rendering and other render engines options

[coilbook]

This is an image (THE SECOND ONE) that is lit by indirect light (Couple holes in the cave top part) rendered using Direct Light Diffuse .

It takes 20 video cards (7 titans x pascals and the rest are 1080s ) 3 min and 20 seconds to render 8000 samples and you can still see lots of noise.

Do you think CPU Vray would do a cleaner rendering? How many CPUs (for examples, Processor i7-6700K 4.00GHZ ) will I need to do the same rendering in 3:20

Image is 1080P


As you can also see AO rendered image looks terrible like 90s old game quality

Thank you!

[mojave]

You may want to try increasing your kernel's glossy and diffuse depth and decrease "Path term. power so light reaches further and that may help clearing up noise faster.

You should also see your render times significantly improved by using adaptive sampling, available in the latest 3.06 test build (note this is still not a stable release):

viewtopic.php?f=33&t=59760

Also I am not sure but if you were expecting lighting to be more similar to the AO image you are attaching but if so, you'd need to add some fake lights which would also help reducing the noise faster as there would be less occluded areas or as an alternative export as EXR and do some post-processing.

[richardyarlett]

First of all, just curious but are you the same COILBOOK, from the kids YOUTUBE channel with max the train ?

You do great work. Impressed.

Second on this scene, I think you need to rethink the scene a bit. Whilst Path tracing is amazing, its slow and struggles in a nightmare scene like this with high complexity and low low lighting. Direct + AO is incredibly good at certain things at certain times. Here are some thoughts

1) You can blend the two separate passes together, and mix the best of DIRECT for a little lighting fill, with the best of PATH. You don't have to treat them as totally seperate. I often mix two passes together to get the best of both.
2) If you are worried about noise and time, you certainly don't want to increase the passes or the glossy etc numbers. I would personally run a really strong PATH pass with just "2" diffuse depth to get really dramatic lighting and make it render fast and clean. Then mix that with a general ambient pass like a DIRECT pass.
3) You are going to have to cheat somewhere. Everyone does. If you are trying to light that huge scene with just those tiny lights there is no way. You can keep those on for just "effect" to look good, but then have some much bigger, softer "invisible" lights actually doing the hard work. So for every one of those small lights, copy it but make the radius 10 times as big and hide it. That will give a lot more light, but soft and easily rendered.

Finally ANY render engine will struggle with this. Don't switch from OCTANE. It is the best one out there. If OCTANE can't do it, nothing can better.

[Elvissuperstar007]

I would recommend you try the Path tracing
1) do not increase the capacity of small light sources, it is better to make the hidden lamps larger than
2) GI Clamp 1-5
3) Static Noise
4) Coherent Ratio 0.3
5) Caustic Blur 0.0
6) Filter Size 1.0
7) do not try to do everything with light, much can be done camera exposure

[Elvissuperstar007]

and most importantly you will put all objects movable proxy scene? it is important! lighting works best with this option
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n3lhmsYNM4c

[coilbook]

I would recommend you try the Path tracing
1) do not increase the capacity of small light sources, it is better to make the hidden lamps larger than
2) GI Clamp 1-5
3) Static Noise
4) Coherent Ratio 0.3
5) Caustic Blur 0.0
6) Filter Size 1.0
7) do not try to do everything with light, much can be done camera exposure

Thank you !