OTOY Forums

Hi, seems like theres a bright horizon in c4d in the render field.
In my point of view Octane, Arnold and Corona are the most promising but I have some doubts.
The common thing between them is photorealism and speed but my question is why the Corona gallery is so amazing (and its still an alpha version) in comparision to Octane? Octane works are really nice but the corona gallery is so freaking realistic...
As for Arnold seems that is the faster/realistic cpu engine out there but as my main field are the stills which of them is the more photorealistic and easy to setup?

I'm not sure if you understand what makes a scene photorealistic.

It's not only the renderer, it's the materials preparation, scene complexity and postprocessing.
And probably much more.

In Octane Render you have all you need to make photorealistic images because of Pathtracing and PMC kernels which work pretty much like real light bouncing in physical environment.

It's only the matter of how you use it.

in these days the concentration on render engines is way too big..
..the reson for that is because companies need to sell products..
make profits, live somehow..

Corona made a smart move: provided free software for a while,
having a lot of connections in the industry helps too..
(that's why You see so much good works in their gallery)

If You have (art) skills, eye for a detail
(curious, why things look that or the other way),
the engine doesn't matter so much..

proof? well, just take a look what well known artist are doing:
Betrand Benoit, Juraj Talcik, Jeff Patton..etc
- all of them work on multiple engines,
..at it seems that everything they touch become a masterpiece.
& I'm pretty sure that's because of their knowledge,
that has nothing to do with render engines..

As glimpse says technology isn´t the limiting factor anymore or to say it blunt: you are.

It is similar to the change in the photography community. Nowadays DSLRs have gotten so similar in their quality that even a beginner with enough dedication and skill is able to pull off stunning results with entry level hardware.

Unfortunately though taste can´t be taught or learned by mere numbers. And to be honest, to me that is the hardest and most important lesson to learn. Because I see all that great stuff arround like for example the work of Alex Roman https://vimeo.com/7809605 and although he posted a really indepth tutorial on the grading it still is a mystery to me ...

Ok thats true but I dont think that all the engines are the same. I can understand that some guys can do magic in any engine but is obvius that not all the people is that good and not all the people posting in the corona gallery are that kind of masters. But almost all the images showing in the gallery are very very good and that belongs to the engine. So must be something different.

the reason why we don't see so much amazing pics on OTOY gallery page is because developers/admins doesn't take time to update it..In few years I'm around here, I've seen some very beautiful works..Corona is build by some guys, but they have someone (don't remember the name) that is responsible for marketing/comunication & he's doing good work - that's it..(& it's just a question how much of those didn't make up to first page gallery.. 90% or more? =)

Then I assume that I can get the same photorealistic renders with both engines only limited by my own knowledge
Mmm...

what about thea render? i hope its the same story

Agree with glimpse.

Give the artists, that created these corona renders, Octane and you will get same results. As with 3D applications in general - pick a tool you like and master it. I am pretty sure no-one here can say "Octane is not letting me become a great artist".

- I am guessing corona has more people testing out the render engine since it is free - octane also needs the nvidia hardware and a purchase of the licence
- also, corona works with standard materials in 3dmax, so if you have a previously set up scene - you don't need to reconfigure a lot - so you get people who already rendered a good scene, now gave it a go at corona - and only the good stuff ends up in the gallery ..

- I got familiar with corona pretty quickly, it's basically path tracing, so there's not much stuff to set there - so from my point of view - identical workflow as octanes - only thing it is missing is live rendering - which makes me switch back to octane quickly, because any stop and render based engine is what breaks my workflow now..

- it isn't magical, I got crappy renders at first try as well, although, much better results, even when testing first renders than any 3d max default render engine (same as octane)..

- the best challenge is to test render engines with people who use Daz and Poser - they always seem to be have basic flat renders whatever the engine, did you see any poser renders in corona ?