Giving Maxwell another shot
-
Jeff Jacobs wrote:
Go to a museum and look at the masterpieces. They all have one thing in common-good control over these basic design criteria. Inspiration comes from the most unlikely places.This is a very valuable tip. I recently started doing this.
May I add a winderful lesson to this?
Look at this link: This 'Chiarroscura' method helped me a lot in boosting the light setup and enhancing composition:
http://www.efplighting.com/?The_Chiaroscuro_PrincipleCheers,
kwistenbiebel -
Hello Guys
Thank you for your input, these are some very valuable tips, Kwisty.
I do not quite understand this one:"[i]Another workaround would be copying the textured objects and rotating them out of your view." Do that in SU? Sorry, lost me...
I have a question with regards to emitters, you are saying keep them simple like a square surface or object that you place in the scene. Say you have an interior scene that is lit by lightbulbs dangling from the ceiling, just as an example. Now, in reality these bulps would "glow", emit light. The bulbs are curvy, "complicated" objects. If you do not want to use them as emitters in your model, would you place simplified objects in the space instead, that can emit but are not visible in the final render and give the visible bulbs a "fake" glow? Is it actually possible to create different types of directional light with Maxwells "emitting approach", meaning floodlights, pointlights, spots, cones, etc. It is not, is it?
Anyway, maybe I should move my questions to the Maxwell forum, your input is very very helpful. Thanks for helping!!!
Regards from a rainy (turning into a thunderstorm right now) London, Andy.
Posted by Andrea Glucker
-
@unknownuser said:
Quote:
[One workaround to the issue of messy, slow, highpoly models is the use of dummy components. In the case of your image, you could create high poly versions of the table and chairs and then use the Sketchup Component browser to replace the low poly versions just prior to exporting to Maxwell. Even better would be if this process could be performed automatically when you export. This feature will be in the next version of SkIndigo (Indigo exporter). It is a truly powerful and useful feature and I expect other render exporters will also have that feature in the future.
WhaatIt's like vray-proxy objects?
When we waiting!!!
Posted by spire7k
-
Another shot at the model I rendered in Modo, but this time in Maxwell. Might be a nice comparison for those interested in either of these two renderers.
Modo render: http://www.sketchucation.com/community/forums/suc/viewtopic.php?f=25&t=254&st=0&sk=t&sd=a&start=10
The Maxwell renders are just so much nicer than anything excpet for maybe Vray. It's all about the light and Maxwell has that down to a science. Trying real hard to get the materials thing figured out. I really need to work on my rice paper material. One of these days.
-
Jeff,
I'm messing around with the Maxwell demo just now and am pretty impressed with the results. I love the SU plugin and export (except the materials editor which is horribly buggy), but render times are horrendous. At first I thought they were great, but that was only to a grainy quality- when I try to leave them longer (25 SL passes) to get a grainless result like yours above it takes days on my laptop which is a fairly decent spec.
I seem to remember you work on a supercomputer (8 CPUs?) Very Happy , but how long would the above image take to render for example?
HP dv8000
Centrino Core Duo T2400 1.83GHz
1.5Gb RAM
nVidia GeForce Go7400Jackson
Jackson
HP dv8000, Centrino Duo T2400 1.83GHz, 1.5Gb RAM,
nVidia GeForce Go7400
SU, AutoCAD, Progecad, MicroGDS, Vue, Maxwell, VRay, Photoshop, Dreamweaver -
Jackson,
The last image ran for 4 hours on my 8-core. A bunch of processors is the only thing that makes Maxwell a real option. I'm going to try to network my old G5 and a couple of dual G4's together to and see if I can't get the network render going. Processors, and lot's of them, are Maxwell's only hope.
Also, little grain is good in my opinion. If an image is too clean then it doesn't look any better that one with a lot of grain. Try duplicating the main image into another layer. Do a high-pass filter at about 4 percent on the copy and set it to overlay. This will sharpen up the details nicely. Then switch back to he original layer and use a plugin like Noise Ninja. This will help kill some of the noise but the high-pass will help the image stay sharp. I've also used Noise Ninja on the high-pass layer, but at a real low setting. This will help with the noise too. I always render my images to at least 3000-3200 on the long side, then reduce after all the above.
-
Jeff,
Thanks for the info. Sadly without Deep Blue Rolling Eyes or access to a network I'll have to restrict my Maxwell work to hobby only- the render times are unworkable for me. Although I've complained for ages about Vue's artefacts and quality of radiosity, it's render times means it actually compares pretty well with Maxwell and other unbiased renderers.
Jackson
p.s. was that render time for a 3000px wide original or for the 800px attachment?
Jackson
HP dv8000, Centrino Duo T2400 1.83GHz, 1.5Gb RAM,
nVidia GeForce Go7400
SU, AutoCAD, Progecad, MicroGDS, Vue, Maxwell, VRay, Photoshop, Dreamweaver -
3000
-
@unknownuser said:
Jeff Jacobs wrote:
3000SPARTAAAA!! (x10)
Sorry for the OT, but the whole 300 / Sparta thing with macros still gets me laughing.
Save the Earth, it's the only planet with chocolate.
+++ NB +++ NB +++ NB +++ NB +++ NB +++
MEMBERS: Have you read the announcement?
Report this post
-
Jeff,
Just 4 hours for a 3000 px wide image in Maxwell?!!! How many teraflops does your machine do?
Let me know when you're upgrading- I'll start saving up for your old machine now!Jackson
Jackson
HP dv8000, Centrino Duo T2400 1.83GHz, 1.5Gb RAM,
nVidia GeForce Go7400
SU, AutoCAD, Progecad, MicroGDS, Vue, Maxwell, VRay, Photoshop, DreamweaverReport this post
-
Hi to everyone, just found my way here now. Cool
Great renderings Jeff, like always. That is the Saarinen table from FormFonts you have in the first render right? I had trouble with those faceted edges on that one myself. It is true that with the added realism of Maxwell those sharp and faceted edges become more apparent than with some other products. The low poly models seem to work better with a more CG:ish look. The problem is often that low-poly geometry that looks fine in SU just doesn’t render well. I have noticed this also when rendering curved surfaces with a shiny surface.
Here is a quick example of three Panton chairs. One is a low-poly FormFonts chair with a messy mesh. One is s rather high poly Evermotion chair with a clean mesh. The third one, found on the SU forum, is something in between. Can you tell which one is the low-poly one?
Image
When I use high-poly models in SketchUp I always try keeping them on separate layers, so you can turn them of when working on different parts of the model. I think SU can handle a big file, but displaying everything in a high-poly model is where the problems start.Nondestructive bevelled edges is definitely on my SU wishlist.
Sheik
-
Sheik
Really glad to see You back. Your Su-Maxwell
expertise was missing here. -
Middle one is low-poly, left one is high-poly, and right one is the mix.
-
Bingo! ArchitectBoy gets 3/3 points. Notice how the middle one, the low-poly version, has strange uneven shadows and reflections.
-
Greetings from Vancouver. It's BC Day! Woo Hoo!
The one on the right is the only one close to the original shape–low poly, high poly, no poly. Very Happy
-
Who is this "poly" everyone keeps talking about? I've never seen her post her before....
Great work guys! Enjoying the thread.
...still waters, run deep....
Tina Anne Stiles, ASAI
Quality Digital Watercolor Architectural Illustrations
Advertisement