FREE Maxwell Render for Sketchup (free version).
-
Hello, I am still a bit confused on the differences between the Draft and the Production engine. In their website they say "Maxwell Render is unbiased: for any given scene, both the draft and production engine will eventually produce the identical image" but from some of the responses here I got the impression that for more complex lighting you need the Production engine. So now I don't know what to expect from the Production engine. Would it produce an even better result or would it produce the same result but faster?
Or maybe that "eventually" is only theoretical, and for complex scenes the draft engine could take many days to produce a result that the Production engine can do within a few hours? (i.e. you will practically never wait for the Draft engine to finish)
-
Pretty much -- in the Unbiased world "eventually" really means "longer than you want to wait"... it's a promise that remains unfulfilled because you wont test it. Much like if you keep walking in a straight line you will eventually end up back where you started (by circling the earth) -- nobody will ever actually put this to the test so it remains a widely accepted truth that nobody actually sees.
The optimization of the FIRE engine (the draft engine here) is such that it will give reasonably fast results for scenes with simple light interactions... with the primary focus on speed of feedback while making changes -- this is useful while you are setting camera, materials and environment settings.
Interior shots are generally anything but simple... relatively low light-levels and lots of emitters, combined with lots of bounces and complex materials/surfaces.
The production engine (this is the real full-power Maxwell engine) is optimized to actually render to Maxwells full potential -- it's not concerned about giving you fast feedback while you are working, it's there only to give finished results.
Both engines are necessary in a complete workflow, but given the option you would never choose the draft engine for final work... and the circumstances where it might be suitable as such would be mostly limited to Arch Viz scenes lit by physical sky or IBL and product shots lit by IBL.
With alot of skill and patience you can pull it off -- but it will take longer and will definitely be noisier than is necessary.
Think of it like the difference between SketchUp free and Pro -- yes you can create presentations without the tools in Layout (part of the Pro version), but it is cumbersome and more problematic than it needs to be and will likely not look as good... not to mention that you will likely have to have some other expensive software (Illustrator/In Design) to complete the project anyway.
People use SketchUp free for many things but its designed purpose at this point is primarily Google Earth modelling -- the fact that it can do considerably more is mostly a testament to the community of Ruby plugin authors we have here.
Best,
Jason. -
@zoom123 said:
for complex scenes the draft engine could take many days to produce a result that the Production engine can do within a few hours? (i.e. you will practically never wait for the Draft engine to finish)
If you recall this thread you will see that for a reasonable scene, the difference between draft and production is incremental, not night and day. My impression was that it gets a slightly better result a little faster - maybe 10-20% (My subjective impression) If you give it a torture test scene, like one small daylit opening and complex emitters, sure, you may see a big difference, but I think it more has to do with how well you set up the lighting situation. It all depends on the kind of scene you are trying to render...
-
As I said -- Arch Viz lit only by Physical Sky or IBL will work (more or less). However start adding emitters and more complex materials/models and things become difficult for the draft engine to resolve very quickly.
Your scene setup was pretty basic for Maxwell therefor the difference between engines is minimal (as you say).
This falls under knowing the limitations of the tool and working within them.
There is also an issue with uneven power of emitters -- basically the idea is that the sun is a much more powerful source of light than the emitter materials... when you put both light sources in the same scene the emitters often look "grainy" due to the uneven power ratio (Maxwell prioritizes powerful emitters).
Best,
Jason. -
Thanks, now that difference is clear!
Another question:
I've been looking at arroway textures (ex: http://www.arroway-textures.com/en/products/concrete-1/contents ) and I noticed they provide several different kinds of maps (diffuse, bump, specularity etc). How would I apply those textures with Maxwell for SU?
I understand how to add the diffuse and bump maps, but where would I add the specularity / glossiness map?
Also there are some textures where a bump map is provided and in addition they give a value for displacement. How can I do that?
-
This is where we bump up against the limitations of the "stand-alone" plugin as far as materials are concerned -- as things stand right now there is no way to map specularity within the stand-alone plugin... you will have to use MXED (I'm sure you've heard me say that before). In order to do that you will have to download the demo version of the full Maxwell Render Suite.
This may change in the future, obviously there is already a request in place to allow the embedded character type materials to map specularity but when (and in what form) this arrives I could not say.
Within MXED mapping specularity is a fairly simple operation which you can see my video for here: http://youtu.be/sof2gfMQXwc
Displacement is a simpler matter within the plugin-- under the bump section you will find that you can choose from bump/normal/displacement and load a texture/settings as needed... but before you get too far into working with displacement materials please read this thread as it will save you alot of wasted time/bad results: http://www.maxwellrender.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=352777#p352777
Best,
Jason. -
Thanks!
Would it still worth to buy the arroway textures (or similar) even though I will not be able to use the specular maps? How much worst would the result be without the specular maps?
Regarding Bump and Displacement maps, some of the textures would say something like "diffuse 100% - displacement 50mm" (http://www.arroway-textures.com/en/products/stonework-1/contents). With the plugin it doesn't seem possible to change both the bump and the displacement at the same time, it is one or the other. Or maybe I didn't understand something?
-
I have already made some of the Arroway materials into MXMs (and linked SketchUp materials) -- however I cannot supply the texture maps to make them work (which each user has to purchased from Arroway on their own).
If you do decide purchase the textures I can share the sets I have already made into materials to at least allow you to have access to the best Maxwell can produce with those particular sets.
The sets I currently have already made are:
http://www.arroway-textures.com/en/products/wood-flooring-1
http://www.arroway-textures.com/en/products/edition-1
http://www.arroway-textures.com/en/products/concrete-1I'm open to doing other sets but those are the only sets I currently own so it will have to wait until I can purchase more.
As far as displacement (and the plugin) goes you are right, you can only have one method active for any material -- whereas in MXED you can have all three types active in various combinations... hopefully you are getting the hint, it's worth downloading the Maxwell Render Suite demo to get access to MXED (at least until the materials in the plugin are beefed up).
Best,
Jason. -
Thanks for the help!!
I am mostly interested in their stone textures ... if I get the Render Suite demo will I be able to create and save the materials and keep those materials to use with the stand-alone plugin even after the demo expires?
@unknownuser said:
at least until the materials in the plugin are beefed up
Any insider info about when that would happen?
If I buy the stand-alone plugin now to what sort of free upgrades will I be entitled to? Just minor ones or major ones also? (e.g. 2.6.20, 2.7 or 3 also?) -
There's no difference between the materials you make in the demo or your ability to save them so you'd be able to use them in the free version forever.
You get free upgrades to point releases, and then discounts (as I recall) to upgrading at major releases (ie. v3 whenever that comes out).
-Brodie
-
Thanks Brodie. I will have a look at the demo then!
-
Let us know how you like it. I think you'll really like the material creation process.
-Brodie
-
Once you have the demo you will definitely want to watch these videos:
http://support.nextlimit.com/display/tuts/Maxwell+Render+video+course+from+VTC
The ones from "Introducing the Material Editor" forward are a good primer course on the basics of working in MXED and general Maxwell materials principles... which personally I find is one of the most fascinating elements of working in Maxwell.
Best,
Jason. -
@jason_maranto said:
I have already made some of the Arroway materials into MXMs (and linked SketchUp materials)
I'd kill for those. Well, not quite, but still. I own most of Arroway's dvds -I'd love to pick your mats apart.
-
I'm not sure they would have much relevance outside of Maxwell -- however if you'd like to take a look you can find all of the links for the "edition 1 set" here:
I haven't posted the next 2 sets because I'm still tweaking them based on tester feedback -- I'm a bit slowed down right now due to a looming deadline for a new tutorial series on Substance Designer.
Best,
Jason. -
@jason_maranto said:
I'm not sure they would have much relevance outside of Maxwell
I own a license -so thanks.
-
From what is said I understand that creating the materials based on the Arroway textures is not as simple as just loading the maps and values provided by Arroway in MXED. Is that correct? In that case maybe instead of trying to create the materials myself with the demo version I would be better off downloading ready made materials created by pros!
-
It is alot of work -- each set took me about a week of solid work to put together (including testing time)... and it is not really as straight forward in Maxwell as it might be with Arroway in other engines but I do use the formulas they provide (just interpreted through the Maxwell interface).
There are some marketplaces where you can buy ready made MXM materials -- here's a good place to start:
and also here:
Best,
Jason. -
@zoom123 said:
From what is said I understand that creating the materials based on the Arroway textures is not as simple as just loading the maps and values provided by Arroway in MXED. Is that correct? In that case maybe instead of trying to create the materials myself with the demo version I would be better off downloading ready made materials created by pros!
Material creation in any professional program is as much art as science (although maxwell in general and Jason, in particular, has the potential to create materials in a highly scientific way). That said, you should do both. Jason's materials will give you a great idea of how to create your own. The MXED has some wizards that can help you create plastic, glass, textured materials, metals, etc. so it's easy to pick up and get something very good without being a pro. But the more you use it you'll discover what exactly the values and settings do and the process will be faster.
With the arroway textures you can pretty much just use the wizard to create a "textured" material, drop in the arroway maps and you'll be in great shape. Jason tends to take them to the next level though tweaking values and adjusting layers to get them just right (and then generously GIVING his hard work away to the joy of us all!). However, if you're new to Maxwell, photography, and/or rendering in general using Jason's materials could be like learning how to golf with a $400 driver - it won't hurt but it's not going to magically make you a good golfer...or renderer. So keep that in mind, and definitely play around with the material creator as it's one of the most enjoyable parts of Maxwell IMO.
-Brodie
-
Thanks for the answers! As a newbie and non-professional in this field I think for the time being I will stick with the stand-alone plugin and ready made materials. It seems that I will have to learn a lot to create high quality materials with MXED and there is no point in trying to learn so much within the 30 day demo trial when I am not planning to buy the Render Suite (for now at least).
I was looking at the results of the Maxwell Render For Google SketchUp Competition and I wonder if the images there were created exclusively with the stand-alone plugin (particularly for the "Free Category") without the use of MXED or any other help from the Render Suite.
Advertisement