First of all. PDF is not good container for renderings, pictures etc. Use some of lossless formats (tiff, tga, bmp) or loss with high quality (jpg). It is much easier to control it (brightness, contrast, crop etc.) or retouch. I must say this the quality of rendering is the sum of software possibilities and your experience.
Here is something I made in 1997 without fancy rendering engine, just 3dsmax scanline renderer, nor radiosity, GI or so. I know it is not perfect but even today I like it.
Here some tests from max+Vray, The benefit was the time in setting up this stuff, but time consumption goes up. Of course in near future it will be no problem but today it still is.
Consider also Blender. It takes time to learn it, but ones you get familiar with interface it is really easy to use. And effects ?
And this is only scanline with raytrace. I'm still learning blender.
You also can fake GI - like here (no GI engine - just scanline)
Here is something I made in 1997 without fancy rendering engine, just 3dsmax scanline renderer, nor radiosity, GI or so. I know it is not perfect but even today I like it.
Here some tests from max+Vray, The benefit was the time in setting up this stuff, but time consumption goes up. Of course in near future it will be no problem but today it still is.
Consider also Blender. It takes time to learn it, but ones you get familiar with interface it is really easy to use. And effects ?
And this is only scanline with raytrace. I'm still learning blender.
You also can fake GI - like here (no GI engine - just scanline)
Pablo wrote:Pablo,
Robert,
....but it is powerful and if you use a "light dome", it can be really powerful.
What I liked about Maya though, is it's presence on the web and in the whole 3D community. I think that is worth something. That is why I think Steve Jobs is interested in it so much. Keep us posted on your progress!
+pablo
Thanks for your input. Do you have a link for LightWave that you can point to? Also, I'm waiting for GS to get back to me, so far I really like what I see in the Maya interface......now if I could only get it to "play nice" with AC
Regards,
Architects Design Forum, Ltd.
Robert Mariani, AIA
OX Maya, 3D Max, SoftImage and LightWave=LOW END softwers and renders
Please say as what is HI END softwers and renders PLZ open my eyes
Please say as what is HI END softwers and renders PLZ open my eyes
IvanG wrote:It depends on your definition of "high end"
OX Maya, 3D Max, SoftImage and LightWave=LOW END softwers and renders
Please say as what is HI END softwers and renders PLZ open my eyes
The "big boys" to me are clearly (not in a particular order):
* Maya Unlimited (and Complete to a certain extent)
* 3ds max and Autodesk VIZ
* Lightwave
* Softimage XSI
* Houdini
* Cinema4D XL or Studio
And to me it seems that these are the high-end tools: they are expensive, they have lots of features, they are open-ended (you can script & program), they have plugins to extend the features and they support lots of formats (import & export).
Most of them are around for a while and have proven themselves in production environments: still rendering and animation. There is no clear winner, but each has strong points:
* Maya: hypershade, MEL, animation
* 3ds max: plugins, gametools, DWG-compatibility
* Lightwave: price, polygonal modelling, rendering quality
* Softimage: non-linear animation, workflow, compositing, Mental ray
* Houdini: procedural approach for technical tasks (FX, animation)
* Cinema4D: price, rendering, stability
rm wrote:I don't follow the reasoning that a good software should be usable without any look at the manuals or helpfiles. Sure, this goes for simple programs or utilities that you don't use 24/7, like e-mail, compression, anti-virus, games etc... but it doesn't work for production tools.
Thanks for the reply. I generally evaluate software in a very primitive manner, one that I'm guessing many on this board don't subscribe to, but I guess thats partially why I use Macs instead of PC. My technique is simple and is as follows: One: Install software for evaluation ( usually only involves a couple mouse clicks on the Mac ), Two: Launch program, and start playing with it, be it a graphics, word processing, or photo software. Three: If I don't have to fumble with it to get it to work on a very basic level, and I don't have to open a manual for the first few times I use the program, then I use it and buy it.
You can play with ArchiCAD, but you need to learn about it to get productive. And that also applies to 3D-animation, video-editing, music-sequensing, programming etc... I use all of these and most of them are not easy to use, but once you learn about them, you appreciate their power and customizability and (most importantly) you understand that the 'tool' in itself is not the limitation to what you can do with it. To me that defines HIGH-end !
Miki wrote:I like the exterior shot. Very good photomatch. Now add a littly blurring on the house and you would not be able to see which parts are the photo and which is the rendering. But as you might have noticed, I tend to dislike sharp images...
[example renderings]
IvanG, I think you misunderstand me. I AM saying that Maya, 3D Max, Lightwave and those +$2000 apps are HIGH-END 
.. oh and just to be more clear since this is primarily an architectural forum, I am talking about applications for Macs and PCs. I don't want to get flamed by those workstation guys running Softimage or some Pixar animator to think I am looking past their interface. I am thinkinng primarily those programs that can reasonably be used in an architectural office on the type of budgets afforded to these type of uses (still renderings and aerial animations of architectonic subjects) vs. charactor animations and special effects.
+pablo
.. oh and just to be more clear since this is primarily an architectural forum, I am talking about applications for Macs and PCs. I don't want to get flamed by those workstation guys running Softimage or some Pixar animator to think I am looking past their interface. I am thinkinng primarily those programs that can reasonably be used in an architectural office on the type of budgets afforded to these type of uses (still renderings and aerial animations of architectonic subjects) vs. charactor animations and special effects.+pablo
Didn't find the answer?
Check other topics in this Forum
Back to ForumRead the latest accepted solutions!
Accepted SolutionsStart a new conversation!
