www.kraytracing.com

geo_n wrote:
yes yes johny. i'm learning. teach me more pls. hopefully lw still alive when i'm good with kray. LOL!
when i change rec from 16 to 8 in a 45min render it becomes 42min. maybe i'm not doing something right. but only 3min gain. in 4.5 hour render that's 4.2hour faster but still i'll go to sleep in that time. hehe

no, you are doing everything right. thats just how kray works - more bounces will not slow it down because it uses photon map to calculate indirect bounces. It only have effect on pure raytracing recursions fo reflection and transparency.

Just to clarify, Kray is not slow with a few bounces, it's just very fast with a lot of bounces. Photon mapping in general doesn't take a significant render time hit if you use a lot of bounces.

jure wrote:

geo_n wrote:
yes yes johny. i'm learning. teach me more pls. hopefully lw still alive when i'm good with kray. LOL!
when i change rec from 16 to 8 in a 45min render it becomes 42min. maybe i'm not doing something right. but only 3min gain. in 4.5 hour render that's 4.2hour faster but still i'll go to sleep in that time. hehe

no, you are doing everything right. thats just how kray works - more bounces will not slow it down because it uses photon map to calculate indirect bounces. It only have effect on pure raytracing recursions fo reflection and transparency.

I see. I just think that because in lw adding bounce adds significant rendertime. Kray is great doing multibounce render indeed.

AcidArrow wrote:Just to clarify, Kray is not slow with a few bounces, it's just very fast with a lot of bounces. Photon mapping in general doesn't take a significant render time hit if you use a lot of bounces.

yes wrong logic in my part. kray is faster with few bounce than lw.
then more bounces kray is still nearly as fast with few bounces. conclusion, kray is faster than lw absolutely.

geo_n wrote:

AcidArrow wrote:Just to clarify, Kray is not slow with a few bounces, it's just very fast with a lot of bounces. Photon mapping in general doesn't take a significant render time hit if you use a lot of bounces.

yes wrong logic in my part. kray is faster with few bounce than lw.
then more bounces kray is still nearly as fast with few bounces. conclusion, kray is faster than lw absolutely.

You can try: recurse 1000; (this is maximum bounce light for Kray...maybe)
recurse 4 is very fast: around 4-8 faster then Lightwave engine render with same effect.
But we need multiple bounce shader for glass, becouse under 6-7 glass render bad (I mean glass have to few bounce)

better for me is render 3-4 bounce and 3-4 multiplier (this make good contrast and colours)

geo_n wrote:

Johny_quick wrote:

geo_n wrote: I use reinhard in vray for exterior, too. So I didn't know how to do it in kray. I'll check out that qtp program thanks.
Really need displacement in lw. The grass looks flat but when its far it looks good. I think your render is already photographic and only the sharpest eye can spot its cg. How did you make the walls glow without postprocess?
What does multiple bounce light mean? Doesn't kray do this anyway? And I mentioned in another thread that from recurse 16 to 8 I dont get significant render speed in kray. So is it important?

16 recure is too big for exteriors. Try under 8 recurse.
For better speed You must know better Kray

yes yes johny. i'm learning. teach me more pls. hopefully lw still alive when i'm good with kray. LOL!
when i change rec from 16 to 8 in a 45min render it becomes 42min. maybe i'm not doing something right. but only 3min gain. in 4.5 hour render that's 4.2hour faster but still i'll go to sleep in that time. hehe

Kray's speed is not drastically effected by additional bounces like fe LW native render engine, so you can use a recurse of 100 and not have crippling render times. But increasing the bounces will wash the image out, hence Johny's suggestion to used a low recurse rate of 8 for external scenes.

For exterior You can use: 7 bounce/0.5 multiplier + turbity around 7 in susnky (texture Enviroment) Sun orange.
Render to HDRi + QTP later.

Higher turbity under sunsky make warm colours. Lower (3-5) cold renders.

the interior win again over the exteriors... and by far

giacob wrote:the interior win again over the exteriors... and by far

... but a bit.....

btw: this is V-ray:

Vray version much better. Maybe just because the colors are so much more vibrant. Kray version colors just very bland. Are you playing with PS on Kray final image?

That vray version really looks more than photoreal. Its better than real like a dream place. hehe. Normal photo would look more like Johny's render.
That's the advantage of vray sun. Color spectrum is very good for shadows and lightcast. A little overbright though in some areas.

The two versions looks very nice but I think that the two have a little detail.
The Kray version has ok all model but the background (polygons with surface ?) is quite dark, the tone of this image for a photoreal render need more contrast and intensity. The Vray version is exactly the opposite too bright and saturate background for this render.

The two versions are very good. I try last day to make a good exterior test, and, with kray, it's more difficult that a complex interior. My result was really far of this Jhony tests.

People in this forum and other forums always find detail and corrections to the works of other users but in a few cases are really constructive criticisms and in less cases can see his works to compare with the others.

Very good Jhony. When do you think that the Kray wiki have a tutorial explaining a kray exterior ???

At first, the Vray image looks a lot better, but there are several things which contribute.
1. The background isn't as 'washed-out'
2. The grass texture is better
3. The stonework doesn't seem to have displacement mapping applied. I don't think this looks good in the kray image.
4. The model looks slightly different to me. The pool edge in particular is better, as is the ceramic tile texture just above the water's edge.

However, I think the Kray image is better in a couple of respects.
1. The steps on the left are better-defined, and so are the shadows on the wall of the raised planter to the right of them.
2. The shadows on the wall from the glass in the open windows looks more realistic to my eyes.

The Vray image looks more like a post-processed holiday brochure, whereas the Kray one looks more like a photograph to me, except maybe the grass

bigstick wrote: The Vray image looks more like a post-processed holiday brochure, whereas the Kray one looks more like a photograph to me, except maybe the grass

exactly what i meant. its like a dream.