Lux, Corona, Cycles

lacilaci86 already said in front of me, add a crooked bump on the table and chair, they will not allow to be mistaken

I don’t want to give some unsolicited advice but I hope you don’t mind.
I opened your lux scene to see what can be optimized…
I’m now rendering
with clamping at 1000
camera tonemapper settings are set to: camera settings Fstop 2.80/shutter 0.02 and ISO 800
environment gain at 1000
disable BCD denoiser and rather use Declan Russel’s nvidia denoiser(it’s not great but better than BCD)

Should be enough speedup to get you down to ~20 min (I’m guessing, I don’t know how well your HW will perform)

Of course, thanks for the advice, it’s good when the clues come themselves, and are not randomly found on the Internet))

1 Like


This is the cycles render at 50% output with Blender 2.80. Look at the curtains and color tone mapping does not match the Cycles.jpg at the top of the page.

I looked at myself too, yes, that’s right, the raw would have been like that, most likely I would cut off the orange in order to change the light over the table top, to make, in my view then. closer to the rest. In general, I threw off without post processing, but in general after that time I had a lot of this kitchen, it was difficult to find where it was. It was at night and long, so I could not correctly assess the color quality.

I also specified that 11 minutes were made with E-Cycles.
If I had used classic Blender, I would have used twice as much.
Obviously there is no fixed rule, each scene has its own prerogatice, its artifacts and light / material interaction.

On the rest of your opinion among the various Render Engine you described, I fully agree!! Totally.
I adore the surrender of Corona, but as I wrote above, it is unthinkable to currently use it for professional work.

1 Like

I featured you on BlenderNation, enjoy :slight_smile:


Sorry but you’re wrong, if you go into Corona daily builds there is now Corona 4 in the works… let alone Corona 3 has just been released… Corona is still live and kicking. If anything features between Vray and Corona working together will bring better features to both!


I did some work on this scene. The processing time of the geometry was taking almost one minute. I discover the bar stools each have 1.5 million triangles plus the additional subdivision modifier was creating huge amount of geometry. Removing these subdivision modifiers reduce the processing time to just a few seconds.

I did the conversion to Eevee trying to match raw output of Cycles. The process I took is describe in Tips for realistic HDRI lighting.

Eevee render took 8 seconds:


Is it possible the Cycles render uses a hideous bloom / glow / glare filter which is being added to the base image emission?

That window blind is most certainly adjusted in some way, as can be seen in the direct emission reflection on the chrome pot and the heavy posterization near the darker regions of the blinds.

Something is amiss.

Graph_Sparrow did mention that his post processing might have been off. See my post # 29 for the cycles raw render which I think looks better.

No better way to make a render look like complete sh*t than to add bloom.




Lol, have you heard of post production phase?

Lenz Flarez!!

I gotta say here – I only really see one thing that matters most (to me): “Eevee = eight seconds.

Far more than I need it to be “perfect,” I need it “now.”

pretty cool for 8sec, but I tried with clients, they would all notice things like the burned/dirty top of the central column/light or other artifacts. Fixing those issues manually and regularly, plus the extra configuration it takes compared to cycles cost much more than buying a bunch of graphic cards pretty fast. Even more since E-Cycles cuts render times by 2 and the mining boom is over.

That Eevee render was a work on progress. I had already adjusted the lighting locally to fixed the central column top darkness and it took just few seconds to adjust. See the fixed Eevee render below for a 4K resolution of 25 seconds that would have taken probably 1-2 hours even with e-cycles to have a complete noise free image in Cycles. I am sure their some issue left, but the same can be said of the other renders a the top of the thread.

I have work in many interior scenes in Cycles and their many things to adjust in Cycles to get a good render. In interior scenes adjusting the lighting to reduce noise especially with small windows and lights. Their is also hot spots and splotches to improve and many more potential issues.

Once you are well experience with Eevee fixing and adjusting is faster than in Cycles. First because the preview quality looks just like a final render and changes are real time for material and lights.

I agree that Cycles will have better quality than Eevee if your willing to take time and wait for the renders. In many cases the quality of Eevee is good enough specially once you gain experience with Eevee. The time saving can be huge in high resolution stills and in walk-through animations it can save days of rendering.

Final point Eevee is still in beta and it’s going to keep getting more features and improving the render quality. Even now their some great looking interior scenes done Eevee in this gallery.

Eevee 4K+ render of 3090x3840 of 25 seconds.


Yes, for a 25 sec. high res render it is an impressive result…
For some purposes I can imagine eevee being useful, I’ve even did some simpler stuff using eevee where it was good enough.

But without some good light baking or another way to provide detailed GI interaction it’s not gonna be good enough against some top level archviz made by offline renderers(look at the 4 lights on ceiling how they seemingly float compared to lux or cycles or corona).
Maybe some rtx features could help with that and also reflections and refractions…
But I don’t think eevee is going to be on par with offline renderers for a while…

This scene is however relatively good example of where it could work, depending on how demanding the client is.

Agree shadows are more difficult in Eevee. In Eevee it is possible to have more detail control of GI shadow interaction by adding multiple/nested irradiance volume probes. I added contact shadows to fix the shadows for ceiling lights on the right.

The ceiling lights enclosures on the left I added single irradiance volume probe behind each enclosure for shadows.

The workflow should be one main irradiance volume for the room with a normal density. Then in areas where the lighting of the main IRV (irradiance volume) did not reach properly add small nested IRV probes. To improve shadows or lighting under furniture, behind items or in certain corner areas. Avoid overlapping the individual point probes between the multiple nested IRV.

Here is the update Eevee scene render improving GI, contact shadows and using multiple IRV for shadows on the ceiling light enclosures on the left. Still only 8 seconds.


maya has no viewport renderer at all :smiley: