Lux, Corona, Cycles

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.

5 Likes

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.

6 Likes

maya has no viewport renderer at all :smiley:

Oh, this is interesting. I didn’t know/try that multiple “nested” ir volumes can work together so nicely.

I definitely agree with the recent comments concerning Eevee, and, “versus Cycles.” But I’m going to be frank and say that I think that Eevee is going to eclipse everything else for many pragmatic circumstances, simply because it has proved itself capable of producing very high-quality renders … commensurate to those produced by Cycles … “almost immediately.” And with real-time visualizations of the final render output within(!) the development environment (viewport).

Of course(!) “every situation and every client is different,” but when I look at the latest Eevee output and compare it to the others which were much more laboriously produced, I frankly cannot see a single difference between them that actually matters – to me – for this shot.

The beauty of Blender is, of course, that we have many alternatives available to us, at our fingertips, within the same integrated environment. If the job calls for Eevee, “there it is.” If it calls for Cycles, “there it is.” (And I fondly hope that I can say, “if the job calls for BI …” but that’s another story for another [existing] thread.) We have at our fingertips an open-source “embarrassment of riches.” :+1:

7 Likes

Oh Thanks))

1 Like

Do you mind sharing the scene? I want to test appleseed as well.

https://dropmefiles.com/h7xpH
Hi)

1 Like

What GPU did you use for this render?

Windows Nvidia RTX 2070.

Can you put it on google drive ? the files is not available. just find time to make a proper / optimized convertion for luxcore.

https://dropmefiles.com/B7ed6
Hi)

Thanks Man for the files. You forget to pack textures in the blend file. anyway i manage to find them. After some simple optimisation (not aggressive/huge bias) like :

#1 Change curtain shader to Matte transluscent instead of Glossy translucent as there is no visual benefit for this. Always use Matte transclucent for my curtains.

#2 give a small radius to the four lamp in the back near the curtains instead of size 0.0 (better sampling. we should hard coded a lower limit to avoid user doing such mistake cause it lead to lot of fireflies)

#3 move the orange lamp to fit the hole instead of overlap with geometry

#4 Switch to linear = 1 as based camera response and efficacy off all lamp also set to 1. help to predict render output while working

#5 Big improvement whent i remove all the Lights group and use a single one so Compute power is not divided and wasted arround.

#6 As i use lower camera response and light/lamp efficacy 1 i can use smaller clamp value from :

5 = 3X faster give a corona like output (a bit to clamped for me)

to

100 = nice speed better light propagation but still avoid useless fireflies

#7 Switch to OIDN denoiser better than luxcore 2.1 BCD ( but not your fault here)

My hardware is = GTX 1080ti + i7 8700k so simillar to your GTX 1080ti + 1800x

Luxcore 2.2 Pure Path tracing ___ 20mn Rendertime

Luxcore 2.2 PGI ___ 5mn Rendertime

So i can easly outperform corona time and quality With PGI + i7 8700k. I feel a bit strange when i’m saying that but this dream came true now. David Bucciarelli is making a striking good job on this software.

If you want to have more infos about Luxcore 2.2 follow this link. And thank you for giving a try to this engine with this very nice Scene.

5 Likes

hi sharlybg please can you upload lux2.2 scene.

Done ! By the way also want to share the file with Lux forum user Gragh_Sparrow Do you allow me ?

if you have simillar hardware (1080Ti + i7 8700k) performance just open and press F12 and see yourself. The scene stop condition is 5mn and PGI enable by default :

Here you go :

https://drive.google.com/open?id=1Yo80y1bUSBpBulAE-cilzPM7iM8vke8u

1 Like

For anyone who wants to try it, you will need the latest v2.2alpha0 of our Blender addon: https://forums.luxcorerender.org/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=937

wow, this is super. The result was like yours. Of course, there is a small difference between a very long render, but 5 minutes is something. Please tell me, are those pgi settings, can they be considered universal, or close to this, and build on them in other works?
Thank you for your participation)/ When displacement appears it will be just awesome.

How many samples did you render?