The features of Corona Renderer you shown in this video are Awesome. Do those features works in all versions of Corona Renderer or particularly only for CORONA RENDERER - 5???
Just got Vray 5 for max 21 loving the new features especially light mix and the new hdri tools, much easier for post production since you can do most of it in the frame buffer, also love the history renders you can see yoo
Nice comparison (Y) thanks for sharing both renderer are great and for me only the pricing is the real difference now . VRay 5.0 is as simple as Corona where you don't need to actually tweak anything to get good image .just pick the noise threshold and hit render. just 2 tips for VRay : 1- whenever you are using environment lighting just use the dome light to get more accurate and faster rendering ..even if you are using VRay Sky just plug it into a dome ..I learnt this from Vlado as he mentioned it many times in the official forum. 2-Use the new filmic tonemap to get much better contrast while preserving color unlike the old highlight burn and contrast controls . Corona development is doing well actually and it get cool stuff from from Vray , for example they took the adaptive sampling years back from VRay and solve the noise issue ( they mentioned this in the merge announcement ). both teams are helping each other to improve their renderer Vray get the improved sky from Corona daily build and Corona will get soon the adaptive environment from Vray so no need for portal ! also Corona will soon get the nice Glare controls like in VRay and improved and more accurate ( according to Corona developer ) GI like in VRay . anyway , we here are using both renderers too and love them both ! : ))
nice tips!! I have an issue with the Filmic Tonemap, t looks great, but my render elements doesn't have it applied, when I compose them in nuke, the result looks the same as the vray buffer with FT off...
@@martindione386 if you are planing to use that with a compositing workflow you will need to construct your passes in a linear space in Nuke ( without any tone-mapping so the math works ) and only after that you will use a Filmic mapping as a last step . There are many choices for how to do that ;in the past people wrote their own Reinnhard mapping in Nuke to replicate what VRay is doing : forums.chaosgroup.com/forum/chaos-common/chaos-common-tutorials-tips-tricks/62729-tone-mapping-in-nuke For filmic you could use the same fimlic OCIO file in Both VRay and nuke to make sure things will match or you could use a a tonemapping gizmo in nuke ( there are few free choices on Github like this one gist.github.com/jedypod/c698d573eeba836332b9 ) and try to match things manually . I usually leave all that to our compositor and deliver a linear renders with a sample render for how I personally think the final look should work so I'm not the best one to talk about compositing here : )) .
But when someone feels restricted by lack of control over materials look in Corona, it's time to switch to Vray. Tool can't restrict your creativity and Corona is less advanced software for sure, that was the idea for it -easy, but restricted.
@@ArchVizArtist Lot of all features first been on corona in daily bilds or corona older. But vray added all features from corona. And first done realease vray 5 than corona render 6. And Texture randomisation and Tiling now have in Corona 6 rc6.
@@kolatsky we need to look at corona 6 and vray 6) I think corona render is most practical and we can create more realistic renders than in vray-i mean interiors
Been using Vray in 10 years when I try corona last 3 months, it changed my render output, no more IR, brute, light cache adjustment. the result is outstanding. You can focus on the compostion, lights and your artistry , rather than on settings(vray). Corona the best
I would like to add one more big Advantage of Corona renderer. Corona can render V-Ray Material. Whereas, V-Ray Can't render Corona material. So Obviously, My choice is Corona.
I upgraded from Vray 3.6 to 5 and it has dramatically improved my workflow. Vray's interactive production renderer is so much better, faster, and more resource efficient than activeshade used to be. I love the ability to make adjustments in the light mixer and then transfer them back to the scene. I love being able to use auto exposure as a starting point and being able to transfer it to the camera for manual adjustment. Those three things combine make lighting easier, faster, more efficient, and allows me to iterate a lot more allowing me to be a lot more creative and achieve better results in significantly less time. I'd say my only real complaint is region rendering in IPR. Every time you select a new region it recalculates GI, but only for the region so overlapping regions don't necessarily match. The ability to render around the mouse pointer makes up for it though as you can basically paint in detail in the areas you need to see. That feature already existed but it's a lot faster now. I have no experience with Corona so I can't compare, but I'm very happy with Vray 5.
The serious issue I face everytime with Corona is its handling of memory. I constantly face issues while rendering with a complex scene mostly - it will start showing memory errors (Running low on RAM) and probably the max will shut down without any notice. V-ray is similar at times, but it handles better in these times
what i love bout Corona is I not necessary need to wait the image to rendered completed then only save it. I can save the images in half way and the quality pretty good. Another one is their lightmix effect, with 1 click it can change to night mode after you settings all the lighting in render setup.
The only thing I like from the new Vray is the layering system in the VFB. The filmic tonemap in particular is very nice. Would love to see that in Corona soon (the layering and all its features). However, even that is not enough for me to go back to Vray, still sticking with Corona because the image quality is superior.
Both engines are amazing. I'm using both depending on projects as you. Thanks a lot for your tutorials Ava. I'm waiting more tutorials about creating realistic materials :)
Corona has quite realistic lighting now but materials still look poor...especially 'soft' materials like wood, plants. It can't beat Vray's ability to map almost any parameter (for ex. falloff map for refelction glossines or refraction, mixing textures with faloff map mask, ) Is mapping lights with HDR possible in Corona now?After all Corona can't beat Vray materials photorealism, you just need to uderstand Vray features on higher level, not just a few numeric values and automatic settings like in Corona. Also it takes more time to set up
Hi Corona renderer is good, but for me "corona renderer is rendering as infinite " my question is "what kind set i have to do?" because if i don't touch, render is not finishing.
I think they might be combined into one software by the developer. From release to release they are becoming more and more similar and soon Chaos Group might realize that there is no reason to keep both teams of programmers. This might happen, but doesn't have to. On the other hand, Corona gives to Chaos additional money from less demanding customers with not a lot of cash. This might be the goal to keep Corona alive. Both producing great pictures, but more points to Corona for out of the box quality. Vray needs a little more tweaking.
@Andrey Unfortunately there are some studios that are using Vray for animations or even sometimes VFX. So canceling Vray wouldn't be a clever move by Chaos.
@@ArchVizArtist I don't think so at all... We saw a great improvement in V-Ray 4 and 5 thanks to Corona. Without Corona, I'm 100% sure we never had so "speed up" of V-Ray evolution. So, honestly, I hope we will never see this merge!
@@ArchVizArtist they will never do that, it's market segmentation, that's why Corona is cheaper and more restricted. Second thing: you will have no choice, just one software on the market for all industries, movie and visualisation and others - it is pointless:)
i use laptop ryzen 5800h and rtx 3060) for rendering. i use all of ram(64gb) for high resulations (8000x12000). Render times is very long, 2 hour render (last noise %10-12) + 40mn denoise. Can i ise vray gpu rendering with CPU+gpu for save some time?
We switched to Corona a year a go and it works well....proper post-production can only be done in Photoshop in my opinion..so most of the those features of the frame buffers are not really useful. The biggest problem in Corona though is the memory usage...that's the only advantage of vray
Corona 6 came up with new great features ! but the thing is that Chaos group reprogrammed Vray from the scratch and as all we know it is more standardized than Corona, if you are welling to create virtual visits. Vray goes straight into Unreal engine with no hassle and you can use their servers for light backing. Also, now with the coming beefy NVIDIA 30 Series and the Vray GPU .. lol, let's party !
hello i have a question did i used vray material set models in corona i know there is a corona converter but i just want to know if i convert the scene first and leter i wanted to change the model e.g sofa that sofa is only in vray did i import it in that converted scene did it change the material or not. please guide the method.
For me, Corona VS Vray depends on which PC build you will have. Whereas, Corona is for CPU build and VRAY for GPU Build (they were leaning on to this direction, GPU next generations will be much faster with higher VRAM's too) More like; will you go for a Threadripper? Or will you go for Quadro's 😁😁😁
Vray is 650 a year corona is about 300 and if you can get an educational license it's around 30 euros after tax. Thats huge. Vray only got better after they bought the corona team. Vray is good for sketch up and Rhino. In 3ds Max if you buy a legit copy just use corona it's half the price and easier to use. ( if you are a designer or architect that has to do arch viz the difference is really small at this point.)
One I thing I really like in Corona is the multi HDRI map feature, one render with different environments is pretty cool. But I think Fstorm is quicker than both :) and has the best tone mapping features, close to ACES.
Nice knowledgeable video I recently switched to corona from Vray next and instantly found why people are talking soo much about corona now days Now looking at vray 5. Mixture of both can be used to get great results
Chaos Group owns both engines. (Since 2017) But it depends on your usage and knowledge of the software. If you're having issues with performance in Vray it's more than likely your settings. Vray forces you to understand how photometrics and lighting work and once you utilize Vray, It will always be the superior tool for those who understand it. Corona is for those who don't want to spend time refining render controls. (It's the quick and simpler option.) I always tell people, "If you want it faster with less time learning then use corona. But if you want to become a better artist, use Vray."
Thanks guys! I just ported from Vray to Corona at the end of 2019 so I’ll probably stay put with Corona for now, and the pricing is what currently keeps my feet firmly planted in Corona’s corner. What Chaos is doing with Vray is definitely exciting though, can’t wait to see how they will keep it moving forward!
What about GPU rendering in Vray 5 with heavy scenes ? I am using Vray Next and despite my efforts to optimize my scenes it crashes constantly. Did they improve the engine ? I heard they added a Out-of-core rendering...
Hi! You could wait one week to compare vray 5 with corona 6. Clearly as a result of the marriage between them vray got light mix and corona the light cache (4K HD) and new sky model. Also I would you like to ask you if in the corona scene portals are in place since will be no need to place them only from 6 and up too. Thanks!
@@k.krishnanarul3640 If you're unsure, you can check our guide here: coronarenderer.freshdesk.com/support/solutions/articles/5000518064-how-many-passes-is-enough-
For Arch viz Corona is probably better. Easier to use in general. But for nrp and games, V-Ray is much more powerful. In Corona, for example, there is no PTex support, no toon shader...
The only thing you mentioned in this video that makes me interested in trying corona is that according to this video you get slightly more realistic renders. However this comes at the cost of longer render times and less material/texture features. Now that vray has lightmix im going to stick with it for now
I think it's better to compare Corona 6 and VRay 5. Corona 6 has many of these features, sun and sky was taken from Corona 6 and added to VRay. Both are great, I just find Corona more responsive and user friendly, I don't want my render engine getting in the way of things. Corona is effortless and let's me spend time on other things.
I think you need to upgrade your computer so you can render much faster. My 3950x renders 57 pass 2000x1000 resolution image in 8 minutes. It's quite decent for a preview image. Wait until 4960x gets released and it would be the best buy for you! 😁
i love corona for its result and ease. but when it comes to 3d models, corona dont have much range in it. and corona converter not always work good. can u tell us what do you do about your 3d models with corona, please.
They say Corona. I was confused which one to use, then decided to go with vray, because it works in other platforms as well, like sketchup and Revit I guess, so I can talk the same language with other guys. Vray, so far after a month of learning, is possible to handle, but for a personal opinion, when it becomes completely under control for me, I might try Corona so I can have a true personal opinion.
I know this is a total noob question but I was wondering if the primary host software matters? Like, will corona for C4D and Max produce the same results. Or are there differences?
@@murtazarizvi368 NO I was using Vray for Rhino recently and material's settings are those present in Rhino, not those in Vray for Max(native host) or Maya for example. So it depends on host software STRONGLY. Worst is the Sketchup thing;))) Only the rendering engine is the same, but features of the host soft. is big restriction.
Hi archviz.nice videos of urs.can I get realistic renders with quadro k 420 graphic card like urs.or I have to go for higher configuration of computer.pls recommend.
Cannot argue with the realistic results from Corona from Lighting to Shaders they are superior. Been considering the switch to Corona I guess it will be much better to work with both cause... those render times though lol
Vray for blender is still experimental, lacks of many features, you can try Vray standalone but it's pain in ass. Caustics is present in Vray from the begining, with photon map.
Yeah, i once indirectly worked with one guy, he rendered 4000x4000 image for like 2hours on a RebusFarm which cost him like $24 using Corona, meanwhile i rendered same/similar ( converted to vray scene of his ) in like 15mins on a single 980Ti in V-Ray. Also for reference: 980Ti costs around $150-200 used i believe and it's 400% faster than R5 2600 @ 4Ghz OC or pretty much equivalent to Threadripper 3960X ( $1200~ ) and now imagine RTX 2080Ti ( or RTX 2070S as an best value option ) w/ the RT Cores enabled which provides extra 300% performance boost on avg ( i've heard the more complex the scene the better it does, once seen 800% boost posted by someone ). RIP CPU rendering pretty much.
@@ExacoMvm Yeah, and what did You render in 4000x4000? A box? That gpu has 6gb of ram I think, so what scene can fit in it? I think the problem of gpu rendering is the ram, if You work with huge scenes and render in huge resolution, the only way is CPU rendering, if You dont want to buy 2x quadro rtx8000.
@@peterasztalos4693 It was around 1mil poly product w/ pretty complex lighting and few different materials. ( NDA so i can't tell exactly what it was ). In terms of geometry that 6GB VRAM can easily handle something like 50mil+ scene ( most archviz scenes for example are just few mil polys ) also nowadays there's Out-of-Core support for all the textures etc so it gets loaded into RAM. Imho for architecture GPU rendering is fine, but ofcourse if you're going fairly insane GPU rendering might not be the ideal solution ( i am talking here about these Hollywood shots which takes few TB of RAM ). For reference: 68.245.580 polygons takes 3.03GB of VRAM ( FStorm ). Also check out "Project Lavina" i think it's going to be great stuff ( requires RTX GPU ).
@@ExacoMvm I don't know, maybe You know something I don't. Usually I convert everything to proxy what is bigger than 50k poly. I use forest pack when it needed, I keep my scenes more simple as I can. Usually during rendering a normal interior scene, like a restaurant with lots of details, in 3k resolution needs like 20-30 gb system memory. An exterior scene in big resolution with lots of trees, grass needs even more, like 50-60 gb. So I can not imagine which kind of scene can fit in 6gb. Because I usually work with big interior and exterior scenes, for me gpu rendering can not be an option, and also in my opinion cpu rendering is much more accurate.
I'm beginning with 3d's max and Corona, you think you could make tutorials from start basic? Those kind of things for people like me that have no idea of how to start rendering with corona. I'm switching from SketchUp and V-Ray for SketchUp.
@@ArchVizArtist OMG you are my hero since several months ago, thank you for replying me, your job is amazing, greetings from Venezuela. ♥♥♥ I hope I can work as you do someday.
Hi. Great video, the comparaison give us the most important to know, so great job. I found the render time comparaison was lacking in details about the Vray side, so i'm asking if you tried it with irrandiance map or bruteforce. You must already know that the Irradiance map is much faster than the bruteforce and in this new version of vray lightmix works only with bruteforce and I personnaly deplored it. It tried Bruteforce and corona, and in my scene I think that the rendertimes were equivalent, with a preference to corona renderer. Would you please give us more details to understand where i probably got wrong. Thanks for all :)
Grt explanation 👍.........but the features of corona u demonstrate in ur video is also in vray 5. The main difference i find b/w vray and corona is resumable renders process. I have mid end specs system. So, this feature is very important for me. When i render in corona by resume render function...it takes same time for remaining part render as it takes in single render process but this is not happen in case of vray. Vray takes more time as it take in single render process. But still i use vray for fast render results in single render process. Is corona match the vray render time? Plz share ur opinion.🙏
@@ArchVizArtist aha, i was really curious about this. I used to render with iRay so invested in good GPU's. Now i switched to Vray5 mostly because of GPU rendering. I'm really curious to render your 2hr CPU render on my 2x RTX2080Ti....is that possible? Grtz Brian / Helder3d
I found that settings of CPU are different from GPU, so I focused on CPU, specially that all videos are talking about it. I wonder if there is a hybrid option in vray or in Corona.
Corona bouncing engine algorithm is superior, that's why corona feels more "realistic", I wish they add cuda handlers to help with the time. But hey Ryzen..... 😂
Mmm... not bad video, but there is room for improvements: (1) As other people say, why not wait v6.0 (end of August 2020)? Corona v5.0 (November 2019) vs V-Ray 5.0 (summer 2020) is not fair comparison at all. It can create a bit of confusion. (2) Corona developers invented the new Improved Sky model and shared in V-Ray. (3) V-Ray bloom and Glare are now in Corona. (4) Corona v6.0 has new Tiling option. (5) Corona v6.0 has new Adaptive sampling to avoid using Portals and speed up rendering time (from V-Ray core). (6) You didn't mentioned how you rendered in V-Ray. If you use IM+LC vs PT+UHD Cache, you did a mistake and it is a not fair comparison. You should use BF+LC instead. I cannot believe in such huge difference between two engine. . Author of VRay - THE COMPLETE GUIDE (first book in the World for V-Ray - 2008), Corona Beta Tester from 2013, official Corona main instructor of Corona and... much more... ;-) Stay tuned!
For characters, Vrayhairmtl and its new Skinshader is superhandy and robust. For anything like realistic rendering, not includic organic stuff, I'd use Corona or Maxwell. But Maxwell is pain to use, but I think it's the most realistic. By the way, thank you for the video, it was a sheer pleasure to watch. But yes, Vray has new features, which are very nice. But I'm not sure how they coexist in one company.
hello, when you comparing renders times, is a cpu vs cpu comparation??, vray is then too much faster than corona, wow. In animation it can be a big difference...
@@ArchVizArtist Hahahaha..to już wiem skąd ten akcent:)) .. świat jest mały:) Zaczynam w 3ds max przede wszystkim na użytek własnych renderów interiorów. Piszesz, że przygotowałaś również kurs, czy jest on również po polsku? pozdrawiam serdecznie
very good comparison, thx! i am working with corona 6 (C4D) at the moment... much easyer and faster than vray in my opinion. i get faster results if i am under pressure ;) ...the denoiser works very good in corona!
2 and 5 hour is suuper long for a scene this small, wow! What cpu and how much ram do you have ? i have a i7 gen 4 and i render a scene like this in less than 30 min, and it's a pretty old cpu. Anyway, nice video :D
Octane is the best !! because 4 CPUs in one PC is too expensive to have 4 PCs with network and render licenses is kind of difficult to maintain but 4 RTX cards in one PC is much easier to handle
What's your thoughts? V-Ray or Corona?
The features of Corona Renderer you shown in this video are Awesome. Do those features works in all versions of Corona Renderer or particularly only for CORONA RENDERER - 5???
All the versions.
Just got Vray 5 for max 21 loving the new features especially light mix and the new hdri tools, much easier for post production since you can do most of it in the frame buffer, also love the history renders you can see yoo
vray then, vray now! obviously
I Am all For Corona for the reasons above and the ease of use compared to Vray
2020 might not be the best time to Use Corona renderer
Corona V-ray us.
:P :))
Nice comparison (Y) thanks for sharing
both renderer are great and for me only the pricing is the real difference now .
VRay 5.0 is as simple as Corona where you don't need to actually tweak anything to get good image .just pick the noise threshold and hit render.
just 2 tips for VRay :
1- whenever you are using environment lighting just use the dome light to get more accurate and faster rendering ..even if you are using VRay Sky just plug it into a dome ..I learnt this from Vlado as he mentioned it many times in the official forum.
2-Use the new filmic tonemap to get much better contrast while preserving color unlike the old highlight burn and contrast controls .
Corona development is doing well actually and it get cool stuff from from Vray , for example they took the adaptive sampling years back from VRay and solve the noise issue ( they mentioned this in the merge announcement ).
both teams are helping each other to improve their renderer Vray get the improved sky from Corona daily build and Corona will get soon the adaptive environment from Vray so no need for portal !
also Corona will soon get the nice Glare controls like in VRay and improved and more accurate ( according to Corona developer ) GI like in VRay .
anyway , we here are using both renderers too and love them both ! : ))
Thanks for sharing!! Great tips :)
nice tips!! I have an issue with the Filmic Tonemap, t looks great, but my render elements doesn't have it applied, when I compose them in nuke, the result looks the same as the vray buffer with FT off...
@@martindione386
if you are planing to use that with a compositing workflow you will need to construct your passes in a linear space in Nuke ( without any tone-mapping so the math works ) and only after that you will use a Filmic mapping as a last step .
There are many choices for how to do that ;in the past people wrote their own Reinnhard mapping in Nuke to replicate what VRay is doing :
forums.chaosgroup.com/forum/chaos-common/chaos-common-tutorials-tips-tricks/62729-tone-mapping-in-nuke
For filmic you could use the same fimlic OCIO file in Both VRay and nuke to make sure things will match or you could use a a tonemapping gizmo in nuke ( there are few free choices on Github like this one gist.github.com/jedypod/c698d573eeba836332b9 ) and try to match things manually .
I usually leave all that to our compositor and deliver a linear renders with a sample render for how I personally think the final look should work so I'm not the best one to talk about compositing here : )) .
@@nawrasryhan thanks for your answer!! I'll try those gizmos, I hope I can replicate the results ;)
Doesn t matter which one. What matters is which one you feel more comfortable with. It s not the tool but rather the user that makes the difference.
Agree!
But when someone feels restricted by lack of control over materials look in Corona, it's time to switch to Vray. Tool can't restrict your creativity and Corona is less advanced software for sure, that was the idea for it -easy, but restricted.
You should have waited a few days and compared Corona 6 with Vray 5 , It would have been a more accurate comparison : )
You're right :) I will make a video about Corona 6 too.
@@ArchVizArtist Lot of all features first been on corona in daily bilds or corona older. But vray added all features from corona. And first done realease vray 5 than corona render 6. And Texture randomisation and Tiling now have in Corona 6 rc6.
@@kolatsky we need to look at corona 6 and vray 6) I think corona render is most practical and we can create more realistic renders than in vray-i mean interiors
@@arttv4082 Yes for archviz Corona is better. And colormodel better in corona.
@@kolatsky I think in 6 version both renders they will be same
there is a special airy white in the corona render that I have not yet seen in vray)
Been using Vray in 10 years when I try corona last 3 months, it changed my render output, no more IR, brute, light cache adjustment. the result is outstanding. You can focus on the compostion, lights and your artistry , rather than on settings(vray). Corona the best
I would like to add one more big Advantage of Corona renderer.
Corona can render V-Ray Material. Whereas, V-Ray Can't render Corona material. So Obviously, My choice is Corona.
True.. it cannot render blend or 2side material though.
@@ArchVizArtist Vray 5 can render simple Corona material. Please also do render time comparison same scene but with Corona 6, with 4K light cache.
I upgraded from Vray 3.6 to 5 and it has dramatically improved my workflow. Vray's interactive production renderer is so much better, faster, and more resource efficient than activeshade used to be. I love the ability to make adjustments in the light mixer and then transfer them back to the scene. I love being able to use auto exposure as a starting point and being able to transfer it to the camera for manual adjustment. Those three things combine make lighting easier, faster, more efficient, and allows me to iterate a lot more allowing me to be a lot more creative and achieve better results in significantly less time. I'd say my only real complaint is region rendering in IPR. Every time you select a new region it recalculates GI, but only for the region so overlapping regions don't necessarily match. The ability to render around the mouse pointer makes up for it though as you can basically paint in detail in the areas you need to see. That feature already existed but it's a lot faster now. I have no experience with Corona so I can't compare, but I'm very happy with Vray 5.
Thanks for sharing this :)
Can u pls one help
V ray me HDRi plate purchase karna padta he ki koi setting ya other way se free download kar sakte he? Pls replay jarur kariye..
The serious issue I face everytime with Corona is its handling of memory. I constantly face issues while rendering with a complex scene mostly - it will start showing memory errors (Running low on RAM) and probably the max will shut down without any notice. V-ray is similar at times, but it handles better in these times
So what kind of work station would you recommend for the work
There is one line I tell everyone I know who leaves V-Ray or the Unreal Engine. "You'll be back."
Hehehe :)
hmmm idk about unreal haha but true
Not for all :) I use Corona and I never come back eheh
@@andreamacor4135 I'm really interested in Corona. How is it better than Vray ?
Depends what you will be doing with it. :)
what i love bout Corona is I not necessary need to wait the image to rendered completed then only save it. I can save the images in half way and the quality pretty good. Another one is their lightmix effect, with 1 click it can change to night mode after you settings all the lighting in render setup.
V-Ray has a light mix now too.
Can u pls one help
V ray me HDRi plate purchase karna padta he ki koi setting ya other way se free download kar sakte he? Pls replay jarur kariye..
The only thing I like from the new Vray is the layering system in the VFB. The filmic tonemap in particular is very nice. Would love to see that in Corona soon (the layering and all its features). However, even that is not enough for me to go back to Vray, still sticking with Corona because the image quality is superior.
Corona has filmic highlights and shadow option which works similarly. I agree with you about the quality ;)
Both engines are amazing. I'm using both depending on projects as you. Thanks a lot for your tutorials Ava. I'm waiting more tutorials about creating realistic materials :)
Awesome, thank you!
What about Maxwell Render?
Can anybody help me where can i download vray for 3ds 2018. Thanksm
Stay with Corona, my fav channel youtube about archviz!
Thank you sooo much!!
Love corona, maybe in the next version add some gpu or hybrid interactive prevs
We will see :)
I used vray for almost 7yrs..
But Just fell in love with corona..but the rendering time makes problem..
Corona has quite realistic lighting now but materials still look poor...especially 'soft' materials like wood, plants. It can't beat Vray's ability to map almost any parameter (for ex. falloff map for refelction glossines or refraction, mixing textures with faloff map mask, ) Is mapping lights with HDR possible in Corona now?After all Corona can't beat Vray materials photorealism, you just need to uderstand Vray features on higher level, not just a few numeric values and automatic settings like in Corona. Also it takes more time to set up
Corona all day! Thanks Ava!
You're so welcome!
This sentence out of context would not sound good these years
Hi Corona renderer is good, but for me "corona renderer is rendering as infinite "
my question is "what kind set i have to do?"
because if i don't touch, render is not finishing.
you can set time, pass or noise limit in the settings :)
@@ArchVizArtist😉 thanks for answer
i tried it... So I'm a bit of a dreamer. I need to increase the values more.😁😊
I think they might be combined into one software by the developer. From release to release they are becoming more and more similar and soon Chaos Group might realize that there is no reason to keep both teams of programmers. This might happen, but doesn't have to. On the other hand, Corona gives to Chaos additional money from less demanding customers with not a lot of cash. This might be the goal to keep Corona alive. Both producing great pictures, but more points to Corona for out of the box quality. Vray needs a little more tweaking.
I think it would be a great idea to merge them and take the best from each ;)
@Andrey Unfortunately there are some studios that are using Vray for animations or even sometimes VFX. So canceling Vray wouldn't be a clever move by Chaos.
@@ArchVizArtist I don't think so at all... We saw a great improvement in V-Ray 4 and 5 thanks to Corona. Without Corona, I'm 100% sure we never had so "speed up" of V-Ray evolution. So, honestly, I hope we will never see this merge!
@@ArchVizArtist they will never do that, it's market segmentation, that's why Corona is cheaper and more restricted. Second thing: you will have no choice, just one software on the market for all industries, movie and visualisation and others - it is pointless:)
What specification of desk top would you recomend for the work. And which graphic card is the better
Sars CoV2 renderer
I'm a completely beginner... what about Arnold renderer? Do you suggest to learn it or to learn directly Vray or Corona? TKS
I believe that Corona is much more realistic in interior lighting and rendering, but for exteriors, i prefer V-Ray and for animations too...
system configuration FOR CORONA render 3ds max
i use laptop ryzen 5800h and rtx 3060) for rendering. i use all of ram(64gb) for high resulations (8000x12000). Render times is very long, 2 hour render (last noise %10-12) + 40mn denoise. Can i ise vray gpu rendering with CPU+gpu for save some time?
We switched to Corona a year a go and it works well....proper post-production can only be done in Photoshop in my opinion..so most of the those features of the frame buffers are not really useful. The biggest problem in Corona though is the memory usage...that's the only advantage of vray
Yes, you need a lot of RAM ;)
Hi Ana ! Can You try Redshift too ? Im really interested in your opinion about its quality, speed etc. Nice comparison ! Thanks for sharing !
I'll check it out!
Corona 6 came up with new great features ! but the thing is that Chaos group reprogrammed Vray from the scratch and as all we know it is more standardized than Corona, if you are welling to create virtual visits. Vray goes straight into Unreal engine with no hassle and you can use their servers for light backing. Also, now with the coming beefy NVIDIA 30 Series and the Vray GPU .. lol, let's party !
hello i have a question did i used vray material set models in corona i know there is a corona converter but i just want to know if i convert the scene first and leter i wanted to change the model e.g sofa that sofa is only in vray did i import it in that converted scene did it change the material or not. please guide the method.
You can convert multiple times, you can also convert only selected elements.
I didn't understand. Are you using here Vray CPU, or GPU? Because now it is not actual to use CPU for rendering....it is too long.
Corona render is POWERFUL! Only Corona-Render!
For me, Corona VS Vray depends on which PC build you will have.
Whereas, Corona is for CPU build and VRAY for GPU Build (they were leaning on to this direction, GPU next generations will be much faster with higher VRAM's too)
More like; will you go for a Threadripper? Or will you go for Quadro's 😁😁😁
Thanks for sharing:)
What about GPU rendering though isn’t it better for most people to use their GPUs for rendering ? 😕
your vids are the best. Women have better understanding of what is to be explained. Better content. Love it
Vray is 650 a year corona is about 300 and if you can get an educational license it's around 30 euros after tax. Thats huge. Vray only got better after they bought the corona team. Vray is good for sketch up and Rhino. In 3ds Max if you buy a legit copy just use corona it's half the price and easier to use. ( if you are a designer or architect that has to do arch viz the difference is really small at this point.)
In my opinion, it will be a great idea to merge both of them and take the best from each of them.
I think it would be good 👍
Corona still more realistic renders in an easy workflow so none of the fancy features in Vray matter xD
Heheh :)
If you know how to use it, you can achieve same results
Corona render- vray light mix and post process came in corona 2 itself..best in quality,price and comfort.
You're right ;)
agree apart from quality of 'natural' materials
One I thing I really like in Corona is the multi HDRI map feature, one render with different environments is pretty cool. But I think Fstorm is quicker than both :) and has the best tone mapping features, close to ACES.
Thanks for letting me know;)
Nice knowledgeable video
I recently switched to corona from Vray next and instantly found why people are talking soo much about corona now days
Now looking at vray 5. Mixture of both can be used to get great results
Glad it was helpful!
Chaos Group owns both engines. (Since 2017)
But it depends on your usage and knowledge of the software. If you're having issues with performance in Vray it's more than likely your settings.
Vray forces you to understand how photometrics and lighting work and once you utilize Vray, It will always be the superior tool for those who understand it.
Corona is for those who don't want to spend time refining render controls. (It's the quick and simpler option.)
I always tell people, "If you want it faster with less time learning then use corona. But if you want to become a better artist, use Vray."
Wich one is better ???
Both are great ;)
The features of corona renderer you explained in this video works only in CORONA RENDERER 5 or in all Versions of Corona Renderer????
Mostly in all the versions.
are you using the threadripper 64core?
Subscribed And Also hit the Notification button. Very good content.
Thanks guys! I just ported from Vray to Corona at the end of 2019 so I’ll probably stay put with Corona for now, and the pricing is what currently keeps my feet firmly planted in Corona’s corner. What Chaos is doing with Vray is definitely exciting though, can’t wait to see how they will keep it moving forward!
Yes, it's very exciting! Cheers ;)
What about GPU rendering in Vray 5 with heavy scenes ? I am using Vray Next and despite my efforts to optimize my scenes it crashes constantly. Did they improve the engine ? I heard they added a Out-of-core rendering...
I don't use GPU rendering as my GUP is not so good...
Hi! You could wait one week to compare vray 5 with corona 6. Clearly as a result of the marriage between them vray got light mix and corona the light cache (4K HD) and new sky model.
Also I would you like to ask you if in the corona scene portals are in place since will be no need to place them only from 6 and up too.
Thanks!
I will make a video about the new Corona as well ;)
Generally how much no. of render pass will you use in corona renderer for better results
Depends on the scene..
@@ArchVizArtist how much min. No. Of render pass needed, i have no idea on that
@@k.krishnanarul3640 If you're unsure, you can check our guide here: coronarenderer.freshdesk.com/support/solutions/articles/5000518064-how-many-passes-is-enough-
Why corona image look so vivid compared to Vray wich look very flat ?
For Arch viz Corona is probably better. Easier to use in general. But for nrp and games, V-Ray is much more powerful. In Corona, for example, there is no PTex support, no toon shader...
Thanks for sharing, I have no experience in games.
The only thing you mentioned in this video that makes me interested in trying corona is that according to this video you get slightly more realistic renders. However this comes at the cost of longer render times and less material/texture features. Now that vray has lightmix im going to stick with it for now
I see your point :) Thanks for sharing.
I think it's better to compare Corona 6 and VRay 5. Corona 6 has many of these features, sun and sky was taken from Corona 6 and added to VRay. Both are great, I just find Corona more responsive and user friendly, I don't want my render engine getting in the way of things. Corona is effortless and let's me spend time on other things.
Thanks for sharing your thoughts :)
God rendered his eyes in which of the two software?
I’m waiting for corona for sketchup then I’ll try it
what is render nod ???
I think you need to upgrade your computer so you can render much faster. My 3950x renders 57 pass 2000x1000 resolution image in 8 minutes. It's quite decent for a preview image. Wait until 4960x gets released and it would be the best buy for you! 😁
Thanks for the tip
Ava could you tell us what Rig you're running?
You mean PC? If yes it's in description.
V-Ray - VFX, inematic, Arch + gamedev. Corona - Arc&Design
this is accurate
Vray GPU for speed is incredible but it doesn't have all the functionality of CPU
i love corona for its result and ease. but when it comes to 3d models, corona dont have much range in it. and corona converter not always work good. can u tell us what do you do about your 3d models with corona, please.
Sometimes I have to tweak materials manually.
@@ArchVizArtist thank you. dont you think it take more time then vray ?
i am still thankful for corona after many years of v-ray...
Which is user friendly and faster? Corona or vray?
They say Corona.
I was confused which one to use, then decided to go with vray, because it works in other platforms as well, like sketchup and Revit I guess, so I can talk the same language with other guys.
Vray, so far after a month of learning, is possible to handle, but for a personal opinion, when it becomes completely under control for me, I might try Corona so I can have a true personal opinion.
@@sameralsad great
Which one will be better for animation?
You can do animations in both, V-Ray is faster to render ;)
@@ArchVizArtist still corona is easier to manage ?
vray by far.world best engine for animation
I know this is a total noob question but I was wondering if the primary host software matters?
Like, will corona for C4D and Max produce the same results. Or are there differences?
i think its pretty much the same, considering the user knows both the softwares
@@murtazarizvi368 NO I was using Vray for Rhino recently and material's settings are those present in Rhino, not those in Vray for Max(native host) or Maya for example. So it depends on host software STRONGLY. Worst is the Sketchup thing;))) Only the rendering engine is the same, but features of the host soft. is big restriction.
Hi archviz.nice videos of urs.can I get realistic renders with quadro k 420 graphic card like urs.or I have to go for higher configuration of computer.pls recommend.
Not sure, check benchmarks. Computer won't make your renders more realistic, it will only render faster.
Vray for animation corona for stills. I totally agree with you, corona looks more realistic. But for animation less render time = more money!
Good point ;)
why dont u use lumion instead
Cannot argue with the realistic results from Corona from Lighting to Shaders they are superior.
Been considering the switch to Corona I guess it will be much better to work with both cause...
those render times though lol
True ;)
Do Corona or V-Ray have caustics rendering?
Also can you try Blender and give us your opinion?
Thx
vray has. Don't know about Corona.
Vray for blender is still experimental, lacks of many features, you can try Vray standalone but it's pain in ass. Caustics is present in Vray from the begining, with photon map.
I think one of the most advantages of vray is do the same scene in 45 min in GPU mode ;)
Yeah, i once indirectly worked with one guy, he rendered 4000x4000 image for like 2hours on a RebusFarm which cost him like $24 using Corona, meanwhile i rendered same/similar ( converted to vray scene of his ) in like 15mins on a single 980Ti in V-Ray.
Also for reference: 980Ti costs around $150-200 used i believe and it's 400% faster than R5 2600 @ 4Ghz OC or pretty much equivalent to Threadripper 3960X ( $1200~ ) and now imagine RTX 2080Ti ( or RTX 2070S as an best value option ) w/ the RT Cores enabled which provides extra 300% performance boost on avg ( i've heard the more complex the scene the better it does, once seen 800% boost posted by someone ).
RIP CPU rendering pretty much.
Thanks for sharing, we probably need to upgrade our GPUs and start using it :)
@@ExacoMvm
Yeah, and what did You render in 4000x4000? A box? That gpu has 6gb of ram I think, so what scene can fit in it? I think the problem of gpu rendering is the ram, if You work with huge scenes and render in huge resolution, the only way is CPU rendering, if You dont want to buy 2x quadro rtx8000.
@@peterasztalos4693 It was around 1mil poly product w/ pretty complex lighting and few different materials. ( NDA so i can't tell exactly what it was ).
In terms of geometry that 6GB VRAM can easily handle something like 50mil+ scene ( most archviz scenes for example are just few mil polys ) also nowadays there's Out-of-Core support for all the textures etc so it gets loaded into RAM.
Imho for architecture GPU rendering is fine, but ofcourse if you're going fairly insane GPU rendering might not be the ideal solution ( i am talking here about these Hollywood shots which takes few TB of RAM ).
For reference: 68.245.580 polygons takes 3.03GB of VRAM ( FStorm ).
Also check out "Project Lavina" i think it's going to be great stuff ( requires RTX GPU ).
@@ExacoMvm
I don't know, maybe You know something I don't. Usually I convert everything to proxy what is bigger than 50k poly. I use forest pack when it needed, I keep my scenes more simple as I can. Usually during rendering a normal interior scene, like a restaurant with lots of details, in 3k resolution needs like 20-30 gb system memory. An exterior scene in big resolution with lots of trees, grass needs even more, like 50-60 gb. So I can not imagine which kind of scene can fit in 6gb. Because I usually work with big interior and exterior scenes, for me gpu rendering can not be an option, and also in my opinion cpu rendering is much more accurate.
Have you tried blender cycles? i think there are a cycles version for max
I am Vegan.
I'm beginning with 3d's max and Corona, you think you could make tutorials from start basic? Those kind of things for people like me that have no idea of how to start rendering with corona. I'm switching from SketchUp and V-Ray for SketchUp.
We are working on the online course for beginners right now, it will be ready in about 1 month.
@@ArchVizArtist OMG you are my hero since several months ago, thank you for replying me, your job is amazing, greetings from Venezuela. ♥♥♥ I hope I can work as you do someday.
Corona is best for our archviz but current situation, corona is bad for world!!!😂
Mam can you show me. V ray rendering settings For interiors
I will do a video about that.
Did you use portals on the corona scene?
not needed anymore with corona 6
Hi. Great video, the comparaison give us the most important to know, so great job. I found the render time comparaison was lacking in details about the Vray side, so i'm asking if you tried it with irrandiance map or bruteforce. You must already know that the Irradiance map is much faster than the bruteforce and in this new version of vray lightmix works only with bruteforce and I personnaly deplored it. It tried Bruteforce and corona, and in my scene I think that the rendertimes were equivalent, with a preference to corona renderer. Would you please give us more details to understand where i probably got wrong. Thanks for all :)
With irrandiance map you achieve fake lighting, brute force try to emulate real world lighting.
Grt explanation 👍.........but the features of corona u demonstrate in ur video is also in vray 5. The main difference i find b/w vray and corona is resumable renders process. I have mid end specs system. So, this feature is very important for me. When i render in corona by resume render function...it takes same time for remaining part render as it takes in single render process but this is not happen in case of vray. Vray takes more time as it take in single render process. But still i use vray for fast render results in single render process. Is corona match the vray render time? Plz share ur opinion.🙏
Great video! but I have a question.
When you are using Vray do you use CPU or GPU rendering and why?
I use CPU only because I have weak GPU. We invested in CPUs more because we used Corona more.
@@ArchVizArtist aha, i was really curious about this. I used to render with iRay so invested in good GPU's. Now i switched to Vray5 mostly because of GPU rendering. I'm really curious to render your 2hr CPU render on my 2x RTX2080Ti....is that possible? Grtz Brian / Helder3d
I found that settings of CPU are different from GPU, so I focused on CPU, specially that all videos are talking about it. I wonder if there is a hybrid option in vray or in Corona.
@@sameralsad There is a hybrid option in Vray.
Corona only renders by the CPU
@@hishamelmaghraby3875 an advise how to use that will be a big help please.
Your video contents are very helpful......and updating well about the things around....thank you so much ....from🇮🇳
My pleasure 😊
Vray is 629€/year and Corona 300€ in every year, voor a small studio i think it isn't a big question.
It’s 425€ not 629€. 629 is The V-Ray Collection
I think i can use both
Corona bouncing engine algorithm is superior, that's why corona feels more "realistic", I wish they add cuda handlers to help with the time. But hey Ryzen..... 😂
Neh. I am a Corona user after year with Vray. I don´t think the difference is in the quality.
Do you compare they algorithms? How did you know?
Mmm... not bad video, but there is room for improvements:
(1) As other people say, why not wait v6.0 (end of August 2020)? Corona v5.0 (November 2019) vs V-Ray 5.0 (summer 2020) is not fair comparison at all. It can create a bit of confusion.
(2) Corona developers invented the new Improved Sky model and shared in V-Ray.
(3) V-Ray bloom and Glare are now in Corona.
(4) Corona v6.0 has new Tiling option.
(5) Corona v6.0 has new Adaptive sampling to avoid using Portals and speed up rendering time (from V-Ray core).
(6) You didn't mentioned how you rendered in V-Ray. If you use IM+LC vs PT+UHD Cache, you did a mistake and it is a not fair comparison. You should use BF+LC instead. I cannot believe in such huge difference between two engine. .
Author of VRay - THE COMPLETE GUIDE (first book in the World for V-Ray - 2008), Corona Beta Tester from 2013, official Corona main instructor of Corona and... much more... ;-)
Stay tuned!
LEGRENZI STUDIO I bought your book!!! Long long time ago.
I'm not patient enough ;)
@@ArchVizArtist Eh eh he ... try to think me write a book , what's your V-Ray setup? IM+LC or BF+LC?
It's not "more realistic" you can achieve same results... Also when you compare you show different part of the images...
For characters, Vrayhairmtl and its new Skinshader is superhandy and robust. For anything like realistic rendering, not includic organic stuff, I'd use Corona or Maxwell. But Maxwell is pain to use, but I think it's the most realistic. By the way, thank you for the video, it was a sheer pleasure to watch.
But yes, Vray has new features, which are very nice. But I'm not sure how they coexist in one company.
YES, CORONA GIVE MORE REALISTIC RESULT
Agree :)
Nop I don’t think so lady depends how the setting you put on Vray
hello, when you comparing renders times, is a cpu vs cpu comparation??, vray is then too much faster than corona, wow. In animation it can be a big difference...
Yes, cpu vs cpu
why not use both? you have a bias and unbiased solution along with gpu and cpu. Also perhaps a more fitting comparison would be arnold vs corona.
i leap back to vray after vray5 release....
Thanks for sharing ;)
You're right. Corona still more realistic than v-ray.
You have a great channel. I watch with fascination.
Greetings from Poland
Peter
Thank you, I'm from Poland too :D
@@ArchVizArtist Hahahaha..to już wiem skąd ten akcent:)) .. świat jest mały:) Zaczynam w 3ds max przede wszystkim na użytek własnych renderów interiorów. Piszesz, że przygotowałaś również kurs, czy jest on również po polsku?
pozdrawiam serdecznie
very good comparison, thx! i am working with corona 6 (C4D) at the moment... much easyer and faster than vray in my opinion. i get faster results if i am under pressure ;) ...the denoiser works very good in corona!
Hey I've some doubts regarding corona and c4d can u help as u see there aren't much tut on yt abt it.
2 and 5 hour is suuper long for a scene this small, wow! What cpu and how much ram do you have ? i have a i7 gen 4 and i render a scene like this in less than 30 min, and it's a pretty old cpu.
Anyway, nice video :D
image is 4000x5000 and probably rendered to obscurely low noise level.
Thank you Ava..
You are so welcome!
Octane is the best !!
because 4 CPUs in one PC is too expensive to have
4 PCs with network and render licenses is kind of difficult to maintain
but 4 RTX cards in one PC is much easier to handle
Thank you for sharing.