Perfect comparison, man! I don't know why didn't anyone praise your animation timing so I can switch video forward and backward on TH-cam and I'll get the same frame on different engine. Well done!
Thanks for you effort! unfortunately all this comparison videos only tell the time & a bit of the shading but not the quality, due to youtube compression...
Look at that beautiful backlight on the gril's hair in Arnold result! I love Arnold. Maybe you can do the same by spending hours on setup in other renderers but Arnold seems to always do what we need more easily.
Unfair comparison, look at how long the render times were with Arnold. Unacceptable. I've tried using Arnold for my workflow and the speed of it simply didn't work. I've switched to redshift and have been getting better results due to being able to ramp up my sample counts higher. I can render the same animations up to 20 times faster! Speed is highly underrated
ye what the hell is houdini doing with those 28 minutes, watching an episode of friends then halfassing the squirrel with some cheap crayola ripoff crayons for the last couple of minutes? I would say the results aren't too bad if it wasn't for that ridiculous time difference but it's doing a job comparable to Redshift in x7 the time
@@TheFloatingSheep Mantra is definitely slow but trashing it for being slower than a GPU renderer is just asinine - redshift is a drop in quality too and doesn't support nearly as much.
Very nice comparisons, thank you.. I would like to see a comparison on skin shading. I know its not a easy or quick thing to set up correct, but as of yet I have not been able to get Red Shift to match Vrays ALsurface regarding quality and set up time. Keep up the good work.
CGDreamsTutorials learn to use the rsMaterial better, Redshift gives very good skin results nowadays. Here’s an example. The rsMaterial is literally modeled after the ALsurface node Anders made years ago. Redshift has supported ALsurface before vray even did but the rsMaterial is more powerful and feature rich. imgur.com/a/1sa8aoI
@@TheArtofSaul Thanks for your reply. I dont own Red Shift, so have limited time and experience with the rs material, however given that you say Redshift has supported ALsurface before Vray and was modeled after it how come like for like settings do not yield the same results? I came to the conclusion using the RS demo that id need to spend significantly more time to set it up, and more maps used to get the same results I can get in Vray within a fraction of the time. The image you showed is nice, there is not enough of these, and certainly no tutorials on how one gets to that result. Its also much easier to think a skin shader is doing a good job if the modeling, texturing, lighting is all the highest quality unless you know what your looking for.
Im using Vantage render in my work, it is still very in progress, very limited, but the speed...wow, simply insane! It is "UE5" without raytracing limits in our 3D apps. For many cases can be used in production already. Would be fine to have link to Houdini also. I think it is limited to 3DS max still.
Arnold results are lovely. The first example vray wasn't great but I've seen it do fur better than that and closer to Arnold. 2nd example Arnold and vray were gorgeous 👍🏽
Why on earth would you want to switch from an unbiased (physically correct) render engine like Arnold to a biased (in simple words faked to look accurate) piece of cluttery that Vray is?
Mantra really seems to be very slow! I wonder how the new render man compares, since it has gotten quite cheap and is a Pixar product! Also an unbiased Renderer like Maxwell or Octane would be really interesting, so that you can see their if they have quality advantages!
forget it. rendering times are a joke even with the RTX 3090
5 ปีที่แล้ว +1
Great video as usual but I think for the girl test, using PTC SSS for Redshift with low precision is not great. I know, fast, but in prod, this result can't be kept. the same render with raytrace SSS will be better but less fast I know. Or better PTC SSS sampling to avoid the glowed mouth.For the hair result for the girl too, the Arnold one is best and the result in Redshift is strange (like Vray and Houdini), seems Redshift not support for the moment the Marschner shader but normally yes. As volume, need a better hair shader for Redshift ;) Great video again ;) NOTE : a few transparency in hair for Redshift can give better result, but expensive too
Redshift is amazingly fast and OK results. Arnold better quality for much longer render time, Vray fast but surprisingly bad quality, Houdini gives the best quality result, but the render time is crazy long.
Indeed Arnold hair example is the best, but the squirrel is between red-shift and mantra. though mantra is terribly slow. Ide like to see Octane render in this test.
Vray next GPU is missing tons of features still compared to its CPU engine version and Arnold on GPU while in beta is even missing more compared to its CPU counterpart it can’t even run on multiple GPU yet.
@@TheArtofSaulSo what is missing about Vray Next GPU? :D Vray Next GPU has many features that Redshift doesn't have, things like memory pooling with NVlink, Hybird rendering , Biased GI in IPR mode , Debug shading isolate select for lights, materials, textures and objects ,GGX tail falloff ,VRscans ,Mappable Vray's dirt radius for procedural shading and many other features ;) And Vray has one slider for all sampling settings since 2015, it doesn't use local samples per lights/materials/GI like RS.. Also, Next GPU can do many things that the CPU version cannot do, like using adaptive lights with BF/BF mode. Grow the fuck up with the fanboy crap already.. People screenshot your bullshit in Vray's discord and it is really embarrassing.. Talk about RS, it has many cool features , no need to be toxic trashing other renderers in every comment.
Not sure about settings, but with the girl and the long hair, Arnold kicked the other three to the the curb. Such richness in the colour of the highlights in the hair.
I like the redshift color and it's speed. It is the winner because the studios can re render my files on their own after receiving my prototype approved. So Arnold is the only one to calculate sunshine reflection from the dome... and the rest engines just failed?
so the first clip took Arnold 22 hours to render? 120 frames X average 11 minutes per frame, is that correct? or am i just dumb and calculated wrong? if so then that would just shock me of how long rendering really takes, even in 2019 lol
Because it's CUDA based. Vray has been written 3 different times for GPU. The latest version will be based on the Optix API from nVidia and should match the CPU renders.
V-ray looks like many standard old animation quality and Arnold looks super realistic but i have no idea why many studios use v-ray for newer film like Endgame but Arnold have only been use in old film like The Avengers.
Arnold looks the best but is one of the slowest, mantra is also very slow but maybe the most versatile render engine, redshift seems so fast but still seems to have that hint of gamey look always
@@Berget3DProductions To be precise, Eevee is a Real time PBR engine. And to my Understanding, i think it can use GPU. The real difference is that Cycles is an Unbiased Ray Tracing engine. Eevee being a PBR engine, does give tremendous speed, but it comes with some limitations. It can be good enough if you know how to use it. Especially if you weren't aiming for photorealism in the first place. But i've seen some artist make some animations in Eevee that are absolutely astonishing.
@@jascrandom9855 almost every game engine can do pbr, and the limitations you are talking about is what make it a game engine (or also called real-time engine), even blender guru calls it that. That is because eevee and other real-time engines like unreal and unity makes shortcuts to light and reflections. That is why you can't compare it to a complete render engine as it does not make those shortcuts. They are two different ways of rendering.
@@Berget3DProductions All games do PBR. They HAVE to. The Difference between a PBR engine like Eevee and a Path tracing engine like Cycles, is the way they render images. Its not that Eevee is less complete than Cycles. But never the less. I wished that they included Eevee because i've seen some pretty good stuff, that is just incredible that it was made with a PBR engine like Eevee.
@@jascrandom9855 No, all do not do that... And they don't have to. It completely depends on the game you want to make. PBR (Physical Based Rendering) is mainly to make the final result use real life values on materials and light. For a stylized game that can fast become a waste of resources. If he was gonna make a comparison with eevee it would had to be with unreal, unity and cryengine for example for it to be a fair comparison. That is why eevee is not meant to replace cycles, because they do things differently. In core they are same, but in whole they are different. You can make anything look good if you know how it works.
Lighting.. Vray.. but both Mantra & Redshift are pretty close as results go. When it comes to hair, Vray is capable of more detail, and looks less "lumped together" as the others do. Arnold is too dark in general. And what's up with the mouth part on the female character. The greys around the mouth in Arnold makes her look like she's half dead. (I've used all of these.. but I prefer V-ray & Redshift)
I think Arnold looks the best, followed by Redshift and Mantra. Mantra is a great renderer but is so insanely slow which really makes it hard for freelance work.
hm, interesting, I personally think that Arnold is always too blurry and you have a lot of details disappearing. Like you can get the look of Arnold when you postprocess any other of these, but not vice versa :)
Yeah wow. I use redshift and am happy to see the times, but it's so obvious that Arnold looks 20% more "real" than any of the others. Shocked at Vray and wonder if that's user... I find it hard to believe that Vray really looks that bad.
This video is very old at this point, Vray 5 features completely new Hair and Skin shaders now, both of which either rival or even slightly surpass Arnold's. Both are great rendering engines at this point, at work, we often switch between them, depending on the project.
Did you used the vray hair next shader or the old one ? Because I get much better result then what you have lol.. either you used the old shitty shader or you don't know how to set it up properly...
Little redshift has grown up so fast, keeping up with the big boys with unrivaled render times. My favorite renderer by far, I use it exclusively now
Perfect comparison, man! I don't know why didn't anyone praise your animation timing so I can switch video forward and backward on TH-cam and I'll get the same frame on different engine. Well done!
I think the quality is based on how deep you know your renderers.
@bayfarstudio You need to leave your renderers in the deep fryer at 300C and add a frame every 5 minute for best tasting results.
Great work making these comparisons.
Arnold hair by far the best.
г ьщь ыгслы
It is because the hair seems to have subsurface scattering. This means the the hair will actually allow light to bounce inside of the hair.
for me redshift
for me evry other looks fake, except vray.
About 1000 years ago I put one animation scene on render in Houdini ..and
Today it still showing 2000 years remaining.
So now I am switching to vray
Thanks for your work!
Thanks for you effort! unfortunately all this comparison videos only tell the time & a bit of the shading but not the quality, due to youtube compression...
Look at that beautiful backlight on the gril's hair in Arnold result! I love Arnold. Maybe you can do the same by spending hours on setup in other renderers but Arnold seems to always do what we need more easily.
arnold chipmunk looks realistic af, not sure if the hair or the lightning, but there is something cool about it
All Arnold renders on this guy's channel look realistic.
Thank you Soooo much for these. I love these videos.... Domo Arigato!!!!
un Giapponese che si chiama Doms ? ja ja ja ja ja !
Omg, squirrel on arnold render looks so realistic.
Ъ
Unfair comparison, look at how long the render times were with Arnold. Unacceptable. I've tried using Arnold for my workflow and the speed of it simply didn't work. I've switched to redshift and have been getting better results due to being able to ramp up my sample counts higher. I can render the same animations up to 20 times faster! Speed is highly underrated
ye what the hell is houdini doing with those 28 minutes, watching an episode of friends then halfassing the squirrel with some cheap crayola ripoff crayons for the last couple of minutes? I would say the results aren't too bad if it wasn't for that ridiculous time difference but it's doing a job comparable to Redshift in x7 the time
Лол Кварк Дог? Что ты тут делаешь?
@@TheFloatingSheep Mantra is definitely slow but trashing it for being slower than a GPU renderer is just asinine - redshift is a drop in quality too and doesn't support nearly as much.
would be great to see some renderman 22.6 comparisons with fur and flip fluids.
Hey. Thanks a ton for these videos. Really helpful. which GPU render would you suggest for a 3D animated movie which is made on maya.
This is exactly what I've been planning to animate, but I'm working on it
Great work！Can you do a comparison with Maxwell involved next time？That would be really helpful
Jeez Arnold seems to render hair specularity and sss way better than the others
Interesting test. Are you using unified shader model for these tests?
Arnold has some kind of sss effect instead of opaque looking in other renders.
Very nice comparisons, thank you.. I would like to see a comparison on skin shading. I know its not a easy or quick thing to set up correct, but as of yet I have not been able to get Red Shift to match Vrays ALsurface regarding quality and set up time. Keep up the good work.
CGDreamsTutorials learn to use the rsMaterial better, Redshift gives very good skin results nowadays. Here’s an example. The rsMaterial is literally modeled after the ALsurface node Anders made years ago. Redshift has supported ALsurface before vray even did but the rsMaterial is more powerful and feature rich.
imgur.com/a/1sa8aoI
@@TheArtofSaul Thanks for your reply. I dont own Red Shift, so have limited time and experience with the rs material, however given that you say Redshift has supported ALsurface before Vray and was modeled after it how come like for like settings do not yield the same results? I came to the conclusion using the RS demo that id need to spend significantly more time to set it up, and more maps used to get the same results I can get in Vray within a fraction of the time. The image you showed is nice, there is not enough of these, and certainly no tutorials on how one gets to that result. Its also much easier to think a skin shader is doing a good job if the modeling, texturing, lighting is all the highest quality unless you know what your looking for.
Came for the engines, replaying the video for the squirrel
Im using Vantage render in my work, it is still very in progress, very limited, but the speed...wow, simply insane! It is "UE5" without raytracing limits in our 3D apps. For many cases can be used in production already. Would be fine to have link to Houdini also. I think it is limited to 3DS max still.
Awesome, but I think you need to include the sample sizes in the video.
Arnold is KILLING IT! though at a slight cost of render time. Still ... visual eye -candy!
redshift is better
Wish you do a vdeo comparing Vray Next (GPU Bucket mode) vs Redshift
Arnold results are lovely. The first example vray wasn't great but I've seen it do fur better than that and closer to Arnold.
2nd example Arnold and vray were gorgeous 👍🏽
Hi, Can you share the scene i would like to try with my render software.
Thank you!! I use Arnold and thought maybe I should use Vray but Arnold looks too tier. I love Arnold!
Why on earth would you want to switch from an unbiased (physically correct) render engine like Arnold to a biased (in simple words faked to look accurate) piece of cluttery that Vray is?
0:55 Arnold MBlur noise on rat snout
thank you so much
Where can we get scenes for tests? - thanks
Really like the hair best in Arnold, but what's up with the mouth?
but if you set redshift render settings to take the same amount of time as arnold, should it look better?
Mantra really seems to be very slow! I wonder how the new render man compares, since it has gotten quite cheap and is a Pixar product!
Also an unbiased Renderer like Maxwell or Octane would be really interesting, so that you can see their if they have quality advantages!
thank you
I'm going to say it, I was on the verge of vomiting at the 360 comparison. I got dizzy.
Arnold never disappointed. I use it from 3-4 years. Glad to find it! It's a fast and easy to set up.
Lol, corona is much easier and faster with same result
amazing animaton
That's why I'm looking forward to GPU rendering in Arnold.
forget it.
rendering times are a joke even with the RTX 3090
Great video as usual but I think for the girl test, using PTC SSS for Redshift with low precision is not great. I know, fast, but in prod, this result can't be kept. the same render with raytrace SSS will be better but less fast I know. Or better PTC SSS sampling to avoid the glowed mouth.For the hair result for the girl too, the Arnold one is best and the result in Redshift is strange (like Vray and Houdini), seems Redshift not support for the moment the Marschner shader but normally yes. As volume, need a better hair shader for Redshift ;) Great video again ;) NOTE : a few transparency in hair for Redshift can give better result, but expensive too
good test :)
Where can we find this scene for testing?
Which renderer is the most photorealistic?
Redshift is amazingly fast and OK results. Arnold better quality for much longer render time, Vray fast but surprisingly bad quality, Houdini gives the best quality result, but the render time is crazy long.
It's your opinion
Thanks for your work! Still want to see Corona Renderer.
awesome
Indeed Arnold hair example is the best, but the squirrel is between red-shift and mantra. though mantra is terribly slow. Ide like to see Octane render in this test.
Hi
Thanks for the effort
In case I need that squirrel animated for 60 seconds and rendered in Arnold to be done In one month ?
How can I do it ?
go for online render farm
Which DCC are you using?
What’s the hardware configuration???
different channels.....different champion....now its up tu you
Corona would have been cool to see in the mix here.
The squirrel made with houdini is great
Hard to believe that Arnold kicked some butt in this comparison test.
Why is it hard to believe? It's unbiased render engine - what better can you get???
Nice video , can you compare vray next (GPU) vs Redshift. Thanks
and arnold GPU.
Vray next GPU is missing tons of features still compared to its CPU engine version and Arnold on GPU while in beta is even missing more compared to its CPU counterpart it can’t even run on multiple GPU yet.
@@TheArtofSaulSo what is missing about Vray Next GPU? :D
Vray Next GPU has many features that Redshift doesn't have, things like memory pooling with NVlink, Hybird rendering , Biased GI in IPR mode , Debug shading isolate select for lights, materials, textures and objects ,GGX tail falloff ,VRscans ,Mappable Vray's dirt radius for procedural shading and many other features ;)
And Vray has one slider for all sampling settings since 2015, it doesn't use local samples per lights/materials/GI like RS..
Also, Next GPU can do many things that the CPU version cannot do, like using adaptive lights with BF/BF mode.
Grow the fuck up with the fanboy crap already.. People screenshot your bullshit in Vray's discord and it is really embarrassing..
Talk about RS, it has many cool features , no need to be toxic trashing other renderers in every comment.
Please. Octane vs Redshift.
Andru Smith +1
lol you dont event need to compare... octane is shit. redshift wins in everything and by far.
I think Octane is best than other one (speed and quality ....) I did test ... same scene (chipmunk) render time less than 1 min same quality...
@@houdinivex3897 that cant be bc octane doesnt support cd attribute so you cant render fur with different color
@@MovieFactory Please, check about "rgb4k_map.ppm". It can support cd attribute.
can you using corona render ??
Not sure about settings, but with the girl and the long hair, Arnold kicked the other three to the the curb. Such richness in the colour of the highlights in the hair.
Renderman please !
Redshift looks best
the super expencive Vray looks cartoon.
what program is using Redshift?
whats your media social name? like instagram or twitter or etc. i need for my reference paper
I like the redshift color and it's speed. It is the winner because the studios can re render my files on their own after receiving my prototype approved.
So Arnold is the only one to calculate sunshine reflection from the dome... and the rest engines just failed?
cool!
so the first clip took Arnold 22 hours to render? 120 frames X average 11 minutes per frame, is that correct? or am i just dumb and calculated wrong?
if so then that would just shock me of how long rendering really takes, even in 2019 lol
they probably used a render farm. I can render 200 frames of 1h per frame in one day on my school render farm
huge hair size for redshift
Pc full specifications mantion please
Can you compare Arnold and Corona? and mental ray please
mental ray? are you serious?
octane plzzzz
why Vray looks dark in shading?
Because it's CUDA based. Vray has been written 3 different times for GPU. The latest version will be based on the Optix API from nVidia and should match the CPU renders.
V-ray looks like many standard old animation quality and Arnold looks super realistic but i have no idea why many studios use v-ray for newer film like Endgame but Arnold have only been use in old film like The Avengers.
Arnold looks the best but is one of the slowest, mantra is also very slow but maybe the most versatile render engine, redshift seems so fast but still seems to have that hint of gamey look always
Next time put in cycles as well please.
Arnold and Mantra are top
Please include EEVEE and Cycles next.
Eevee is basicly a game engine so can't really compare it with a gpu render engine, cycles sure.
@@Berget3DProductions To be precise, Eevee is a Real time PBR engine. And to my Understanding, i think it can use GPU.
The real difference is that Cycles is an Unbiased Ray Tracing engine.
Eevee being a PBR engine, does give tremendous speed, but it comes with some limitations. It can be good enough if you know how to use it. Especially if you weren't aiming for photorealism in the first place. But i've seen some artist make some animations in Eevee that are absolutely astonishing.
@@jascrandom9855 almost every game engine can do pbr, and the limitations you are talking about is what make it a game engine (or also called real-time engine), even blender guru calls it that. That is because eevee and other real-time engines like unreal and unity makes shortcuts to light and reflections. That is why you can't compare it to a complete render engine as it does not make those shortcuts. They are two different ways of rendering.
@@Berget3DProductions All games do PBR. They HAVE to.
The Difference between a PBR engine like Eevee and a Path tracing engine like Cycles, is the way they render images. Its not that Eevee is less complete than Cycles.
But never the less. I wished that they included Eevee because i've seen some pretty good stuff, that is just incredible that it was made with a PBR engine like Eevee.
@@jascrandom9855 No, all do not do that... And they don't have to. It completely depends on the game you want to make. PBR (Physical Based Rendering) is mainly to make the final result use real life values on materials and light. For a stylized game that can fast become a waste of resources. If he was gonna make a comparison with eevee it would had to be with unreal, unity and cryengine for example for it to be a fair comparison. That is why eevee is not meant to replace cycles, because they do things differently. In core they are same, but in whole they are different.
You can make anything look good if you know how it works.
Mantra is EOL.
Karma new Houdini renderer.
can you add cycles from blender for your next benchmark please ?
Arnold is awesome.
Lighting.. Vray.. but both Mantra & Redshift are pretty close as results go. When it comes to hair, Vray is capable of more detail, and looks less "lumped together" as the others do. Arnold is too dark in general. And what's up with the mouth part on the female character. The greys around the mouth in Arnold makes her look like she's half dead. (I've used all of these.. but I prefer V-ray & Redshift)
I think Arnold looks the best, followed by Redshift and Mantra. Mantra is a great renderer but is so insanely slow which really makes it hard for freelance work.
hm, interesting, I personally think that Arnold is always too blurry and you have a lot of details disappearing. Like you can get the look of Arnold when you postprocess any other of these, but not vice versa :)
Redshift and Arnold. Arnold for most Hair Render...
Vray its the last of good quality .......
Realistic Character test
Yeah wow. I use redshift and am happy to see the times, but it's so obvious that Arnold looks 20% more "real" than any of the others. Shocked at Vray and wonder if that's user... I find it hard to believe that Vray really looks that bad.
This video is very old at this point, Vray 5 features completely new Hair and Skin shaders now, both of which either rival or even slightly surpass Arnold's.
Both are great rendering engines at this point, at work, we often switch between them, depending on the project.
Redshift yeaaaaah !
Did you used the vray hair next shader or the old one ? Because I get much better result then what you have lol.. either you used the old shitty shader or you don't know how to set it up properly...
I think houdini looked the most realistic but I thought arnold was more visually appealing.
Corona ftw
1-Arnold and Mantra 2-Redshift 3-V-Ray The first three one is all well acceptable. V-Ray is far behind them.
Where is Octane ??
Redshift
1. MANTRA, ARNOLD (looks most realistic)
2. Redshift
3. V-Ray Next
arnold (y)
and... cycles ?? ;-)
Hello, does redshift use amd cpu ?
only the newer ones.
redshift uses nvidia GPU
why does she have blue mouth in Arnold? SSS? red S and mantra blue nose.
No Noise on Redshift
why vray look crap ?
Speed Redshift
Quality Arnold.
Hmm where is corona😅
cured
Arnold