Which image do you prefer ?
- Image 1
- Image 2
- Image 3
- Image 4
Not in the original poll, but this is the latest tweak from the Bella Image
Image 1 - Maxwell 1.71 2008
Image 2 - Cycles (SSS Lightness>50)
Image 3 - Bella
Image 4 - Cycles (SSS Lightness<50)
Sooo… when will you tell us which is which?
Regards, Jakob (who doesn’t deal too well with waiting, although he’s way to old to be part of “instant gratification” generation )
i like nr 3 but its a bit too grainy, which actually adds a slight retro look to it but most important what are you using it for?
No.1 is more orange juice while No.3 is like fanta. No.3 has better looking straw.
No. 1 is the only one where the straw doesn’t stop at the surface. Get’s my vote for realism.
I think that 2, 3 and 4 all look as if there’s a LED ice cube in the drink. Or maybe some really nasty food coloring chemicals Also the SSS along the surface tension on#1 seems more natural, with the yellow color being subdued where the material thickness is small.
#1 is the only one that has the proper amount of rum in it!
Interesting observation !
Orange juice is very thin and yet (surprisingly) the straw is not always visible.
My reference photo does have a slight visibility for the upper section of the straw, but have not been able to reproduce this yet in a render.
Cancer for the win
All good points !
It could be a render engine issue not giving us enough parameters for the thin section translucency, or could be a user error. I am still fiddling with the parameters.
Image1 - Maxwell 1.71 2008
Image2 - Cycles (SSS Lightness>50)
Image3 - Bella
Image4 - Cycles (SSS Lightness<50)
With Cycles I have not been able to get the thin SSS areas to look translucent/watery enough. Even after boosting the SSS radius all the way to 5000. With some settings (changing lightness over 50) the edges get white, but not watery.
With Cycles there is also a distinct different between lightness of 50 and lightness of 51; as if it switches to a second algorithm after 50 and the transition is not smooth)
How about opening this up to other renderers (people and/or engines) by posting the geometry? Time we had another challenge on Discourse…
The colors goes well with the cool straw
You used old version of Maxwell
Technically didn’t use Maxwell … the image was found laying on my drive from a long time ago. Also, I don’t have the latest Maxwell anyway (last one I got was 2.7)
What i mean to get real opinion you need use the new versions , Bella is new software like Cycles
Maxwell now is more powerful.
Sure, I am testing to see how far Cycles goes to know when to use. Helps to make a poll about what people think between the two engines. Wasn’t meant as global render comparison.
Besides, Maxwell is kind of irrelevant now. The original Maxwell engineers are working on the Bella project now.
Yes and Maxwell still powerful , for example it have nested priority feature, i think Bella have it too but Cycles no. caustics also Cycles miss it
Cycles didn’t do too well on this, but I am pleasantly surprised with it. For interior scenes and architecture work it is just great. Cycles also can go far for most product renders except the most demanding ones with liquids … best thing is, it’s included in Rhino. All other engines would have to justify the extra cost.
Bella has a lot of potential and contains the newest physics code, but it’s still green and the UI needs more refinements here and there. The output is like a Cadillac though.
here’s a go at it in V-Ray. I still like the way the concave meniscus looks almost transparent in your Bella rendering best.