Rendering software for jewellery design

Well, first of all, Arnold, Maxwell and Octane are easy to use, because they work just like a real camera does; second, in today’s era of fierce competition, excellent images are a necessity, unless you work in a field where neither individual nor company/retail clients don’t care. Third, excellent images allow the individual designer or company to prepare exhibition, online marketing and print material while the objects themselves are not yet finished, generating sales or reservations. Fourth, particularly when you’re dealing with metals and gemstones, you want picture perfect realism (anisotropy, IOR, dispersion, etc.) so the customer can see the difference between three versions of a brooch you may offer in Cobalt, Palladium or Platinum.

The thing is, once one has set up the “virtual photo studio” in the rendering software and prepared the most common metals and gemstone materials one frequently uses (measured IOR data for most metals and gemstones can be downloaded for free), one gets results very quickly, reliably, repeatedly. And saving time means saving money in the end, rather than tinkering around like a nerd, wasting precious hours and days.

How one would go about such an image:

1 x softbox luminaire
1 x beauty dish luminaire
1 x black polycarbonate material
1 x 14k gold material
1 x green tourmaline material
1 x orchid twig (online 3D model provider)

7 Likes

This is a good point!

Unquestionably!

This is perhaps the coolest aspect of HDR Light Studio. It is a twofer: Both an HDRI creator (perhaps best) and a render.

Keyshot is super fast (do not underestimate the value of such for interactive design) and super easy, and will create outstanding images with the right segment application - typically consumer goods.

The others: some are geeky and slow, but if one gets what one is after, it is all good. To each is own…

If you don’t want to buy HDR Light Studio, you can also find some good collections of very high quality HDR images of real photo studio equipment for a fraction of the price; particularly if all you need is a few typical luminaires.

I adore this picture and I agree with your statement! :raised_hands:

I totally agree with that, but you talk as if keyshot produce shit , i disagree, i can do the same of you ( even better ) in Keyshot.

The instrument does not make the musician, that only what i’m trying to say.

Jimi Hendrix or CAN could not have revolutionised rock music with only an acoustic guitar.

Great things can happen at the intersection where skill and technology meet.

1 Like
1 Like

Ah, Purple Haze, rendered with GroShot Pro ; )

Lately, things just don’t seem the same…

This really turned into a dope thread : D

I vote for Maxwell render, with the same lighting setup it gives a better result for me.
Multilight feature helps a lot too, the diffraction and dispersion of the light is calculated right and the result is accurate, do all other renderes have this feature?
Some renderes like Keyshot from my experience are great for quick decent results, but when you push too much for realism with materials like diamonds, I’m not sure if it would be as fast an great as maxwell.
I can’t talk about others, but V-Ray was not as good either without a deep understanding of the setting to get a perfect result.
The conclution for me is that Maxwell is easy to setup and gives incredible result, the time worth it.

This rings were done in 2008

10 Likes

Very much agree. Apart from that Maxwell behaves like a real camera and makes for easy material definition, especially to render the diffraction and dispersion of gemstones, Multilight is the greatest bonus - adjust the lighting after the render is finished, without having to re-render.

I saw just this weekend that Next Limit has a 50% off everything Black Friday promotion on right now until Monday evening. And - no, I do neither receive compensation from the company, nor am I affiliated.

1 Like

Those stones do look good!

Here is my render in Thea

2 Likes

Nice. The top diamond looks more computer generated than what @laborda created. Perhaps it is the ‘top’ reflection he and/or Maxwell got super right?

The platinum on yours look great!

Yes its because of dispersion, can get the same effect in thea

This rendering shows nicely how Maxwell renders gemstones with the correct dispersion and extinction coefficient, compared to Thea, where the diamonds look dull and plastic-like.

Thanks for your feedback, but i guess its a matter of personal choice, where i prefer the facets to be clearer while somebody might want the shine more than anything else

I have no doubts about maxwell capacities to produce great diamonds and renders , but Laborda diamonds don’t look realistic for me, too white, like self illuminated from their centers.

Just watch real diamonds to see what it should be :

Diamond

The diamonds shown are photographed in isolation and badly lit, rather as a specimen assay.

When in the jewelry business, you as the goldsmith or your client as jeweler has one goal: to sell product. It is a commercial operation and a costly one at that. In order to sell, you need top quality images. Imagine someone wanting to gift jewelry for a very special occasion - would she/he rather go for the dull plasticky or the lustrous one? You know the answer.