Testing with new V-Ray + DOF

Rendering V-Ray
1

Just some fun render tests using V-Ray 3.4.

go chair render test 003
go chair render test 0031356×737 132 KB

go chair render test 004
go chair render test 0041356×737 144 KB

And the new depth of field is a BIG improvement.

go chair render test 005 with DOF low
go chair render test 005 with DOF low1356×737 130 KB

go chair render test 006 with DOF high
go chair render test 006 with DOF high1356×737 128 KB

2 Likes
2

Nice renderings. What is the difference to VfR2?

3

Rendering calculation (in last picture) looks a little strange.
DOF_SW
I’m talking about the chair legs, look at the legs, gets more (dark spots) or less (light places) mass.
Regards

4

That how a photograph would look like in a similar setup, high key with lighting behind the subject and focus blur

5

Hey, thanks for the feedback and comments.

Here’s the scoop on the images. These were a ‘road test’ to simulate how well the new defaults would work AND how well my class might do on the new version. They learned V-Ray 2 last semester, but no one touched the app over the summer. (So sad, I know!)

STEPS for TEST

  • All settings were on default EXCEPT for the image size and quality, which I bumped up to high from medium.
  • NO lights are in the scene! I only used the GI default map.
  • I made a studio with floor and back wall geometry
  • I then grabbed two materials from the EXCELLENT new library for the chair and two more for the studio.

TAKEAWAYS I learned from class on Tuesday

  • The new UI is much better and organized for beginners.
  • The rumors of the app being rushed are true. We found a minor material preview bug and a few occasions where the app didn’t respond. Fortunately, nothing major.
  • For experts, the ‘transition learning curve’ is pretty good. I found all of the settings I wanted right away or after very short hunting. (I was a beta tester, so I had a few practice sessions.)
  • The quality (in pics above) is amazing for the few minutes I spent on it. All of the students produced excellent quality after 30-60 minutes of class demo time.
6

I cranked the DOF value up way too high, just to see what happened and how long it took. This part of the rendering process is many times faster than version 2. I was very impressed.

Also, yes, it is way too distorted. I would only show this kind of image to smart geeks and quality nerds like you.

7

I made a short summary in another post. A few more observations:

  • All of the quality has remained the same or gotten better. So far.
  • The defaults are WAY better … and there are less settings to waste time on!
  • Speed has improved, especially on the DOF I tested.
  • The UI is a big improvement, both visually and functionally, but there is still room for more refinement.
1 Like
8

Good catch. The entire rear wall has an emissive material. It fills the scene everywhere except where there is floor geometry.