Attached Link: http://www.kenzden.com/movies.htm

This little test was conducted to see how long it would take to render frames in Carrara's Global Illumination. The operative test is to see if rendering with radiosity (however faked it may be) is worth the cost timewise. There are no lights in this scene. Only a skylight setting of 100% and a white background. Total rendertime for 640x480, 4 sec (@30fps): 2 hours I'm currently compiling a generic GI flipbook so that I can see what looks best. The comparisons analyze both ambient and skylight together to get the best mix of light per render time. As much as we usually say turn down the ambient when rendering, the rendertime-cost is a little lower in GI when using a little more ambient. Points to ponder. Ken 

I couldn't download much on a dialup but what I did was neat. Great bot and animation! Just a few seconds of animation and "he" felt very real to me.

Good animation. Whats the word on GI rendering speed with ambient turned up? Got a approximate?

Will know more when I complete the renders. right now I'm just compiling times and images, and with GI, that eats up a lot of time, time in which I cannot use my computer. I'll post a link to the web page when I complete the renders. IMO, knowing this will be able to give us a good indication for a good balance. From what I've seen so far, the ambient in GI adds almost as much as the skylight can. The rendertimes haven't been too great a difference, but if you are rendering animations those extra seconds or so can add up to a lot of time saved over the long run. My 2c again, Ken

Thanx for doing this experiment Ken!

I'm curious Ken are you rendering out as .avi, .mov or sequential? If you render out as sequential not only are you covered if power goes out (can just stop at last frame) or if its morning and you actually want to use your computer, you also get faster render times. Which if you are animating...IS GOOD! Brian