Thanks! That looks pretty cool so far. I'd say it bodes well for VuePro + Cinema, at the very least. :)

Nice post! Thanks for sharing this with us. When I get my copy, I'll do the same for a MAX comparison. Have bookmarked this thread. Anybody else want to participate with another app?

What happened to the texture of the tree trunks and branches?

Funny that all of you just take these test results for granted. Guys, be serious, we're comparing apples with oranges at the moment... There two major reasons for that; a) one doesn't exactly know how the scene is converted to Cinema 4D. It might well be that lots of polygons were added or any other things that would slow down the render b) both render engines work different and use different settings Other than that I think its very doubtful that Vue d'Esprit renders 2 times (!) faster than Cinema 4D, which is considered to have one of the fastest render engines in the world, confirmed in several tests. I don't want to spoil the fun, but this test isn't proving anything. Just my 2 cents

ahhhh, you're focusing on the numbers. some of us are looking at the pics, especially GI lighting

Comparing? I don't care about that at all. What I cared about is the fact that Absinthe was able to import the entire Vue scene with a couple of trees, render it, and get a pretty good looking (if rather basic) scene out of it. IMO that's enough for me: it works! The only catch is that I'm going to be out of town, and won't be back until after the special offer ends, so I'm not sure that I'll be able to take advantage of it, since I'm not sure that I'd want to spend the money BEFORE my vacation :/

I wonder if it was the terrain or the trees that cause slower Cinema 4 results. Adsinthe, can you redo test with the trees alone and post the results.

I also like to reiterate MikesJs question: what happened to the texture of the tree trunks and branches?

Dave

Ok, I already gave you my opinion about he speed test, but allow me to give my opinion about the final result. The truth of the matter is that it's close to impossible to recreate a scene in Vue d'Esprit in Cinema 4D, period. How on earth can you convert every option or setting that has to do with lights, shadows, textures, etc, to something equal in Cinema 4D? I also know by knowing this, that I can't ask for perfection. if a screen is a bit too dark or light, no big deal. I respect Thalaxis' opinion if he says that he's satisfied. I hope that he also respects my opinion if I say that I'm NOT satisfied. The terrain is an important part of a lot of Vue d'Esprit scenes and that's exactly were it goes wrong. I don't care about plants, I mean there are free models that I can import in C4D without a problem, so I don't need any real improvement in that area and yes, that's personal. Two other major aspect of a scene are shadows and textures and that's something that goes wrong too. It's not just the shadows that are messed up on the terrain, but also the shadows on the branches and leaves. Textures... where are they? I mean, this is not something minor guys, here is something structural wrong. I'm confident that E-on will find a solution for this, but until then I would blind or a potential thief of my own wallet when I say that I'm satisfied. Just throwing in another 2 cents ;-)

First, this is Vue Professional, not Vue d'Esprit. They are different programs. The former is new and cost $500, the latter is old (on version 4) and costs $200. Second, there are ways to convert most options or settings from one 3D application to another as long as each application has similar feature sets. Most good 3D apps, like C4D, have color, specular, bump, transparency, translucency, reflection, displacement, environment, alpha, and so on for material channels and utilize both procedural and bitmap-based textures. Procedural textures are nearly impossible to transfer, but not bitmaps. There will be differences, but it is not impossible to recreate a scene from one app to another. I was able to do very well importing Poser 5 scenes into C4D with my own plugin, including lights, cameras, textures, and geometry. Third, though, I agree with you that something is amiss in these C4D renders when textures have disappeared. Unless the textures are procedural in Vue Pro, they should be transfered easily. Even more interesting is the fact that the sky was imported, but not the tree and ground textures. When I receive my copy of Vue Pro, I'll run some tests on rendering. I have yet to see C4D's renderer slower than another, but optimizations in Vue Pro could contribute to its speed advantage. Have no idea what options were used in C4D's render settings.

kuroyume0161, of course I do know that that we're talking about the Pro version, I just forgot to add "Pro", I still need getting used to it ok? Btw, I said that it's impossible to recreate a scene in Vue d'Esprit in Cinema 4D. I didn't say that it's impossible to get close or did I? About the textures, I now think that these were just forgotten during the conversion. But that thing with the shadows and terrain still bothers me and it's interesting that it doesn't seem to bother you. I therefore assume that you use wide margins for your interpretations of a good conversion.

I didn't notice that before, namely that they left out the words "d'Esprit" in the product name. Makes you wonder why?

Gaussian: "d'Esprit" is and will be the continuum name for all versions of Vue d'Esprit 1 to 4 until now and all coming versions. Vue 4 Pro is a product apart, especially created for professionals. Guitta

I shall be working today to see about increasing the texture maps to get a better quality, I shall post my results later today. Videodv.

There are no doubt than C4D is hundred times faster (!) than Vue, of course !!! This soft is famous for this particular feature, some tests have been done before by Audity which is now the C4D forum moderator...I'm myself a new C4D user (and still a Vue user). You must compare the same thing, particularly in terms of lights. Absinthe's Vue picture has no soft shadows, and his C4D picture has soft shadows ;=) The difference is here. I can confirm than C4D never render in more than 1h with the best settings for 640x480, as for the same pic in Vue it could not be done in hundred hours ! Even for a single sphere ! And the result is much better in C4D, sorry to say that here... Vue Rendering engine has not be changed between "Pro" or not "Pro" The interest for Vue is not in rendering fast, it is in "easy use" especially for "landscapes" pictures. IMHO, Yves

Vue Rendering engine has not be changed between "Pro" or not "Pro". It is wrong. YL, you are almost totaly wrong. Did you try to work with new VP render features?

Well, I thought the advertisement/promo stuff said the renderer was changed and improved. And faster! Did I remember wrong?

i don't have v4pro but i'm curious how lightwave handles the files. if any pro users here also have lightwave, i'd love to see some more examples. thanks!! ren

Gaussian, I think you're right that it will be nigh impossible to reproduce the Vue "look" in Cinema. What I'm interested in is being able to use the tools in Vue to make creating environments for Cinema easier. Take a look at World Builder's integration features, and you'll see what I'm talking about. Of course, the WB Rosetta toolset is far more sophisticated than Vue Pro's, but then WB is a $1000 package, and the Rosetta plugins are extra.

kuroyume0161, of course I do know that that we're talking about the Pro version, I just forgot to add "Pro", I still need getting used to it ok? No problem, you're just confusing me! :) d'Esprit and Pro are not the same, so I couldn't decide if you were talking about the former or latter. Btw, I said that it's impossible to recreate a scene in Vue d'Esprit in Cinema 4D. I didn't say that it's impossible to get close or did I? You said "close to impossible". ;) As long as there's geometry, textures, lights, and cameras, most features should be transferable. More esoteric features like atmospheric effects, procedural objects, or other forms of proprietary features may cause problems in any transfer between 3D programs, but one should be able to get reasonably close otherwise. About the textures, I now think that these were just forgotten during the conversion. But that thing with the shadows and terrain still bothers me and it's interesting that it doesn't seem to bother you. I therefore assume that you use wide margins for your interpretations of a good conversion. Shadows... seems that the imported lights either had area shadows set or somebody did that themselves. Area shadows in C4D obtain more realistic results (when used correctly), but are, surprise surprise, very costly in renders - which explains the disparity between Absinthe's Vue and C4D render times. From what I've seen of videodv's renders, it seems that Absinthe exported differently and/or made changes to the imported file. Absinthe has performed a skillful "hit and run". Posted here and in the C4D forum, haven't heard back since. No details about settings in either application. Not very useful for an indepth analysis.

Phoul : Should be interesting to compare between Vue4 and Vue 4 pro rendering times for the same quality. Not easy to do that, since it is possible that new settings aren't corresponding to olders (remember than Vue rendering quality has been decreased since Vue 3 to decrease rendering time, "ultra" does no more correspond to the same quality). Couldn't do that since I just have Vue3. I remember that some tests were done in the past (one year ago maybe), maybe still by audity. > Absinthe : who are you ? Why haven't you said here that one of your rendering was GI as you mentioned in C4D forum ? GI has nothing to do with other rendering modes, as it's one of the best as radiosity and hdri are also (and we all know that they are time consuming). Why haven't you mentioned on C4D forum that you have done some comparisons with Vue rendering times ? C4D People have lost a good reason to laugh !!!

In Videodvs test the terrains in Vue Pro and Cinema looked more a like and the speed was more in line with what I expected. I never thought Vue Pro was a faster renderer than Cinema 4D but was worried that Vue Pro did a poor job of converting things over. Videodvs results relieved some my worries. Videodv, can you add trees to your scene and post the images and the speed results?

Dave

I should also be more careful with my posts as it was mentioned + GI here !

OK I will add some trees to the same scene and I will post a bit later, I will also make the textures a bit larger and you will see a big difference. Videodv.

and here a breakdown. ok first I have been working hours to try to find out why the blackness in the trees and bush at the bottom, I have had no luck yet but will keep trying today to find out why! This is a scene export from vue with the same tex setting as the above and no changes in cinema execpt to setup the alpha channels for the tress and bush. In the other pic tests I used a second light in cinema to help with the scene but not in these pics just to see how it imports, but I think you can see it needs the extra lights no biggie but just a thought. The scene was exported as 3ds and the textures where the same size as the other pics, but I have found it is better to export the terrian as a single object where you have more control over the export, I have found if you set the size in the terrian editor (vue) to 512 and then the export mesh size to max and then set a texture size to somewhere between 1500 - 2000 you get a near purfect match between the two progs 3ds seems to work fine with this. Finaly the times are vue 3.13 secs (broadcast) cinema 8.2 1.58 secs (best) settings. I am currectly using an athlon 1600+ machine with 1G ram. I think there is great promise with vue 4 pro if e-on can get the trees, bushes ect, texturing, artifact removal, right then I can see great stuff coming for us all. As I said I will post again later today if I can workout why the tree problem is there and how to overcome it, unless somone else has allready done so! Videodv.

Can you add the second light so I can take a better look at the trunk and branches?

ok rerendering now will upload in a few minuets.

would you be so kind as to post some close-ups of the trees, leaves in particular? we thank you and your poor computer!

OK. In my opinion the longer render time of Cinema in my first post above has something to do with antialiasing the trees. Cinema slows down a lot, if you put several trees behind each other. That is the same for xfrog trees or vue trees. (But low resloution vue trees render much faster than xfrog) The scene in my post was exported in low resolution settings. The same with the texture maps. This is because I am running a 800 Mhz Power Mac G4 and exporting in higher resloution let Vue crash almost ervery time. (E-on states as minimum 1,25 Ghz for Mac, but I will anyhow switch in a couple of months to the new G5)

videodv, instead of adding a second light, you could get away with radiosity to enhance the lighting and diminish the shadows' darkness. Just use low settings on Strength and Accuracy (like 50% and 30% respectively). This will still increase the render time, but not significantly. Absinthe, glad you posted back. :) I don't have xfrog myself (and still waiting on Vue Pro to arrive), so haven't had a chance to do trees in C4D. I'm on a dual Xeon system, so testing at high settings shouldn't be a problem. A G5 should improve conditions significantly on your end.

I Quote Absinthe; "Cinema slows down a lot, if you put several trees behind each other." Did you ever wonder why... I totally agree with XL that your conclusions about Cinema's speed are just absolutely foolish. Your "two trees and terrain" took more time to render than Carles Piles' "Daylight", #3 in Renderosity's C4D gallery. That imeage ( http://www.carlespiles.com/tut01en.htm ) took 5 min 45 sec... Makes one wonder what you're doing over there...

Videodv, I hate to be a pain but I need to ask the same thing as richardnovak77: a closer look at the trees. The lighting did help but the blackness is still there. One of the main reasons I want Vue Pro is its export capabilities; what I seen so far does not look promising. Maybe its something silly a parameter or something to change but I need to know it can export to Cinema 4D properly before I lay my money down. If anyone got the Vue Pro to Cinema export working please jump right in.

Dave

To Gaussian Sorry but it is a fact, that cinema renderes much much much slower with some trees, when I use antialiasing. It has for sure something to do with that. This slowness is only if you have a lot of tiny alpha polygons (or planes). (Render options on 50 rays for alpha setting, because otherwise there will appear a lot of black planes inside the leaves.) Without antialiasing it runs much faster, but of course the result is terrible. The daylight picture by Carles Piles has no tree an no comparable complex alpha planes in it. The trees in the background there are one single background picture. I will do some more test renders with trees and post them in the Cinema forum in a new thread.

I'm still wondering what happened to the textures of the tree trunks and branches. :)

Videodv, in C4d render settings, under options, increase your ray depth to at least 30... higher might be even better. This will take care of those dark areas in the leaves. More ray depth is needed to deal with all those layers of transparency. Pro to C4d works fairly well, but with limitations. If I can, I'll be back with a few other 'discoveries'.

DigReal, please do. I need all info I can before I decide to buy it or not.

To MikeJ: As I said earlier I exported the scene with very low resolution settings. This low resolution txture maps happened to trunks and branches! :)

I noticed that another problem you're having is render speed? There was a post on the VuePro list that solved this problem in Lightwave (many thanks to Victor). I've found that it works at least as well with C4d. Pro exports the materials so that the leaf transparency ends up on the transparency channel in C4d (I guess that's logical). This really slows things down. Turn off the trans channel, and instead use the alpha channel. Set it to use the same map as the trans slider did. Be sure to turn off the 'soft' option as this blurs the hell out of it. Something else weird I noticed. Sometimes C4d sees the material map, but doesn't really use it (your trunk map problem, perhaps?). Just re-select the same map so the path is set. Then the texture should show. I don't think that's the problem in this case, tho. I'm hoping to show some example pics, but don't know when I'll get the chance to set them up. Til then, hope this helps.

To DigDeal: Thanks for the tip, but I already used the alpha channel together with the alpha map. Just as you recomended. But the this does not solve the speed problem. I just posted another series of test renders in the Cinema 4D forum. In short the results here as well: Cin 1 tree no antialias time: 0.17 min Cin 9 trees no antialias time: 1.42 min Cin 1 tree + antialias time: 1.23 min Cin 9 trees + antialias time: 30.01 min. !!!!!!!!!! VuePro one tree, + antialias time:11.00 VuePro 9 trees + antialias time16.30 !!!

That is so strange. The difference between 1 tree w&wo AA is 5x's while the difference for 9 trees is 17x's! Something is wrong there. Could be a Mac quirk, could be (and I suspect it is) a MEMORY quirk. You may be using more memory than you have available for 9 trees and it's dipping into VM whereas a single tree doesn't. Before you bring up the VuePro numbers, realize that VuePro may be optimizing memory storage (since the trees are part of VuePro) whereas C4D gets nothing but a ton of polygons.

Wow, those are some interesting results. So far, I've only been comparing render times within C4d, using the different mapping options. On my machine, Pro renders slower than d'Esprit (when it should be faster!), so I didn't bother comparing C4d to Pro, speed wise. I'm working on a somewhat complex scene in Pro right now. Should be very interesting to see what happens when I export it to C4d. The tough part about this kind of comparison is that the mapping will be different.. no way around that. One thing I really like about Vue, is that there are so many options for render quality, like aa. It's hard to match that up with the few options in C4d.

I am at work at the moment (I work Nights) but I shall tryout all your suggestions later today and see what I come up with, will post later. Videodv.