Can the Lux render engine be used with Vue? I tried to find what programs can be used in this render engine but got lost on their site trying to find the info.

Attached Link: http://www.luxrender.net/v/features

LuxRender is an external rendering program and relies on exporter scripts that export a scene from a 3d modeling program.

The primary exporter is LuxBlend, which tightly integrates LuxRender with Blender. It supports all the features of LuxRender. It also features interactive material preview inside Blender, significantly reducing the time it takes to create complex, realistic materials.

Exporters for major 3D packages like Maya, Cinema4D, XSI and 3D Studio are under development. Because LuxRender's file format is openly documented, any skilled programmer could start writing an exporter for any 3d modeling program.

So... unless someone (e-on probably) writes an exporter for Vue, the answer is probably : not anytime soon.

On the other hand, you may try to export a Vue scene to a 3D studio format (assuming the models are not locked for exporting) and then use their 3D studio exporter to use that rendering engine.

But you can't export ecosystems, and skies should be rendered and used as hdri maps, because Vue won't export volumetric cloud functions. Plus, Vue procedurals will be translated into bitmpas upon export. With varying success. Not too sexy, hun?

On the other hand, you may try to export a Vue scene to a 3D studio format (assuming the models are not locked for exporting) and then use their 3D studio exporter to use that rendering engine.

hahaha good luck with that!

On DAZ forums there is much excitement about the Studio->Lux exporter but the renders I saw aren't better than the ones you could get out of Vue. Needless to remember that all the environmental functionalities of Vue like ecosystems and atmospherics are missing. I think that Lux place is mainly as a super renderer for Blender and similar applications.

A completely different issue would be a Vue->VRay path (VRay has a spectacular instancing engine).

P.S.: DAZ seems to work day and night about finding creative ways to harm its own products. The Studio->Lux exporter makes Carrara nearly useless as a renderer for Studio (Lux engine is light years beyond Carrara capabilities). First they endorse Vue as Poser content renderer, then they sell the Studio->Lux exporter... I am glad that I did not waste my money getting Carrara 8 Pro :sneaky:.

This Lux stuff is all moot if you have modo.

I was just curious mostly. I am positive that Vue can do the same thing I have seen some wonderful renders by vue users that have gotten the same if not better results.

Quote - This Lux stuff is all moot if you have modo.

OK, How so?  I have modo and I can't say there is an easy way to replace Lux.  No, I don't render humans much.

Quote - I was just curious mostly. I am positive that Vue can do the same thing I have seen some wonderful renders by vue users that have gotten the same if not better results.

You can indeed get as good a result with Vue.  The advantage to Lux is it takes less work, and the ability to change lighting while rendering and seeing the result.

I know that Vue 9 will have something similar, but you will have to wait for the render to finish before you play with the lighting.

OK, How so?  I have modo and I can't say there is an easy way to replace Lux.  No, I don't render humans much.

What does the Lux renderer give you that you are not able to get out of Modo? Given the Lux render times I've heard described, I'd think the biggest difference would be Modo's blinding speed.

For one thing, I did not know that Modo's renderer was an unbiased renderer.  As to speed, Poser 4 renderer is blazing fast in comparison.

Aside from irradiance caching and refinement shading, the Modo renderer is largely unbiased. You can use settings that will give you unbiased results.

"Unbiased" doesn't necessarily mean physically accurate rendering in any case. Sometimes a biased render will produce a more convincing image.

I'm still waiting to see some Poser scenes rendered in Lux.  In the next few months maybe there will be a beta that has such features.

Attached Link: There will be grease.

Yep.  Very pre-pre-pre-alpha.  By fall there should be some good indirect lighting renders with subsurface scattered materials.  Then I can tell people what to get if they can't afford a 3D app.

hi all,

just my dime to the debate.

Please note that moving scenes from one application to another usually means headaches over camera properties, lighting issues and (procedural) materials as well, let alone for procedural objects like terrains and ecosystem details which are generated at render time. Those ecosystems in my Vue scenes constantly break the 2Gb memory limit on my 32-bit system, which gives you some clue on the size of the exports.

Those issues hold for integrating Studio into Carrara of Bryce, and Poser into Vue and Vue into MAX or C4D etc. Anyone who tried to read Poser scenes into Studio knows about this: all cams, light sets and advanced material sets needs either a redo or a serious bodycheck. And Vue volumes are vast.

Vue to VRay is simple, on paper: run xStream, interface to MAX, setup for VRay and off you go... well, good luck with the VRay sun, lights and materials in your Vue scene, then. 

Note that the only thing Lux adds is raytracing, good for reflection, refraction and some GI/IBL. Vue does it well, too. And dealing with light without re-rendering ... is part of Vue 9, as I understood from the Siggraph notes (3DW mag #134, out now).

The real thing I'am waiting for is the ability to deploy GPU rendering, so I can utilise nVidea 480 cards, or stacks of them in renderboxes like The Cube. Same problems though: cams, lights, materials and extreme memory requirements.

I agree Vue is a nice program on its own.  However when it comes to the actual render I personally have found Lux to be far superior as you said, "with less work".  I have done several renders comparing Vue vs DAZ vs Lux... Lux as far as I can tell does a MUCH better and more believable job MUCH more quickly (again with the less work). 

You can get some dang good results (as seen in the movies) with vue.  But you have to fork over mad sums of cash to get those results.  I myself own Vue frontier 9 (cheapo version compared to infinite / xstreme) and it is very nice, but equally limited, Lux... is free.

So when it comes to my basic renders of small prebuilt scenes and models... I use Lux.  When it comes to making terrain and the like... I use Vue.  But if I could use Lux to render for Vue... that would be amazing!

I've seen some great renders with the Lux/Studio combo. But, as mentioned, not superior to anything you can make in Vue.
I think the main issue here is the declining technical knowledge and "readiness" among the Vue users, becoming more and more like the Poser and DAZ people, just rendering purchased items with purchased atmospheres, and SkinVue e.g., and having no idea what they are actually doing. If you have access to the full render engine in Vue, you can make very convincing results, provided you take the time and energy to dig into the options and features.

So people see "something" brilliant made with an application, and think: "I HAVE to get that one!" not realizing that the outcome has more to do with the artist's skills and talent than the software capabilities.
Example: If you scroll through great artist HowieFarke's gallery, you'll get the impression that Carrara is a superior nature/landscape rendering program. But if you then look at what other artists make with the same software, you'll see very little evidence of this - except the renders involving ready-made HowieFarkes preset scenes :)
I'm not suggesting that the software is irrelevant, of course, just emphasizing that often you're better off mastering the tools you've got than always looking out for something else :)

I really love Vue.  Some of the stability issues make it fairly undesirable to me, but it can't be any worse than, say, Bryce.

I am still in the getting the hang of it stage; I have a render right now I am really proud of, but my installation seems to have crashed, then blown itself up.  Will reinstall later, at least.

I have a few years previous experience with Terragen, so it's trying to take what I've learned there and transfer it to another program (or, how to arrange the landscape so it looks real pretty-- I'm getting better.  I'm pretty okay with skies, though, from Terragen.)

Too bad I'm completely bad at modeling.

Still don't see much need for a Vue->Lux exporter.

Just wish they'd make Vue's render unbiased or, a secondary render mode for that

I really don't think that an unbiased render engine is what we need in vue (don't get me wrong, Lux IS a great render engine and it produces amazing images).

But ... the complexity of an average vue scene would produce render times well over what a normal user with a normal computer can bear (I have a dual xeon w3690 and unbiased renders still take a lot of time with scenes that are not even close to the complexity of an average vue scene).

What I would love instead is an energy conservative shader (something like the arch and design material in 3ds max for example). This kind of material is physically correct without being unbiased.

You can get the same amount of realism you get from an unbiased render engine but at a fraction of the render time (it's of course not as "easy" to use)

And one thing, before we can render anything really photo realistic in vue, the gamma workflow still need some fixing :P

alexcoppo
I don't use carrara but I can see why people would like it. It renders well and is cheaper than vue and you can easily pose in it.  I think vue would be a bit slow to pose more than one person and I don't think you can use your poser library of premade poses in vue can you?

vue gets very sluggish with a few poser people in a scene.

Love esther

also there is tooning software and plugins for various stuff that vue doesn't have.  so carrara is another tool in our 3d arsenal.

An interesting opinion and for me I find it really depends on what type of enviroment you want but when it comes to realism, LuxRender/Studio can't be beat. 

I've enjoyed the discussion you guys have had but even with the Vue 2014 version using "photometric" lighting, you can't really beat that perfectly crisp lighting that you get with reality... especially when you take the cost into account.  Daz for free, I bought reality 2 on sale for like $30 dollars... When compaired to $400 dollars for Vue Complete (not the full version that cost $1700) it really is no competition. 

I think the real issue is what we plan to do with the software... If you want to make outdoor landscapes then of course use Vue.. but if you want to make any type of portraits with human characters then Daz/Poser exporting into Lux really is the hands down winner... besides, you can always fake landscapes by using 2D backgrounds in combination of other 3D elements.

You can try and export DAZ/Poser to Vue and I've made some really 'nice' renders and they each have a good use but when you factor in cost and ease of use, straight using of DAZ and Reality 2 win hands down for me.

I do like my expansive outdoor scenes, so I keep using Vue but if you have a budget then Vue is off the table, too little for a lot of money that doesn't convert into any spectacular.