> Quote -> Quote - Quite right!Somehow in my ramblings I forgot to add in that if you don't need/want caustics, Firefly can  do everything you need. Regardless of the renderer used, you will need to learn how to optimise your materials and lighting for your image. One big advantage to using Firefly is that with a lot of the available content, most of the work has already been done for you. > > I might disagree here.  The presets that come with Firefly, even now, are very outdated, and intended for 3 point lighting, and often don't look good with IDL or global lighting.  The bumps and colors get washed out, and the materials themselves don't look realistic to begin with.  Unless you are bagginsbill, or have all the shaders he puts out there, you've got to be a mathemetician to get realistic, complex materials from Firefly.  Octane actually has more usable preset materials than Poser, and they are all very realistic right out of the box, with ANY lighting situation. > > You really have to fight with Firefly to render without artifacts, or blotchiness, at super-high settings, and dense objects.  The most realistic results I've ever seen in CG are being done with the newer render technologies, and unbiased render engines.  There's just no comparison in accuracy and quality.  I think Luxrender is a bad example of this type of rendering genre, because it's the slowest render engine of it's kind.  It may also be the most accurate, but that's debateable. > > Point is, unless you require ultra high-end realism from your renders, for film or print, then you should really consider not spending the money.  Because you don't need to.  The example of realism indicated by the OP in this thread doesn't seem extraordinary to me (no offense to the artist of course), so Firefly could easily achieve that result.  If that's the level the OP is looking for, the tools to get it are already on his system in Firefly.  However, if true photorealism is the goal, where someone inexperienced in CG might not know the difference between the render and reality, then Octane or Luxrender are the tools to look at.

Well, ummm, yes, I think. I struggle with getting good results with Poser, and have always attributed it to my lack of knowledge of Firefly, because there are people that seem to easily get good results with Firefly. But it is easy for me to get good results with DS, Carrara, Lux, and Octane. However, I still dont think all the blame can be placed on Poser/Firefly, because I haven't really ever taken the time to fully understand/learn it. The other renderers seem more intuitive to me, and much easier to get results I like.

I am always amazed when people seem to have difficulty with some of the basic funtions of the other renderer options for DAZ/Poser content, because they are so intuitive for me. But this does reinforce the idea that we all think differently, and different people respond to different software workflows differently.

That being said, I've had Octane for about 9 months now, and am still extremely happy with it (and I use it on a laptop). IMHO, the quality of my renders has improved with Octane, partially because it is a high quality renderer, and partly because of the fantastic interactive nature of Octane. Getting almost immediate feedback showing the results of your changes encourages tweaking and experimentation with your materials and lights. I like the results I get with Lux, but Octane makes it sooo much easier and faster that I don't use Reality/Lux much any more (but I still use it more than Firefly).

The material/shader presets that come with Octane are fantastic. For the attached image I used a lot of custom shaders based on Octane preset shaders. This render was just a render I did for fun to participate in a contest, and to test the capabilities of Octane (I'm sure this could have also been done with great results in Poser/Firefly as well - but this was only my 3rd or 4th finished render with Octane). It is lit with a HDR, no other lights, and has a lot of reflective materials. If someone wants to push the limits of realistic looking 3d rendering, Octane can definitely be an exellent choice, if you have the proper hardware, and can live within the limitations of GPU only rendering, and can afford it. 

__________________________________________________________

My Rendo Gallery ........ My DAZ3D Gallery ........... My DA Gallery ......