raytracing vs. radiosity by podlovics

Cinema 4D • Architecture • posted on Mar 22, 2006

Open full image in new tab Zoom on image

Hover over top left image to zoom.
Click anywhere to exit.

Members remain the original copyright holder in all their materials here at Renderosity. Use of any of their material inconsistent with the terms and conditions set forth is prohibited and is considered an infringement of the copyrights of the respective holders unless specially stated otherwise.

Description

Just wanted to compare the two rendering methods. Upper image raytraced (with some glow effects), rendering time 30 sec. Lower image radiosity rendering time 6 min. I think for an animation I would chose raytracing.

Comments (15)

)

grylin

1:01PM | Wed, 22 March 2006

holy macaroni! cooool. :D very real :)

)

ToniDunlap

1:24PM | Wed, 22 March 2006

Hmmmm! Love them both. Sort of favor the raytracing but both are just great. Of course your Cinema 4D work and Architecture are a wonderful as ever. Oh if you only gave lessons.

)

Sylvia

1:38PM | Wed, 22 March 2006

Both look so ~Lovely~ Beautifully created... EXCELLENT!!

)

miketche

3:05PM | Wed, 22 March 2006

I think the Radiosity image looks better IMHO. But you're right, for animation use Raytracing.

)

chrispoole

5:54PM | Wed, 22 March 2006

30 seconds, do you have a mega-beast of a machine or is every other proggy shit. The bottom has more depth, fantastic render.

)

Fidelity2

6:57PM | Wed, 22 March 2006

Excellent. I voted for this image because it is truly the best. I love the fact that the ray-tracing rendered image has its unique distinction. I prefer the ray-tracing image and method. But the radiosity image is excellent too. Thanks alot for this great comparative image.

)

podlovics

12:20AM | Thu, 23 March 2006

The machine is a duocore amd 3800 x2, with 2GB RAM. Not a mega beast ca. $7-800

arrogant

2:36AM | Thu, 23 March 2006

to me radiosity looks better, however the rendering time difference is significant. the arm-chair looks a bit too smooth. altogether not bad

)

raydvd

12:52PM | Thu, 23 March 2006

Beautiful render, my fav is the ray-tracing as it has a more soft focus to it but , just fantastic both pics

)

Nod

8:21AM | Sat, 25 March 2006

They're both wonderful, but I prefer the bottom one too.

)

Silgrin

9:06AM | Tue, 28 March 2006

"30 seconds, do you have a mega-beast of a machine or is every other proggy shit." Well, C4D DOES HAVE an extremely fast renderer. Imagine I did my first works with 64MB RAM. "The machine is a duocore amd 3800 x2, with 2GB RAM. Not a mega beast." Yes, not a mega beast at all... ;) Optimist! I just have got one Celeron 1,4 with 0,5GB RAM.

)