own1221

"In fryrender and other unbiased renderers, the longer you let the image render, the higher the quality and you can stop it at any time."

so you would specify a certain image size e.g. 640x480 pixels and it will start rendering until you tell it to stop?

This software sounds very interesting, what is the render time compared to a vray rendertime, just a very rough estimate would it take alot longer or about the same? and is it a plugin that runs inside max or do you export a mesh and open it up in FRY and finally what size is the installation file?

Fran

Yes. Alternatively, you can set a time limit or limit the render by the number of passes completed. With each pass, the image is refined a certain amount and the more passes, the less noisey the image.

Unless you have inefficient GI or material settings in Vray, render times will generally be less than with fryrender. Scenes like product shots and exterior viz will render faster than interior scenes though, so it depends on the work you do. An advantage to the way that fryrender renders the image is that the entire image is output to the frame buffer at once, gradually becoming clearer and actually giving you distinguishable results very quickly. So you have the opportunity to inspect all portions of the image and determine fairly quickly if you have made an error that needs to be corrected.

Also Tonemapping, Post, and Lens effects are controlled interactively from the fryrender console and can be tweaked in real time as your image is rendering or once you've stopped the render. And if you stop prematurely, you can always resume it. In addition to that, if you set your scene lights to different layers via Fryrender object properties, you have the ability to turn them on, off, adjust intensity, rgb color, and temperature. This includes the ability to separate the sun and sky on separate layers and control them independently.

Fryrender itself is a standalone executable that is linked to a host application via plugin. There are plugins for 3ds Max, XSI, Maya, C4d, Lightwave, Rhino and Sketchup. In your host application, you create your scenes, set up your cameras, lights and materials, and render. Once you hit render, the host application exports the scene and calls fryrender. Then your host application is free for you to work in. For information on pricing and licensing details, or to download the demo, you can go to the fryrender web site.

I use fryrender for all of my production work, unless a studio requires me to use Vray for the sake of compatability.

__________________
- Fran
If you must reinvent the wheel, remember that it works best if it is, like, roundish.

own1221

Thanks Fran you have been very helpful in helping me understand Fryrender, I'm definetly going to try it soon, maybe after I get a new computer - I'm running a AMD 3200 at the moment (not even one core :P).

One last question, when I'm setting up the cameras, lights and materials in max is FRY render's set of cameras, lights and materials, and if so how sophisticated are the settings for these esp for the materials is it alot more complicated?

Fran

You would definately want a faster computer with more ram and preferably (though not required) 64-bit Windows, in which case, go for at least 4 GB ram. It makes life a lot easier.

You set up fry cameras the same way you would native ones, but the parameter controls are proprietary fryrender ones. Fry will use a native camera, but not it's native parameters, and you cannot apply fryrender camera parameters to it within the host app. It will carry default fryrender camera settings.

You apply emitter materials to objects that represent your lights in the scene (a plane, a sphere, etc.).

Fryrender materials are proprietary and you apply them to objects within Max. You access and apply them via the Max Material Editor, but you set the material type from the Material/Map browser to FRY Material. When you edit the material, you are taken to the proprietary fry material editor. As to whether the materials are complicated, I've been using them for so long that I can't give an objective opinion on that. They are different. You'll just have to see for yourself.

__________________
- Fran
If you must reinvent the wheel, remember that it works best if it is, like, roundish.

RyanSpaulding

Hey Fran,

What is it you like about Fryrender better than VRay? I must admit, you put out amazing work in Fryrender.

Fran

Hi Ryan,

When I work as a consultant to a studio who requires that I use Vray, I prefer Vray.

There are several things that discourage me about Vray. These things pertain only to me and my experience with Vray, and have nothing to do with the experience or output of anyone else in the Vray community. Nor are these things sited as intended to imply or convince anyone that fryrender is a better product than Vray. But the stumbling points for me are: a myriad of GI settings, AA choices, Color Mapping choices, reliance on LWF, loss of detail and secondary shadow fidelity. With the latest release, there are even more render settings. I can't keep up. Plus, the settings are, for the most part, scene and output size specific. So they change. While I'm thinking of it, if you apply a Vray light material to an object, you have to have extremely high settings to avoid GI artifacts.

With fryrender, I don't concern myself with LWF because it works in linear space already. I choose an AA setting based on the size of the output (Detailed for images less than 1000 x n pixels, Default for anything larger, or you can disable it for fast previews). DOF is automatic and dependent on the fstop of your camera and while that is not interactive, nearly every other aspect of the image output is (as I've described in the post above).

An important personal preference of mine is to have a render engine that does not sit on top of my host application while it's rendering. Sure, you can use Backburner to send out renders, and I've used it successfully before, but I don't like the workflow. If I need to do large format output, I send it over the network via the fryrender console. I can even send it to a renderfarm straight from the console.

Speed of course, is an issue for many. Back when I used radiosity, people were dumbfounded that I would wait 11 hours for a solution - but I could render view after view at high-res in 10 minutes. People also considered GI to be a cheat - something a knowledgable person should be able to do with standard key lighting schemes and adept use of amibient. GI was also considered by one of the most admired people in this business to be not feasible for production work. As hardware evolves and when a Vray render takes 1 minute to render while the fry one takes 60, I'll still choose fryrender for my production. I've seen some of the most astonishing work in architectural viz done by artists using Vray, and I take nothing away from them by saying that I prefer to use fryrender.

So, that's the short answer. Do you want the long one?

__________________
- Fran
If you must reinvent the wheel, remember that it works best if it is, like, roundish.

RyanSpaulding

Haha. Is it sick if I say 'yes'?

Good info though. I've always been intrigued by Fryrender. Seems like it's what Maxwell was originally striving to be...with a better dev team behind it. We use VRay here at the office. It'd definitely be fun to play with.

Fran

Pretty much.

__________________
- Fran
If you must reinvent the wheel, remember that it works best if it is, like, roundish.

leclercq_d

How do you setup the camera so i get the wright angel. i mean normaly in vray you got vertical corretion or in max a camera modifier. But with fryrender i can't get it wright.

can somone give me some tips

greets

RobNJ73

Same question, third thread I've seen it in.