Luxrender 0.6, Indigo 2 and Maxwell 2 - A "fair" comparison.

[Repgahroll]

.
More images on page 3.

Hello, today I rendered a better image on these three renderers:

Maxwell:

Indigo:

Lux:

All rendered for the same time on same hardware. All 64-bit versions on a Linux 64-bit PC. Maxwell licensed, Indigo demo.

In my humble opinion, the better image is the one produced by indigo, maxwell is incredibly fast rendering translucency and direct lighting is just as fast as a biased engine, but secondary bounces aren't much faster than 1.7 version. The scene should have glass and sss materials, but i didn't have time to do it (if it had, the maxwell version would be better i think). All materials are diffuse (matt) with the exact same colours, however, the maxwell version rendered a glossy material on window due a mxstudio "bug" (doesn't handle very well different materials on same mesh).

The luxrender version is a bit "washed", i dunno why because i deactivated the RGC button and applied vignetting and proper colour settings.

On the left bottom corner of the image, it's possible to notice a different face shadowing on the top face of the stair skirting-board. On the maxwell version it's dark and on lux and indigo versions it's not darker than the side face of the skirting board.

If you don't understand what i mean just lemme know and i'll post a image.

[jeanphi]

Hi,

The fact that the lux image is a bit washed might be because you disabled RGC. Have you used portals on the openings?

Jeanphi

[SATtva]

The fact that the lux image is a bit washed might be because you disabled RGC.

With disabled RGC and lowered Gamma the image should become more saturated. I wonder what Gamma value was used here.

[psychotron]

me think it's not very good approach to turn off RGC and mess with gamma.. rather then that examine linear workflow closer
gamma is 2.2 in terms of sRGB profile and nowadays monitors... period

it's great lux is using linear workflow

ad comparsion - indigo is most cleaner so fastest? but isn't cheating somehow.. seems like there is a big meshlight in opening?

lux's light distribution seems most naturaly from all engines in this scene.. indigo have also lesser contrast, like 2nd bounces are stronger or what
would be nice to see maxwell render without that glitch and traditional lux version with RGC on

please compare as much scenes as possibile if you have access to maxwell

[pixie]

ad comparsion - indigo is most cleaner so fastest? but isn't cheating somehow.. seems like there is a big meshlight in opening?

Like an exit portal?

[tomb]

ad comparsion - indigo is most cleaner so fastest? but isn't cheating somehow.. seems like there is a big meshlight in opening?

That would be how Indigo's portal implementation works I think (quasi-invisible diffuse area light, i.e. it shows shows sky but nothing else).
Very different from Lux's implementation, but not sure if it's really "wrong". I've seen movie sets where they have huge reflector boxes outside the
windows to get better indoor lighting... It does make comparisons hard to do though because diffuse sky/environmental light != diffuse planar local area light.
In other words; Indigo's portals seem to work as light sources, whereas Lux's portals are merely light "guides".

T

[psychotron]

ad comparsion - indigo is most cleaner so fastest? but isn't cheating somehow.. seems like there is a big meshlight in opening?

Like an exit portal?

true approach to portals is something like that - find portal mesh and fire paths to this place (so it's concetrating paths from sunsky to opening with portal and not trace paths on outside walls - wasted computing cause they not illuminate your interior of course)
not find portal mesh and convert it to meshlight


edit: tomb I'm afraid those diffusers you mention is used to get 'diffuse/soft' light.. not to get better lighting

[Repgahroll]

I forgot to tell... indigo version isn't the 2.0, its the latest available from forums (not from the site), version 2.2.4, which is a little bit faster that version 2.0.

@jeanphi: No portals.

@SATva: Gamma value was 1.5, i adjusted looking at maxwell output in order to make it as similar as possible, the same for tonemapping.

@psychotron: Looks like indigo is faster than maxwell 2 here (which is supposed to be at least 2 times faster than 1.7.1), the scenes are exactly the same, no portals, no meshlights. I didn't add a sun because it's hard to set it on the same position on maxwell studio.

I think it's better to render a complex cornell box with some transmissible and reflective materials inside.

Why it's not necessary to add portals in maxwell?

[psychotron]

@psychotron: Looks like indigo is faster than maxwell 2 here (which is supposed to be at least 2 times faster than 1.7.1), the scenes are exactly the same, no portals, no meshlights. I didn't add a sun because it's hard to set it on the same position on maxwell studio.

I think it's better to render a complex cornell box with some transmissible and reflective materials inside.

Why it's not necessary to add portals in maxwell?

so how you lit scene if there is any meshlight nor sunsky?
fair comparsion could be in meshlight - it can be tuned to same parameters in different engines..

ad cornell box - I will have updated luxbox testing environment ready in few days so you can use it for your tests if suites you
older version can be find here viewtopic.php?f=14&t=1307&hilit=luxbox
(it also feature maxwell cornell box setup as seen on maxwell forums so you could try comparing with that setting)

maybe maxwell is looking for openings and creating necceserary geometry for portals in automated fashion.. ? don't know

[pixie]

in indigo portals only work with sun light or HDR, not with light sources