SU Podium Forum
Register  |   |   |  Calendar  |  Latest Topics
 
 
 


 
Poll Results
 
 What features/improvements do you want to see in Podium V3?
 Improved performance (render speed) 18 12%
 Network rendering (local network) 8 5%
 Network rendering (internet render farm) 10 6%
 Animation support 8 5%
 Integrated support for rendering sections 9 6%
 Better performance with large/complex models 22 15%
 HDRI Image-based lighting 10 6%
 More control over render parameters (currently in presets) 18 12%
 More options for materials 29 20%
 Better presets 13 8%
 View Voters
Multiple choice poll. Total votes: 145. This poll has been closed.


Reply
  Author   Comment   Page 5 of 10     «   Prev   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   Next   »
AlNizer

Registered:
Posts: 19
Reply with quote  #61 
ok, so you're telling me that I have to buy Photoshop to make my renders look good???

and yes, those models, but I can't get them to look like what you show. I guess I have to use Photoshop?

Here are 2 renders of one of the model you provide, same settings as suggested, but can't get the same result, no matter what I do, doesn't look anything like on your page.

pdm_browser_bathroom_design-su7 2014-04-24 12321900000.png 

pdm_browser_bathroom_design-su7 2014-04-24 12110200000.png 

bigstick

Avatar / Picture

Moderator
Registered:
Posts: 10,137
Reply with quote  #62 
Quote:
Originally Posted by AlNizer
That's only your point of view, not mine.
Which point, the one about HDRI or the one about render quality?

The point about HDRI not being used by high end visualisers isn't really debatable - at least in terms of architecture. The point about quality is something you won't agree with, but there are 2 reasons why your alternative product is inferior. First of all, realtime render engines *can't* get the same quality as non-realtime engines in less time.

Your competitor's web gallery sucks compared to Podium's, and anyone who seriously argues to the contrary is either lacking sufficient critical facilities, stupid, or being paid for an opinion. By 'lacking critical facilities' I mean anyone who hasn't spent a *long* time staring at rendered images and evaluating what is good, bad or indifferent about them. My credentials for this are that I've been a qualified chartered architect for 25 years, I've won several awards for my work, I run an architectural design office, and have been involved in development of render engines for over 10 years. This doesn't make my judgement better than everyone else's but it does mean that it's based on an informed and (slightly) accomplished opinion.

It's not particularly perceptive to say that a man on the street's assessment of art or music is not generally as valuable as that of a professional. I have no idea what your background is, but if you have a very discerning eye and integrity, you won't argue about the quality issue.

The 'other software' is not a bad product, it has different priorities and a different emphasis, and for some people it's possibly a better solution. Some things may be better, so me worse. Its quality is good but in absolute terms, it is *not* comparable quality to Podium, but maybe that's not your priority [smile]

If you are talking about some kind of progressive render, then you can get a result in less time, but it's grainy and way worse. To get better quality, you need to let these algorithms render for far longer.

Render algorithms are a well-documented topic. You have biased and unbiased algorithms. One type is good for speed, the other type good for ultimate quality. Except that it's more complicated than this. You can have unbiased algorithms which are tuned for fewer samples which create quick results with an incomplete solution, and you can get optimised biased solutions which can get excellent results very quickly. Indigo is an example of the first, and VRay of the second. Indigo, which used to be free can produce beautiful results, easily as good as Podium - if you are prepared to wait.

Realtime render engines often use either a simplified ray tracing algorithm, which isn't as sophisticated as photon mapping with irradiance caching, or they use a progressive path tracing (or Metropolis Light Transport) algorithm which is tuned to give an inaccurate result quickly. In 2012 I went to a SketchUp developer's conference in Madrid where I saw exactly what some of the realtime engines can do, and it's not that great, and it's not that fast. We go to many of the same shows and we see what they promote as examples of their best work. Look at the Gallery first of all. This should represent the best that the engine can produce. There is nothing in Podium's price bracket that matches the quality. Even some of the realtime engines aren't much quicker than Podium. By that I mean maybe 30 seconds on some scenes.

Every single realtime engine I've seen has inferior quality to Podium. Sure if you have shiny raytrace only scenes, but that's not what architectural rendering is about. You need indirect light bounces and global illumination, not some kind of fake ambient occlusion or old-school radiosity.

Quote:
Originally Posted by AlNizer
Of course you have to defend your product. But for me, it crash all the time.


So why didn't you post a support request? We all spend our time on the forum to help with problems or answer questions, and we have support 24-7, 365 days a year. There are certain things that crash Podium every time. Using gif, pdf or psd textures is (or used to be) one of these things, and some 3DW components also do it. Applying reflection to LEMs is another thing that causes problems. It's in our interests to do our best to make sure all customers have a positive experience and get the best results possible.

Quote:
Originally Posted by AlNizer
Why can't you provide one of the complete model used on your home page so that we can try it ourself, without Photoshop and see if we get the same result? because I was never able to get it to look that way, even after hours or rendering with the higher settings, and I have to modify the output with Photoshop to look better.


We have some of our test models available for download. If you haven't been able to get the quality that some users can, it's because you haven't had to the time to try, or spent long enough developing your skills. Producing stunning renders takes time, even with a renderer that is very fast and easy to use. You need to practice and be ruthlessly critical about your work to improve. That's another thing we try to do here. Some people might think that we are being overly picky and ultra critical. In many cases we are, but it's helped many customers to develop their skills and talent to produce stunning images. That's the point, if we can, we want to help everyone get better at what they do!

By no means all of our gallery or web images have been photoshopped. The fact is that it's what happens in the industry. You'll find that almost all professional photographers Photoshop their images. You cannot capture with a camera exactly what you see, and for that you need tricks - even with a camera [smile]

__________________

That which does not kill us makes us stronger
-Friedrich Nietzsche

AlNizer

Registered:
Posts: 19
Reply with quote  #63 
I suppose I purchased the wrong software. All these technical terms mean nothing to me, photon, bias, unbias etc. are not terms I really understand. What I care about is the output, and yes, Podium do provide stunning screen shots, but I've never been able to get anything that close with Podium. With other renders, I do get the quality you claim Podium has with much less hassle and no need for Photoshop, that's why I never got VRay to begin with. You are a professional designer, great, so you know how to design a model and texture it so that it will render super nice in Podium. But for the average guy like me, taking a sketchup model from the 3d warehouse (as do your competitors) and use that in their gallery may not be as stunning as yours, but considering they are low quality models to start with, not Photoshoped, it's just as good quality as yours. Now imagine you would setup a model to render it with the competitors software, I'm sure you'll be amazed of the render quality. Podium is not the best rendering engine there is, and some of your competitors surpasses Podium as far as quality, but they may lack the simplicity. Sorry to have bothered you and to have exposed to a few of your users your competitor product, I though I was helping solve the issue they had with what I know, no harm intended on my part, simply ignorance of the business.
bigstick

Avatar / Picture

Moderator
Registered:
Posts: 10,137
Reply with quote  #64 
Quote:
Originally Posted by AlNizer
I suppose I purchased the wrong software. 


Maybe. There is no one package that is perfect for everyone. [smile]

Quote:
Originally Posted by AlNizer
All these technical terms mean nothing to me, photon, bias, unbias etc. are not terms I really understand. 


But you shouldn't have to. We've designed the application so that you don't need to know this stuff, I mentioned it because I do understand it, and it's the reason why the realtime engines *can't* get comparable quality in the same or less time. 

Quote:
Originally Posted by AlNizer
All  that I care about is the output, and yes, Podium do provide stunning screen shots, but I've never been able to get anything that close with Podium. 


Getting that quality isn't easy, and it takes some hard work and a bit of time. The point is that Podium starts users off with something simple, and allows them to progress to something stunning with a very simple interface. The old version didn't have enough in it to keep talented and dedicated users happy for an extended period of time. Quality wasn't as good, but it's all some people wanted.

Quote:
Originally Posted by AlNizer
With other renders, I do get the quality you claim Podium has with much less hassle 


I suspect this isn't the case actually, because I strongly suspect you're not nearly as particular about image quality as I am.

 
Quote:
Originally Posted by AlNizer
and no need for Photoshop, that's why I never got VRay to begin with. 


And this is why I don't believe you. It's not that I think you aren't telling the truth, I don't want to sound rude but I just don't trust your judgement [tongue]

Post-processing almost always improves images. It's why the best visualisers use it, and it still improves their work. If it's good enough for professional photographers, it's good enough for renders. Vray is probably on balance the best render engine of all, but it has a much steeper learning curve and it's *much* more expensive.

 
Quote:
Originally Posted by AlNizer
But for the average guy like me, taking a sketchup model from the 3d warehouse (as do your competitors) and use that in their gallery may not be as stunning as yours, but considering they are low quality models to start with, not Photoshoped, it's just as good quality as yours. 


Nope! I've seen what they do, and it's not as good. I do believe you when you say it's good enough for you though. The reason we introduced the Browser was for novices to take a simple scene, populate it with render-ready objects from it, and get really good results with minimal time and effort. If you think you can get stuff from 3DW and apply material properties and get good results, you're right. But - by the time you've sifted through all the crap and found decent stuff, and then downloaded and applied material properties, you could have done the same thing much more quickly with the Browser in probably a fraction of the time.

 
Quote:
Originally Posted by AlNizer
Now imagine you would setup a model to render it with the competitors software, I'm sure you'll be amazed of the render quality. 


Not last time I looked. The only competitors with quality that match, at an acceptable speed are significantly more expensive. 

Quote:
Originally Posted by AlNizer
Podium is not the best rendering engine there is, and some of your competitors surpasses Podium as far as quality, but they may lack the simplicity. 


I completely agree! [biggrin]

It's not what we intended though. We wanted to get the best balance between quality, speed, simplicity, efficiency and value for money, and we think we've achieved our objective. That doesn't mean that it's the perfect tool for everyone, or that we think we don't need to develop the application further. We have lots of ideas for improvements. Things like the Podium Image Editor I think would even convert people like you to the benefit of post-processign with very little knowledge or effort!

Quote:
Originally Posted by AlNizer
Sorry to have bothered you and to have exposed to a few of your users your competitor product, I though I was helping solve the issue they had with what I know, no harm intended on my part, simply ignorance of the business.


Debate is good, and we don't expect everyone to agree with everything we do. However posting links to competitor's products is pretty much a sure fire way to get a somewhat adverse reaction [smile]

Good luck with whatever render tool you use, but I wouldn't post competitors information on any forum if I were you [wink]

__________________

That which does not kill us makes us stronger
-Friedrich Nietzsche

Nick00

Avatar / Picture

Maître érudit
Registered:
Posts: 3,280
Reply with quote  #65 
Regarding the images you posted. You don't have any sunlight entering the bathroom - it surely won't look the same. What about the sun intensity and exposure, is it to the max?

There's 3 main setting in Podium, preset, SketchUp sun (shadows) and intensity/exposure. If you don't set them, minimally, you may get crappy results.

__________________
Podium Tech. Support
AlNizer

Registered:
Posts: 19
Reply with quote  #66 
ok, I can't help to disagree on the quality. Here is a model of yours rendered with exterior high (I downloaded the latest v2 plus demo), and another rendered with "I won't say" without modifying anything. You can clearly see the difference, to me, the second one is much more photo-realistic. The first one is not, even the one from your model page isn't as nice, and it's your model, so what am I doing wrong here??? both ran for 2 minutes.  

cottage-interior-exterior 2014-04-24 16024900000.png 


cottage-interior-exterior.png 

DavorP

Avatar / Picture

Moderator
Registered:
Posts: 1,151
Reply with quote  #67 
I seriousely don't understand what is the problem here? You have one image with too low contrast and a second image with too high contrast. Both need some adjustment. And no you don't need to buy Photoshop since V2plus has a built in image editor, and it was a free upgrade.

As far as PP is concerned this is what a proffesional photographer does in Photoshop after taking photos with probably really expensive equipment.
http://fstoppers.com/brilliant-time-lapse-video-on-retouching-a-rolex-watch

This is after just one click in Podium Image Editor (auto levels).

1878127.png 


__________________
"Architecture starts when you carefully put two bricks together. There it begins."
Ludwig Mies van der Rohe
AlNizer

Registered:
Posts: 19
Reply with quote  #68 
Thanks for the link, not very convincing as being photo-realistic! Looks like a science fiction drawing. Some people just take it beyond reality. Even the people posting say the same!

Too much contrast??? This is exactly how it looks like in the desert (I know because I do have a vacation house in Arizona and it looks very similar to this model), no trees, nothing, just bright sun and blue sky.

Yours with the auto-level is not convincing either, way too much blue on the walls and the rest looks washed out. Looks like it's in a cold place, not hot like Arizona.

If you have 25 years of experience and you have the eye for this, you must admit that your auto-level did not produce a photo-realistic output.

ok, whatever, I don't want to fill out this thread with this because it's suppose to be for improvement, not tech support, and I'm sure I'm getting on your nerves by now.
bigstick

Avatar / Picture

Moderator
Registered:
Posts: 10,137
Reply with quote  #69 
This kind of proves my point - if you look really carefully. Even though this is the worst kind of scene to show what our render engine does well (it has almost entirely direct lighting) if you look at the shadows cast by the gate you will see that your other renderer's solution is less subtle. It's fine for brightly lit exteriors in full sun, but for other types of scene it is slightly cartoony.

If you look at the original images, your entire argument boils down to the fact that you prefer its colour balance (even though it has a yellowish tinge) and its artificially contrasty appearance, and don't like using PP to adjust these things. That's fine - that's what you prefer, and I'm guessing you do mainly exteriors.

We configure the presets to give a balanced appearance across a whole range of scenes, and the tonemapping (overall tonal appearance, brightness, contrast etc) is entirely personal. 

You also ought to be using the 1.0.5 exterior default preset, because on this scene you'll probably notice no difference whatsoever apart from huge speed increase. The 1.0.8 is for scenes with much more indirect lighting. There is an article on choosing presets on the Tutorials page.

I don't agree with the point about the auto adjust either, that is supposed to be a white wall, not a pale cream wall. [smile]

I'm not sure what you are out to prove with this discussion. Your alternative renderer isn't any cheaper, has some features that Podium doesn't have, and lacks some features that we do. In terms of ultimate quality, it can't cut it, but for lower quality scenes it might be faster depending on what settings you use and on what kind of scene.

People will choose the software they prefer, and many people use more than one package.

Regardless of anything else, you ought to seriously check out an image editor. Fotor is free on PC and Mac and has a number of really fast and easy adjustments that are similar to our in-built image editor. I understand where you are coming from, because maybe 5 years ago I used to agree with the no PP thing. However, that's a 'hair shirt' kind of approach, and I've come to accept that it can make any image better, and it's what professional photographers and the very best professional visualisers use. Of course you can disagree, and that's fine, but you are swimming against the tide.



__________________

That which does not kill us makes us stronger
-Friedrich Nietzsche

Nick00

Avatar / Picture

Maître érudit
Registered:
Posts: 3,280
Reply with quote  #70 
Like I said previously you need to adjust the sun intensity/strength! With default values it will surely be of average illumination, and not like in the desert.<



__________________
Podium Tech. Support
DavorP

Avatar / Picture

Moderator
Registered:
Posts: 1,151
Reply with quote  #71 
In this thread we have Podium vs Vray comparison. Can you please render the scene with Raylectron and post the result?
__________________
"Architecture starts when you carefully put two bricks together. There it begins."
Ludwig Mies van der Rohe
LordV

Registered:
Posts: 4
Reply with quote  #72 
Just popping back into this thread quickly. Do you have any update on when Kray3 engine will be implemented?

I note the preview and SDK has been released, however equally as you chose to release podium 2.5 i am guessing we will have to wait for podium 3 to feature Kray 3 and thats still a while off?

Anyway just asking.

V
lkc

Registered:
Posts: 2
Reply with quote  #73 
I don't understand the aversion to "having to buy Photoshop too."  You should already have it, since no one really concerned with quality rendering works without it anyway.
bigstick

Avatar / Picture

Moderator
Registered:
Posts: 10,137
Reply with quote  #74 
We can't give you a date for Kray 3 implementation, because to start with, I don't think it has actually been formally released yet. Yes the SDK has been released, but last time I checked, it wasn't finished, and Grzegorz hadn't released even a public beta. There is a web preview, but not a fully working version. I haven't seen even a single finished render from it, and don't even have a list of the finished feature set. 

So - it's very premature to be talking about it. 

__________________

That which does not kill us makes us stronger
-Friedrich Nietzsche

henyaoi

Avatar / Picture

Render Machine
Registered:
Posts: 307
Reply with quote  #75 
Hi! It seems to me the font size in V2 Plus is incredibly small. Is there a way to do something with that? Thanks[smile]
__________________
https://www.facebook.com/sucoaching
Previous Topic | Next Topic
Print
Reply

Quick Navigation: