Це відео не доступне.
Перепрошуємо.
Octane vs Redshift - Why I Switched in 2020???
Вставка
- Опубліковано 28 тра 2020
- IG📸: / theo_kerr_
Tweet Me: tr_kerr_?lang=en
MY classes 🔥: theokerr.art/classes
LUTS For VFX artists and colorist!www.theokerr.art/color
PROJECT FILES! gum.co/Rmjrb
------------------// Thanks for watching! \\----------------------
Subscribe to stay UPDATED !!!!!
ua-cam.com/users/TKIII?sub_c...
I've been using Redshift in my commercial work for 3 years after I switched my render pipeline from Arnold and V-ray.
Then I was forced to use Octane more in the past few months cos more concept artists are using C4D+OC workflow.
At first I had to convert their octane scenes into redshift with every little detail... It was much painful when there were dozens of shaders and lights.
And I had to try my best to keep the render result same as the original look from Octane.
But after that I think there's something I can share about these 2 render engines.(not a native english speaker, so please be cool if I say something stupid...)
Since I was an Arnold and Vray user in CPU engine period, overall I prefer Redshift for sure cos it's almost a perfect combination of these 2 render engines with GPU enabled.(let's not talk abt the GPU version of Arnold and Vray for now...)
I agree everything in this video and here's some detail pros and cons I've found between Octane and Redshift:
(1), The experience of RS's node system is almost the same as Arnold, you've got a lot freedom to play with the nodes even includ some of native C4D Xpresso nodes.almost every parameter of nodes could be connected with other nodes. And that makes lots of things possible, such as randomly offset a texture projection's postion/rotation/scale for each object in the scene. Which I really don't know how to do it in Octane...
(2), The costum-AOV-system, also like Arnold, is much powerful when I need to get more control in compositing.
(3), In my opinion, node solo output is the most important function in IPR workflow. Arnold and Redshift could show almost all the color output nodes' solo result fast and correctly. That's vital when you're trying to adjust the roughness map or bump map, etc.
But in my experience, Octane's node solo fuction isn't that handy, even cause software crash sometimes.
(4), In Redshift the most frequently node I'd use other than RAMP is: COLOR LAYER. It composites up to 7 textures together just like the way in the Photoshop, in ONE node. It's so convenient and powerful. To do so in Octane is really complicate, involving lots of nodes.
(5), Working Experience of the node system in octane is much better, due to the outdated Xpresso interface. (I haven't trid the new C4D r21 +RS 3 node editor)
(6), The Dirt node in Octane is extremely powerful than Redshift's curvature. It confused me for a long time with rendering worn edge effect like Arnold with redshift's curvature node. But Octane Dirt just get me even better result.
(7), Before Octane 2020, Redshift's Round corners node is much powerful and practical. But I've to say the new Round edges in Octane 2020 is better than Redshift.
(8), The Random Color node in Octane is more reliable than Redshift's Color user Data node with "Geometry ID color" when you don't wanna use Mograph effector to distribute colors on objects.
I've seen the problem when I sent a scene with Redshift "Geometry ID color" node to render farm, and the color distribution may be different from different render node computer, and it's randomly. So far Octane didn't bother me with this kind of problem.
But here's something important:
Redshift's Geometry ID color doesn't support "render instance" in C4D, which is a big problem. But since it's Geometry ID, every single object in the scene will get an unique color ID no matter it's in a clone system or not.
Octane Random Color node ONLY support "render instance" or it's built-in Octane Scatter...when you turn a Cloner object into "Instance" mode, the random color node will faild...it means without cloner or scatter system, octane Random Color node is useless.
(9), I've gotta say I can't get enough of Octane's denoiser system...
In some specific scene, I don't even know how long I have to wait to see a noise-free render result when there's volume/High power light source/high glossy caustics, more than 40000 samples won't be enough...
but denoiser could save me.
Talking about Redshift's denoiser...well, nothing to talk, just don't use it.
(10), Render pass system, Octane is powerful than Redshift, but lack of modifiability. You can't assign different file format or output file path for specific render pass. So it cause a fatal problem that you can't export z depth pass without filter, and meanwhile export Material ID with filter.
(11),Volume...
With Redshift environment object it's much easier to achieve fog/god-ray effect. And the render speed is fairly fast.
It's so hard to simulate Tyndall effect in Octane, because it dosen't has the "spread" attribute in light object like Redshift does, you've gotta do a lot of job in light's distribution chanel.
BUT, Octane's emission system is so powerful than Redshift. With this emission chanel you can make any polygon object as a light source to interact with volume object.
In Redshift, only a redshift LIGHT object could affect volume by tuning volume "contribution scale", object with incandescent shader doesn't light up volume...
which means that if I wanna build a high-way with hundreds of street lamps, I've gotta clone hundreds of redshift light source on the lamp model...in that case, believe me, the render time will be disaster.
That's all I can share about the 2 engines. Please let me know if anything is incorrect. I hope to learn more about Octane.
Thank you Theo, for this video. I've learnt a lot from your videos.
@@THEOexr I don't know if at the time of your writing this comment if there was a feature in Redshift or not but you can use a single Redshift light to create multiple mesh lights. the process includes some steps but its pretty simple to understand and that street lamp scenario that you talked about would be a lot less of an hassle and would render quickly. what i dont like about the emission on Redshift that you cant get it to work unless you turn on GI. also there is no way to render it out in a separate pass there is an AOV however but it only outputs the emission object like its a diffuse pass and not the actual effect on the objects around it. also there is a lot of issue with its SSS shaders
u can use a geometry as light.... I had 100 lanterns to do, I use oy one light and injected all lamp inside.
@@TTROPVNR how did you do that, by making the light source a mesh? how do you clone lights or have multiple meshs with only one redshift light
@@levihackerman1337 how did you do that, by making the light source a mesh? how do you clone lights or have multiple meshs with only one redshift light
@@EnterMyDreams Create an Area light and go to its properties, look for its shape attribute. you will see options like disc rectangle so on and so forth. there will be an option called mesh. when you select mesh it will highlight a field where you can link/unlink your desired mesh. now create a geometry and with it selected, select your area light and click "link" under the shape attribute. once connected it will show the name of the geometry you just linked in the field. now you can instance this light across the scene.
For those who don't want to play to much with settings about samples, there is auto sampling in redshift.
I guess you're talking about the checkbox. It's a method where you're increasing the camera rays per pixel based on the default sampling values per channel while matching a noise tolerance (with the adaptive threshold). In Redshift, you're ALWAYS supposed to increase the samples per channel individually and then increase if necessary the Unified Samples, otherwise, you're going to suffer a massive time increase in rendering times from bumping up mostly the unified sampling sliders by ticking that checkbox.
I’m using Redshift with the auto sampling and my rendertimes are crazy! 10x what I had in octane, really unsure about Redshift
How do you enable auto sampling? Anyone help?
thanks for the great in-Depth. Helped me a lot to decide what render engine i would probably use in the near future. Having both must be a great setup. On top of it Arnold and we are prepared for the future :D.
dude I have looked countless tutorials online and bought courses, just learning from you is the best in my personal preference! Thank you so much. You have helped my career out astronomically the past year on C4D. I will definitely be buying your redshift course to learn and always support you. Thanks for being a g!
Helpful comparison, you earned that sub. Thank you
Like this is a really good video for comparing the two, in my opinion though since computing power ins't much of a problem for me I tend to use Arnold, it's realistic, really flexible, it's ease of use is like Octane maybe even better *shrug* I tried playing around with Vray too, I have a friend who recommends it, it's faster also very flexible but the fact that it just keeps me from a smooth workflow since until now it doesn't support node based materials, Arnold stands on top for workflow, compatibility and flexibility, (not speed though) and the best part is it's always up-to-date
Thx Theo very great video again, i think the same about this two renderings. What you think about arnold ? i use octane and redshift for a long long time and i love so much but now i use more and more arnold and all the (little) problems i have in octane and redshift are done. Volume and lights works amazing, a transform node that i miss so much in redshift, the great advance toon shader, the amazing clip geo shader, the perfect sss shaders, the disaster at displacement in redshift is history , and last but not least the much higher project you can load in arnold and not constant crashing c4d (same in redshift).
I hope you understand me, my english is not very advance.
Have a great time. :)
I'll take the overall simplicity of Ocatne materials and render settings over Redshift any day.
GREAT VIDEO
Am saving this vid for referencing. Thanks!
Keep hustling cuz!
I agree about the denoising. It generally sucks...even the ones that are considered good. I will never use it, except in after effects and only with mattes to isolate exactly where I want it.
@3:20 Thanks for showing us the octane vdb render...as a big white frame...really sells your point!!! LOL
I've been using Vray for 20 years so I'm very used to dealing with sample settings and all that other stuff so what I'm looking for is speed AFTER render settings are dialed in.
Wow , i did even know how those 30min paases. Thats the beauty of 3d you won't even remember how the time paases so quick
That pun was very much intended
Hii theo is there any sale or discount soon for redshift course , cause i want to have it and love your work cause my result from redshift is messy
excellent brother
Wonderful deep dive! Sometimes it's hard to know the actual difference until you get your hands on both products.
But atleast watching videos like this gives some guidance on what to look out for. The intracacies of every software will naturally lead to one software being superior to the other in certain areas. There may never be the perfect software 😕
Hello. What is it that atmosphere plugin? Could you provide a link please? Thanks.
Hi friends, sorry for the laziness. I plan to watch this video bit later (will budget solid 30 mins), just a quick question if someone can help. We do construction "grow" animation in cinema 4d with a lot of detailed building components parts. Render quality is not priority, the render speed (we also use Enscape in revit, it is real time GPU render) is paramount concern (as each animation may last 4-5 mins). We used to use vray for presentation animation which cost like 40 mins per frame! Is Redshift is the FASTEST plugin for Cinema 4d? can it be a few seconds per frame? Thank you very much in advance!
The only thing I hate about Redshift is the material node manager. The nodes and how you connect them is probably the worst from all engines.
Hi guys, any idea render speed of naked cinema 4d, even just use environment lighting, comparing with using Redshift? As speed is EVERYTHING for our business..we would like to find out the FASTEST way, even without any render engine..thanks for any advice :)
“And this is Arnold” *Shows an asphalt driller”
Do you know which one is bettter when using Maya under macOS with an additional eGPU when it comes to speed in realtime rendering? I’m reading that both support this somehow but at least from their websites it looks like for Octane it’s not really out of beta. Thanks
We can consider Arnold and Corona Renderer as well they both r as good as it gets!
Vray as well. 🔥
@@THEOexr will u please make tutorial explaining both of them?
Checkout my artwork at Instagram @smsxart 🔥🔥🔥
You switched to Octane right? I saw this video a while back but I forget which one you settled with. I'd watch it again but I have to go! :D
For personal and small studio use, Octane is a great choice with affordable prices. THere's a reason why Maxon acquired Redshift and big studios use Redshift for production.
@@dinopolesesharkosaur I'll say its stabilities during actual productions and great supports. I think Blizzard uses Redshift for its cinematics too. Great integrations with Cinema4D and other DCC (actually Arnold does it better)particularly like Houdini for particle rendering.
So after watching the video... did you switch to Octane or to Redshift for 2020?
@Joe Bordo I mean Octane resolves a more realistic image out of the box - less tweaking involved but is slower / Redshift is faster but not as pretty an image + way more tweaks to start. It is more of what you are looking for / helps you the most.
But I wasn't sure if he switched TO Redshift or TO Octane by the end of the video...
@@theodoredaley2229 Yes, the title says he switched, but unfortunately the video doesn't give any reason.
I just love both renderers. Redshift for Studio / product stuff but Octane for the big outdoor scenes. Redshift simply cannot render a full meadow or a wood as fast and effortless as Octane does. Redshift is more stable on the other hand. I am glad i can use both.
I'm a Blender user. Do you have tutorials on Octane Blender workflow?
Very impressive. But i'm never going to bucket-render again
I'm switching after six months of redshift because it just takes too long to get a good result. Also, there's no dedicated film shader which is insanely annoying. I feel like Octane will be much faster in terms of workflow.
I have used Vray, Arnold, Physical Render, Redshift and Octane...and this last one is my favorite so far, easy to use and I really enjoy lightning with Octane ❤️
Octane cons: I just hate how many times it crashes in one day of work 😂...oh! And avoid Octane if you have a big and complex scene.
I love Octane!
With Redshift to need to tweak a lot of parameters to get something cool, I personally hate that.
Arnold is the easiest and better looking.
@@mouaadjaaidi5011 Ofcourse Arnold is best of the best about quality. Although it's slow.
@@SupSupa10 slower than other in terms of render time (although, it's getting better and better, and now it has the option to use Graphics Card) but if you can achieve a result 30% faster than in other render engine then the difference in render time gets compensated.
making a clearly intended pun and saying, no pun intended...
As a user of both engines and as much as I want to switch to Redshift 100% for stability reasons, I do agree with your final assessment that Octane is aesthetically superior. Maybe it is biased vs unbiased that gives Octane the edge, but there is something about Octane's look that is more more pleasing than Redshift, and I don't think it's about the amount of work you have to put in to configure the final output. I can tell instantly if an image is rendered with Octane vs Redshift, it just has a more tangible and convincing feel.
Also, displacement is quite unpredictable in Redshift especially when using Megascans and other PBR libraries. With Octane I can get the displacement dialled in right away, but in Redshift I'm usually tinkering for ages and never quite satisfied.
Volumes are terrible in Redshift (compare to Arnold, night and day difference) and not really worth struggling with. You'll never get convincing or believable clouds out of Redshift.
This all sounds negative but I do love Redshift, it's my go-to renderer but there is a lot of room for improvement.
@@THEOexr Thank you Theo, I enjoy your detailed insights too and appreciate you doing deep dives into these engines to highlight the pros and cons. Arnold is really worth investigating if you have the time, it's a lot more mature than Redshift and Octane as well as super stable. The downside is its speed, but the trade-off is worth it for some projects.
Yeah octane is also biased. Please, everyone, stop saying this. Go read the Chaos Group blog post about biased rendering. Then again, I agree that Octane renders out of the box look better, and I've been curious what Octane is doing behind the scene, it feels like an internal baked LUT or something.
Is the audio out of sync or am i crazy.
resume?
Switched from Redshift to Octane because now I have to pay nearly 150 a month to get redshift with c4d and thats ridiculous imo when octane is free in blender and like 20 a month for a studio license
I can buy Redshift for $500 USD
or I can buy Octane for $820 USD
Do you have a friend that is a student? I get c4d and redshift for $6 a year by using his student email XD
@@michaelroberts8397 How mate ? please let me know LOL?
+1 for Redshift. It's killing it even on Brute Force. Switched from Vray to Octane and then from Octane to Redshift. It's simply just the best on every points
what is brute force brother?
@@batboy5626 Sup, Brute Force is a way to render the GI and global illumination, it's the hardest one and longest one because it doesn't precompile the light and doesn't offer a way to have reduced quality, instead it renders straight like it really is in the scene, that'S why it's longer, perfect quality but longer to render.
Check in the GI option, it's one of the choice you have among Light Cache and Irradiance Map
I like the idea of octane and how similar it is to standard physical render, but it always crashes.
Seriously. 1 Time an hour atleast. It gets annoying.
@@luvair6765 I know you're not exaggerating either. Same deal with me. I dont know how people put up with it on commercial jobs.
for my love Octane.. i can't switch you now cuz i dont have gpu.. haha
amazing tut. thanks man
Hola a todos! Soy Nuevo en esto y e estado revisando e informandome mucho, aqui en los comentarios e visto muchas opiniones compartidas hacerca del tema!... Soy Nuevo que me recomiendan, por cual comienzo, Redshift o Octane?
Muchas gracias eh visto todos tus videos! Saludos a todos.
2:00 your camera is so out of sync to your microphone it's so distracting
Very important is that the unified samples max in Redshift have to be in BALANCE with the sampling override values. Unified samples (primary rays, i.e. camera rays) are there to improve AA and quality of contrasty textures and DOF quality. Secondary rays (under sampling override) improve reflection, refraction, gi, sss quality. If your unified samples max is set to 128, the override samples can't be lower than 128 either. Because every primary ray needs at least one secondary ray. What you usually would do is have the secondary ray value doubled compared to the primary rays. The result of this balance is that having your scene rendered with unified samples max 2048 and all overrides set to 4096 can be much faster in rendering than unified samples set very low.
I wanted this comparison when i was buying. Anyways i bought redshift.
At least future users can use this for reference.
Subbed
quick question : so he switched to octane or redshift? he talk too much :(
Redshift is stupidly expensive
i used octane. that time i was like wow. very realistic. but i just tried Redshift. boom. i got so many production knowledge. this will help my future.i will never go back to Ocatne. Redshift better in all the way. You know its never crashed..
Pun was definitely intended 😂
the light at the back is really annoying ...
Its to white on this video
the audio and video looks like very very slightly out of sync or something
Hey Theo,
While I have no doubt that the service that you're selling is invaluable -- one big mistake that a lot of people in the game make is having bad customer service. I've reached out over a week ago now about a purchase and haven't gotten any sort of response. I've since gotten the answer that I was looking for, but you would think that after asking people to pay upward towards $150 for a course, you would respond to anyone who has made a purchase, regardless of what the question is.
Something to think about.
Apex Legends?
Nah pubg
Dude stop worrying about people in the comments and tell us your honest opinion.
Bro idk what's going on but your audio be feeling unsyned
ikr
"being biased is an optimization" Hmm. interesting idea.
Your licence expires in 4days 😩 We need new tutorials
you guys talking about this plugins and switching between em as if they cost only 10 $ or so LUL
like redshift is 600$ and octane is 700$ or something and arnold prob the same
around 2000 $ total + C4D price .. and you own them all ?