I figured I'd stick neck out on this one, but its definitely something I'd like to get other's opinions on.
Also - I'm not trying to start any wars here, so please keep things objective as I feel each has its pro's and con's (and keep in mind TG2 isn't even 'officially' out yet for full consideration).
Here is how it worked out: Bored (while waiting for a TGTP preview to render), I started browsing other TGTP images on Renderosity. I saw some jaw-dropping images of foliage in someone's gallery, and initially thought they were rendered using TGTP. Instead, found out they were rendered in Vue 6.
Ironically, I had bought Vue 6 just before TGTP came out, mainly for Vue's spectral atmosphere models, which I would use to create background images for TG 0.9. Luckily, TGTP came out a few weeks after I bought Vue 6, and it immediately got shelved in favor of TGTP. So, since then, I haven't give much thought to using Vue 6, atleast until I saw those amazing foliage images recently.
With that in mind, here are my opinions about each. Be sure to reply with your own input.
TGTP Wins with:
-The node based network, which offers amazing power, flexibility, and work flow
-The terrain features are more realistic and flexible, as well as the 'distribution' features for terrain and shaders.
-The skies and clouds are more realistic and flexible (if done properly).
-The overall physics and big picture are way more realistic (ie. there is an actual planet to work with, not a studio room like most others).
Vue Wins with:
-The renderer, which already implements soft-shadows, subsurface scattering, lens effects, and reasonable render-times - they just look soft and natural
-The foliage, which is 100% unique for populations (using solid growth), visual benefits to the foliage from the renderer's abilities mentioned above, ability to 'paint' populations as needed more on a micro scale
-Huge expandable resource support (ie. cornucopia 3d).
-Easier to set up an 'up close' scene
TGTP Gripes:
-render times are way too long, making practical use very difficult, and pretty much impossible in some cases.
-lack of water transparency, sub-surface scattering, soft shadows (though these will be implemented when TG2 is released!)
-crashes (again, most remedied when TG2 is released)
-object import needs work
Vue Gripes:
-interface doesn't work as well for 'grand-scheme' design as TG2's does, so requires more input in a way.
-terrain generation and look, is just nowhere near as good in my opinion.
-just seems harder to get a good large scale scene going.
In a nutshell, one could say TGTP/TG2 works best for macro scale, and Vue works best for micro-scale (at this point). I'm really looking forward to TG2's official release.
Any thoughts?
they both have pretty bad memory consumption, most of my Vue files crash because it can't handle displacement or SSS that well but for those looking for a more user friendly interface then TG2 it might be a good choice, at least for now.
regards,
Will
i have to agree with you with that that tg is better for bigger shots.I guess this is because of the atmo model tg uses which looks very real. I still think that the populations look kind of weird, but if you use different models with different tones they look good.
But yes, imo vue wins for close shots. Even the best close-up tg renders look not so good as some vue renders. But hopefully this will be improved for the final release!
bye
I agree, TGTPs atmospheric model simply looks better b/c its based on real physics (or atleast appears to work like it is). If soft-shadows were enabled, it would make it even more so.
I do have a soft-shadow 'workaround' I've been using for TGTP, which unfortunately adds another 50% to the rendertime. But, the resulting renders look amazing! I did some tests on some foliage, and it nearly rivaled Vue 6's foliage rendering. But to truly surpass it, it would require subsurface scattering in the leaves and stems, which I am not sure if Vue 6 implements or not.
Quote from: fmtoffolo on June 18, 2007, 08:02:46 PM
i have to agree with you with that that tg is better for bigger shots.I guess this is because of the atmo model tg uses which looks very real. I still think that the populations look kind of weird, but if you use different models with different tones they look good.
But yes, imo vue wins for close shots. Even the best close-up tg renders look not so good as some vue renders. But hopefully this will be improved for the final release!
bye
I've tried doing SSS in vue for stems and leaves, but since leaves are just image files it doesn't work that will, the stems and the rest of the plant are one object so they look kind of weird too.
Regards,
Will
Tell us your workaround...
Quote from: moodflow on June 18, 2007, 08:13:09 PM
I agree, TGTPs atmospheric model simply looks better b/c its based on real physics (or atleast appears to work like it is). If soft-shadows were enabled, it would make it even more so.
I do have a soft-shadow 'workaround' I've been using for TGTP, which unfortunately adds another 50% to the rendertime. But, the resulting renders look amazing! I did some tests on some foliage, and it nearly rivaled Vue 6's foliage rendering. But to truly surpass it, it would require subsurface scattering in the leaves and stems, which I am not sure if Vue 6 implements or not.
No problem, I was going to put together an official write up, but I'll just post the gist of it here:
The soft shadow workaround is done by dropping the sun's power down to about 10% of normal, then building a small 'grid' of multiple suns only a degree or so away from each other. Pretty much try to make a "circle" of them to simulate the disk of the sun.
With this setup, there is a cumulative effect of shadows, which ends up being "soft". Areas with more shading, get more shadows, so there is a gradient effect, creating the 'softness'. Of course, the more suns there are (and less power for each), the higher the quality, and longer the rendertime. But this is how it works in real-life as the sun itself is not a point like object, but a light emitting disk.
How I normally do it is - setup a scene with my sun in the position I choose. Once everything in the scene is done and its ready to render, I then drop the sun's power, then duplicate it multiple times and offset it making a circular grid, no more than a few degrees wide. This simulates a light disk. My typical setup has about 32 suns, but I've gone as high as 96 in one case (and could barely tell the difference in quality, but noticed a serious jump in rendertime). The good news is, the rendertimes are still bearable, and the images look quite nice.
Quote from: calico on June 19, 2007, 10:03:32 AM
Tell us your workaround...
Quote from: moodflow on June 18, 2007, 08:13:09 PM
I agree, TGTPs atmospheric model simply looks better b/c its based on real physics (or atleast appears to work like it is). If soft-shadows were enabled, it would make it even more so.
I do have a soft-shadow 'workaround' I've been using for TGTP, which unfortunately adds another 50% to the rendertime. But, the resulting renders look amazing! I did some tests on some foliage, and it nearly rivaled Vue 6's foliage rendering. But to truly surpass it, it would require subsurface scattering in the leaves and stems, which I am not sure if Vue 6 implements or not.
Excellent idea!! 96 suns? OMG!!! ;D
Thanks.
Gimp and photoshop work well too. But I need to try this out, excellent idea.
Yes,
I even have a .tgc file to play with, but its at home and I am at the office :-(
I'll try to attach it when I get home in 10 hours.
Quote from: calico on June 19, 2007, 11:29:18 AM
Excellent idea!! 96 suns? OMG!!! ;D
Thanks.
They can sure help, but true, authentic soft shadows are the best way to go. This is the method I used in Bryce for that Global Illumination/Soft Shadows effect. It worked well, but needed tons of light sources (added manually), and rendertimes shot up. In fact, I had a "light dome" file I'd use for such shots.
When I saw that TGTP could have multiple suns, that opened the door!
Quote from: Will on June 19, 2007, 12:17:29 PM
Gimp and photoshop work well too. But I need to try this out, excellent idea.