these renderings were created with Corona Rendering.
Maybe a motivation for D5 to get better if possible.
Nowadays you only make money with photorealism.
Everything else fails.
Thank you, please wait for the next update, we will try our best to pursue photorealism.
This sounds great!
The GI and the shadows do make the difference.
The first image is unbelievable and does look like a photo.
Agreed @Flamingo. I appreciate @Oliver.J aknowledging the current state and the foreseen improvements in the next update. I believe (and hope) we are just starting with the potential of D5 and there is still room for further development.
It would be interesting to hear from you @Flamingo what you think would add to photorealism?
For me personally i would like a better overal realistic feel, and improved lighting (more bounces?).
Multiple bounces and soft detailed shadows and correct colour bleeding.
GI solver with UHD Cache or Path Tracing.
Path Tracing is for lots of geometries and polygons (3d grass and trees)
UHD for interiors (less geometries)
Denoising with high quality and GPU fast preview.
Include and exclude from GI, reflections and refractions
Perfect would be Multi pass for compositing (PS) with different lightsettings with ONE rendering.
I also have to say incredibly good.
I only remember when we worked with Corana Render, it took quite a bit of time because it was always difficult to remember all the settings.
We only needed the 3D renderings for project competitions and sometimes there was a break for 1-3 months.
Of course, the image quality, etc. is very important.
but also the usability for us, because we still have to draw in 2D for the execution and cannot always spend time just for 3 renderings
for comparison, the other rendering programs have never been so great after a year.
PS: Corona should be around 10 years old today.
I am not saying, that the D5 should produce the same quality. No other renderer will at the moment reach that.
An architect does not use Corona. A visualization agency does. The customers know what is going on in the market.
D5 needs to be clear about what it wants to achieve for the future.
A first or second class renderengine.
It is currently not enough for a visualization agency.
I also think we should strive for perfection. Ease of use is important offcourse. But there are lots of competitors on the market which can produce ‘acceptable’ images with a state of the art ease of use. So if that would be the sole target of D5 the competition would be to hard.
If they focus on ease of use but also have the ambition to strive towards photorealism and be competive with vray / corona,… quality wise. That would be the way to knock out the competitors. For example in my opinion lumion is stuck quality wise. They dont improve that much anymore.
D5 will never be 100% like vray or corona. There is a difference between UE and VRAY for example BUT that difference is very small in my opinion. The difference between lumion and VRAY is huge. So let’s beat the hell out of the competitors and make D5 close to corona / vray and above the other ease of use competitors. I think the software has the tech to be that ambitious.
The points of improvement flamingo mentions would be a huge addition as lots of elements which are mentioned on the road map. In my opinion D5 should focus on quality now and extra functions. The ease of use lumion/twinmotion stuf can come later.
All the renderers like Vray, Corona, Octane started as a photorealism design presentations tools without targeting initially architecture. That is why there are still functioning as addons to design platforms like 3dmax without optimized workflow for architecture. D5 has the opportunity to combine the rendering quality with the architecture workflow. The battle between Enscape, Lumion and D5 will be based on the rendering quality and the speed of the workflow betwwen the connected design platforms. If D5 becomes for technical in matters of rendering settings it will be an upgrade compared to the rest of simple presentation tools.
After all the “render” part of the name should also mean a lighting management approach.
I totally agree.
I believe the only way to achieve photorealism would be multi GPU core function.
All the other methods are just optimizations. All the current products for architectural presentation are biased, supporting just one GPU. If D5 tranform itself to an unbiased architectural multi GPU tool like Octane this will blow up the results.
The earlier this transition comes the faster 5D will prevail in the market and in our work.
They could also implement Lumen and Nanite, Unreal’s 5 New technologies as fast as they can. Since this will make renderings come out exponentially faster and look better.
Hello D5, do you have a timeline for implementing path tracing and even lumen?
Hope you can keep up with Twinmotion!
Hi, PT is under development, please stay tuned. From my point of view, D5 GI is much better than lumen lol…