Загрузка видео...

Не удалось загрузить видео

На главную

blender vs UE5 #blender #UE5

222,600 просмотров • 2 лет назад •via X (Twitter)

Комментарии: 10

Фото профиля Crunio | CGメディア
Crunio | CGメディア2 лет назад

引用

Фото профиля Oyez³
Oyez³2 лет назад

1k textures at best. No hdri. low poly car in principled bsdf color. That's like 30 seconds max per frame in 4k res.

Фото профиля NΣZΛЯ
NΣZΛЯ2 лет назад

That's a very unfair comparison for Blender. The materials are default principled BSDF, so it looks like cheap plastic.

Фото профиля @pipeliner@mastodon.online
@[email protected]2 лет назад

EEVEE next would be great to be added there

Фото профиля Volodymyr Liubarskiy
Volodymyr Liubarskiy2 лет назад

7 min of render + 8 hours of optimisation and debugging

Фото профиля NutT4y
NutT4y2 лет назад

What's the resolution, and samples? There's no way you spend 5+ hours rendering such simple scenes in blender cycles, something is clearly wrong.

Фото профиля Kanishk
Kanishk2 лет назад

Interesting comparison Works best with inorganic models I found unreal struggling with translucent or sss materials Never looked real enough compared to offline renderers.

Фото профиля Benyamin Razian
Benyamin Razian2 лет назад

lumen more appealing for me

Фото профиля Crunio | CGメディア
Crunio | CGメディア2 лет назад

同意です

Фото профиля Ethan Snell
Ethan Snell2 лет назад

there’s no reason cycles took 4.5 hours to render that first shot… shot like that is less than a minute per frame optimized. Cycles struggles with heavy scattering but for simple materials and light set ups like that l suspect there’s a lot of optimizing that could happen there

Похожие видео