Can Mental ray do glossy reflections or not?

[blank-]

Hello everyone

I'm going crazy, it's been days now that i'm looking through forums, articles, posting topics, and no answer. Question is simple, can MR do glossy reflections or not (i know it can but...)? If yes, what the hell am i doing wrong?!
Just two materials used, A&D matte, and A&D satin varnished wood. This is what i'm getting no matter what. The higher the glossy samples, the worse the result. Makes no sense...

And here is the file:

http://www.box.net/shared/23btyn97xzjdm3utloxz

I really don't know what else to try. It looks like starting to learn V-ray is getting closer and closer.

You can see the full scene (and story) here:

http://forum.mentalimages.com/showthread.php?8705-First-interior-speckle-fireflies-in-the-scene-please-help&p=35855#post35855

 Btw GI and FG have nothing to do with it, problem is there even with just direct lighning.

Thanks in advance for any help!

[joojaa]

Yes offcourse.

Not having a max istalled right now i cant really chek your scene. But form yoru screencaptures its prettymuch self evident that you are NOT searching for the problem from the right place. Your problem is pretty selfevidently the deep bbelief that a preset actually magically does exactly what you want. The problems are inside your materials not the render settings.

It looks like starting to learn V-ray is getting closer and closer.

Well vray carters for your world view allright, you allways lose something however.

Please understand the following thing: You can not really buy yourself out of problems of lacking skill. Money only lets you supend this belief further. I mean ive seen plenty of people who get this realisation at 50 which i got as 15 years old (buying a better syntethiser woulnt make me a better synthplayer, but learning how to actually play would), when they suddenly realize that the failure of their multimillion dollar investement is turning to be mis-spent not because they didnt hire teh right people, not because they dindt put eneough money (well it could have been done ewwith 10%  of the cost most likely) but simply becaus ethey themselves lacked the skill to pull it all together. Simply put, if you dont know solething your options are to learn or buy the thing form somebody else, but thenagain wy would you client not buy the end result form your subcontractor.

[blank-]

Please understand one thing: i'm a beginner, this is just my second project (look at the link with the full story), i'm not trying to buy my way out, and i know i lack skill (which is why i ask for help).

After trying everything i could think of, searching the net, posting threads on several forums i'm out of options. Either no one knows what needs to be done, or doesn't want to help (i refuse to believe that).

I applied A&D preset just to illustrate that the problem occurs even with that material, not just with my custom one.

[joojaa]

Try killing your bump/displacement map of the roof. A rough normal/variable surface looks rougn even if the surface shader is glossy.

Please understand one thing: i'm a beginner, this is just my second projec

Yes and that was understood hence the post, if you dont understand THAT is the reason why you dont look for yet another tool. You just dont know any better to make any meningful objective comparasion. The tool might be easier or then it might not be. In this case youd just have the same problem.

Its very important to actually post things that underlines that you have skill to solve a porblem yourself, otherwise you will come in as a time sink. If you tell upfront that your abandoning XXX then why would anybody want to help you solve the problem?

Anyway normally its best for you to actually practice shading a bit first to see what all the different parameters do one by one. Aslo dont expect epople to help you in a less than a week or so.

[blank-]

Problem is solved, those that are interrested can read about it here:

I mentioned Vray because everyone, especially those that do archviz (which is what i’m after) are yelling at me when they hear i’m using Mental They're all saying "waste of time, better learn vray, easier to master, better results, less bugs, MORE PHOTOREALISTIC (very important in that line of work)...".

Nonetheless i'm sticking with Mental, at least for now. Since this is my second project i'm satisfied with the final result:

[joojaa]

Well easier is one thing, nothing worng with vray, per see but the coolest most phorealistic architectural image ive ever seen is a mentalray render by the way. But that said doing photoreal is not about the renderer. Ita about the user.

[avidas]

well, Joojaa, you sound like Yoda. BUT, shut the f*****g hell up, stop lecturing and help this guy out. Forums are not for preaching personal philosophies. Simply answer the guy that needs help.

[joojaa]

His problem is solved already. And Ive outlined the most likely culprit in my second answer.

Forums are not for preaching personal philosophies

They are for discussion, so yes they are. The person who answers has all the right to bring in any subject to discussion present on the table. Besides the lesson is far more important that his rendering problems. Forums are not for simple just solve my problem just so you know. Its your right to ignore any answer you like (or as it is don't like).

If somebody brings is a extra problem by indicating something extra over the question that that extra is PART of the question and that is fair game. If the original question would just have included picture some strict description about what he want then sure that would have not resulted in any comment at all. Grass is greener on the next pasture and all that is a known psychological issue thus commenting on it is a valid observation. Nowithstanding how you get there is far more important than how to do something specific.

Likewise you not liking me bringing the discussion in is a equally valid discussion. Tough we should evacuate this tread and move to our own if you want to continue.

[blank-]

I see that my links are deleted, i guess posting links on other forums is against the rules :-)) Anyway, problem was that my lights were partly inside the fixtures. They had to be moved away, glossy samples on material bumped up on 32, and antialiasing to 4/64 for good results. If i had lots of these i would definitely render the scene with lower values and use "render selected" just for the ceiling (or what ever).

Other option is (lights also moved away) by setting max reflection distance in ceiling material. This way both glossy samples and AA can go down to "normal" values. Not quite "ooo shiny" as previous solution, but renders much faster, and it doesn't look that bad.

but the coolest most phorealistic architectural image ive ever seen is a mentalray render by the way.

Link perhaps?

Boys, come to the dark side... :-)))

[joojaa]

Yes things in overlapping conditions are problems in cg in general.

Link perhaps?

link please note mostly everything you see is made in a computer program including the trees, leaves, grass etc. Its a really hard to belie until you see the wire frame (you can find it if you search around for the "Mies van der Rohe Farnsworth House")

Oh found it wire1, wire2

The thing is i cant spot the cg quality in the mr image, whereas vray tends to have this miniature look on its images. Worse a lot of cg artists break their illusion by using occlusion as multiply layer, its a dead giveaway if you have any concave surfaces.

[blank-]

Damn, this is truly amazing. I've read the entire thread on cgsociety.
Although, Vray has one big advantage - user base. There are a lot more Vray users out there and a lot more finished projects for download from which one can learn, or simply use already finished materials.
I'm definitely not giving MR up, but will also try to learn Vray. The more you know the more you worth.

[joojaa]

You only need one or two good example tough. So a million examples is worth nothing if they are no good, in fact a bad example makes the good harder to find.

The more you know the more you worth.

Yes, however: You dont need to learn mentalray and vray, you just need to learn how a renderer works* and then when you understand the underlying principles you can deduce the rest from eying the manual of said renderer. Ultimately most renderers are almost interchangeable, and what is not is usually learned to good professional level in less than a month (and basic knowlege in seconds) of reading and testing.

On the otherhand if you wish to learn by rote: want to do tricks as described by others, make lists of how to get there, then you must learn each one basically separate form scratch. In essence blind learning. Rote is faster now sure but not in when doing 2 different renederers

• in fact for physical renders you just need to learn a few basic facts of how the rendering cheats and most rest is just knowing how optical physics works.

[adamlewis]

This barely seems worth the effort. industrial plastics