Getting the first image out of Unreal Engine takes quite some time, true, but once you set up the scene you can export as many images as you want instantly, even render video in realtime. So in the long run it actually makes you save time, so I'd say a 2 for Speed is not that fair.
Great video but these renderers are totally uncomparrable. Vray is much and much higher quality for stills. Enscape, twinmotion and lumion are just for fast easy and simple renders. Quality is nowhere close to what vray can achieve. They're great for animations or vr/360 and especcially like enscape because it renders really fast. But when i only need high quality images, i'll Always go back to vray. Unreal on the other hand is on a totally different league then all of the other mentioned. It's hard to learn but the results are from another level. It's not vray quality but it's pure real time rendering. Where enscape/lumion still need time to process renders in their maximum quality unreal can be used for real time walktrough's in higher quality. Baked lighting is also still the best solution for accuracy. But still you should not use it for rendering stills. If you want good looking and fast animations use enscape (lumion animation rendering to slow imo). if you want a high quality render use vray. If you want full real time high quality wallktroughs use unreal. But don't compare them in a what's the best renderer video, cause they're all completely different for different purposes.
I think you are exactly right! I still think it is helpful to compare them against each other. We just wanted to give a quick lay of the land summary hopefully people find it is useful to people
They are comparable. Basically some are Realtime renderers. Some are based on Raytracing. Now Unreal is Realtime Raytracing. So Vray's Raytracing is superior to Lumion, Twinmotion and Enscape. But if you don't compare them, how will you know which one's faster and which one's more accurate? I think it's a good comparison.
Quite honestly you've really underestimated Artlantis. In my own opinion it has much better rendering quality than Twinmotion and Lumion. Its at the same level of rendering quality to Enscape which you've also underrated. Although Artlantis takes quite sometime to render as compared to the rest.
I use Lumion, Twinmotion and Enscape and I have personally found the quality in Enscape easily better than Twinmotion so I differ on that aspect of your submission but nice video all the same. I look forward to more
NO BS comparison. I really struggled to get the " close to reality comparison" just like V-Ray and Unreal. I had a difficult choice to make and stick to it. I truly appreciate your video and ultimately making a choice. Thanks a lot, my good guy.
I like your video! I wish there was such a video when I was still student :( however, in my opinion, I think Enscape Is the best cuz it is a very smart program and renders anything according to the material name. also even if there is some mistakes in the model it will not show any errors and if you spend a small time more to edit the materials you can really have a super impressive quality that I can say it beaten up V.ray!!
Hello, in My opinión, you are under estimating Artlantis, yes, it is simple, but the actual limit is the community, there is not as much artlantis users out there as those that use vray for example. I have been using it for a while now. And I am sure that the learning curve to get the results I have now would had been lot wider with any others program out there.
I'm not a fanboy of anything, but you have to be crazy to put Unreal above VRay in quality. Unreal yields excellent results, amazing results, but... man! do you know exactly what VRay or Corona are capable of? Joder... hay que ver cada cosa....
when you examining a render solution offline or real time you must count in two factors: 1.what is the quality potential 2. how hard is it to reach that potential in terms of quality Real-time engine will never surpass offline renderers like octane vray corona because they fake realism instead of calculating with precision like the offline renderers do and that is why they are so fast and for ability to reach their potential from my experience making good looking stuff in unreal was way harder and more time consuming then vray for example the preparation is long but on the other hand there is no render time unlike offline ones
Pretty sure baking lighting in unreal calculates light path pretty accurately not saying over vray but its by any means faking lights specially in interiors
@@mouhalo when you bake light...It is no longer being ray traced...even all other offline renderers have the ability to bake light but the realism is compromised...
@@dreamboxstudio7243 yes it is, even things as simple as editing a material can be a pain, but the end result is worth the time . I am also using it in rtx now before you had to bake lighting and that could take much more time. Its a very complicated software but does the job incredibly
I always go back to Lumion 10 it's just fun, I Love Corona also, Unreal is amazing but is it worth it especially if you are one man show? it takes allot of time, especially unwrap and bake light etc etc need to micromanage allot to get great result , Twinmotion is ok but the lighting suck
yeah, iam agree with that, i am lumion user too. but Lumion need improvement in lighting to, especially artificial lighting in interior. and reflection too
Great Video but Vray, Corona, Redshift, Octane..all these are like you said specialist Ray tracing rendering engines, but Unreal is for games, less realistic, that's why Vray was put into Unreal recently
Great breakdown. I'm using Enscape and Lumion, but learning Unreal and Twinmotion. It will be interesting to see what Epic does with bridging Unreal and Twinmotion. Lumion 10 came out a couple of days ago. Would you say the quality differences are still the same ? Again, awesome breakdown. Thanks.
always nice a review but i see some concepts are confused. Actually the devicions in type of software are different from the engine/techniques as a base. There is game rendering lumion (unity based) enscape, twinmotion, unreal (3 unreal). or there are physically based renders artlantis (using redway engine) unicorn render (using i-ray engine nvidia rtx denoise) and v-ray (ray tracing and also nvidia rtx denoise). In general the game renders are never really realistic and you need trics, but they are very fast. Enscape for me is one of the best and giving real quick nice results. If you have complex things like a building looking inside, enscape looses however from the more professional ones. So the raytracers/physically based are always more realistic in terms of light, material for high end use but cost more time. Unicorn render is the only physcial renderer that is speedy (3-10 times faster than v-ray) and high-end in one solution combining many whishes in one. They have as plugin for sketchup or stand alone reading many formats. The plugin has a very fast workflow asigning materials with a injection needle. You will need a fast graphics card as it is a hybrid render of cpu + gpu. The more gpu, the faster, and RTX is boosting a lot. So RTX 2060 or higher is the best to test it on..........soon the RTX 30 series i am waiting. it wil lbe an amazing combo
artlantis has best ui. simple to use. fit to work flow. render much like vray, accurate. but it was 4 years ago. how much lumion has been progressed. lumion was very rough resultv
Hi, very valuable information. I am based in Nairobi, Kenya, Africa. When you say Unreal Engine take time...what is the relative difference from the average time by other Softwares?
How about using V-Ray next plugin for Sketchup - i'm not an expert, but isnt its going to be easy to implement (given that sketchup is already easy to use) ?
UNREAL takes a LONG time to get the image out? It's faster than any of the other renderers. Once the lighting and textures are built, the rendering is real-time. That's like click and done. It's the fastest and most accurate renderer out there.
The time to actually render a image is fast. But the preps have to be somehow added to the equation too. And the accuracy is far from V-Ray as real real-time engines cannot bring the same quality in lighting.
@@Jonokaono Unreal in it's latest update supports raytracing (technology used by Vray) in real time. Hence it's far superior to Vray in terms of speed and accuracy.
I know Enscape and UE4.. I use em a lot. in UE4 however, u need to bake. while Enscape never. UE4 seems like good for interior. correct me if im wrong. Now im switching to Blender.. look at this. ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-Pn3a507Dxvk.html
Im all for quality renders as Im doing high end luxury interiors. I dont understand how Unreal is better than Vray or Corona for still images. Is it really?
In South Africa where the Rand/Dollar is hitting crazy levels, Enscape is looking at a better option. Lumion is just crazy expensive. Small firms cant afford that price.
hi thanks for video. I am interested at to which of these is capable of static scene, fly through animation , animation with animated character / objects, show a animation of construction process, VR output, VR as design tool. Also to Synchronization of changes in modeling software with Rendering software useful. I imagine UE is possible to do most of this .... but I hear Blender is also very capable.. cheers from AU
Huh, you gave Twinmotion a higher quality rating than Enscape? My experience is that quality/lighting looks worst in Twinmotion and comparable in Lumion and Enscape. Could you explain this a little bit more in detail?
i found twinmotion render is not as good as lumion, twinmotion is faster in low end computer tho , and the best overall is enscape better render than lumion, faster on low end computer , easier to setup and make it work shortcut on texture name , using sketchup textures and so on . You missing thea render , the render is little bit better than twinmotion, but it's way slower to render and the biggest issue, light are a pain to setup properly and you end up a lot of time with noise on the scene , it's too bad because thea render offer a very good material library compared to all software. Vray light seem a little bit tedious to work with. To bad there is no corona on sketchup because it's way above vray and thea render in non real time renderer.
i compared thea render to enscape and unicorn render. Removed it quickly. what a drama, cannot use it, it is so slow compared to many others. it suprises me really people use it.
Just for interior rendering the latest version of enscape is much better than lumion, artlantis and twinmotion. But for outdoor rendering ....... Btw the quality of twinmotion is the worst software that I never seen before. Could u explain y u gave the higher quality for twinmotion?
the quality of twinmotion is not that bad, I think it is comparable to lumion. I think it will improve alot in the next year or so since it has been acquired by epic.
We are not offering this as a detailed ranking. Just giving our opinion to try give a bit of an overview of each. I have used some more than others. With all these tools it comes down to individual needs as to what is the best tool for the job.
Deberás cambiar ahora tu cuadro de comparación. Speed Unreal 10, con Lumen. Y la usabilidad es relativa, ya cambió bastante. Tiene muchos tutoriales y una gran comunidad, tampoco es muy complicado. Con está nueva versión el render clásico tiene todas las de perder en un futuro cercano.
Vray is used in Hollywood VFX studios and gets quality NINE? And Unreal beats that ? None of these engines are even close to Vray in terms of shading and reflection quality, not even the same category. All unbiased rendering engines like vray, corona , fstorm, octane, redshift and similar are far more superior than any of these engines. It's ridiculous to compare them like this...
i agree with you ! that is not logic, v-ray has better image quality then unreal. he is comparing high end renderings and game renders as a user. I did a lot test with the same model and i am working 25 years with at least 10 render softwares. If you like quality try unicorn. for the natural behaviour of lights is even better than v-ray. you don;t need tricks like putting light planes for a windows. Just use HDRI and emissive lights is working smoothly. You do need good hardware with nvidia graphic cards to enjoy the power, RTX 20 series the best to judge, but those cards start at 350 euro so not an obstacle big to take. They miss a few things as they started 4 years ago, but i think unicorn render will catch up with the features needed soon, like fur, grass etc.
2020 is good, but AT has a very.slow development, still harder to achieve great results. TW still lacks much basic features and has tons of bugs. Lumion is ahead for now.
I used Artlantis continuously for three and a half years. Frankly I thought it was absolutely horrific (just my opinion). And so behind the times too. I remember going to the forums (which are very scarce due to the low user base I assume), and it really felt like I was banging my head against a wall. I remember one forum thread was all about trying to achieve specular highlights.......that's when I decided to get of the bus a sprint headlong towards Cinema 4D and Maya. Renderers like Vray, Corona and Redshift are a totally different species to something like Artlantis. The same goes for Twinmotion and Unreal engine. They're all about 20 years ahead. No joke- use Artlantis, then use something from 2002. Ease of use, in this case, comes at a very high price. Just ask anyone who tried to use their "Neon Light” shader back in the day. Like I said, horrific.
I would agree that V-Ray produces best quality renderer but it is a different purpose that Twinmotion and Lumion. Unreal is investing and developing heavily in real-time raytracing but if you don't trust it yet get the V-Ray plugin for Unreal so you get the best of both. www.chaosgroup.com/vray/unreal
thanks they have plugin for sketchup and stand alone. stand alone has more interface to control hdri/sun/animations/scenes/materials. plugin is more easy and uses the sketchup interface of course partly for sun etc.
