bunkspeed shot VS luxion keyshot?

Hi guys,
I’ve been looking on these 2 rendering software and it both looks great IMO, both have pros and cons. so what do you guys think? I’ll love to see some discussion, cheers!

They’re like the same thing. One has Mac support, one doesn’t (yet). Honestly I’d just get the trials and see which one works better in your workflow.

when i see their demo, keyshot is more similiar to hypershot and shot is bringing it to another level with alots of new feature ( like ray brush, copy and paste model, emissive material, create basic model) its the small stuff but the one that i’ve been dreaming on hypershot but of course you have to compromise that its slower than keyshot :frowning:

Keyshot effectively is hypershot.

Shot is an entirely new tool that is both GPU/CPU based. Theres been other discussions about this I believe, try doing a search. Also you should be able to get trials of both tools so test them out.

The Bunkspeed guys were just in our office yesterday to demo Shot for our ID group. Bottom line, I will be dropping Keyshot 2 for Bunkspeed Shot as soon as our IT guy updates my machine. Shot does a lot of really intuitive stuff as well as increases your ability to get more photo realistic renderings because its an unbiased rendering program. If you’ve got a new Cuda graphics card then you’re in even better luck.

That said, I wouldn’t be surprised if Keyshot upped the ante in 6 months. When it comes to these two companies being an industrial designer is a lot like being a child of divorced parents… one is constantly trying to incrementally one up the other to win your love.

I agree, Bunkspeed Shot is the way to go, especially if you have a hardware for it. Keyshot renders are still adequate enough, at least for students.

You may also want to consider Bunkspeed’s track record for staying in business…

Which renderer created this image? The exact image is on both company’s websites except KeyShot’s image has some extra blur and less vibrant colors.

There are many duplicates between the websites… More then likely since at one time they were the same software they feel that they can both use the images…

I’ve been using Shot and Hypershot for as long as they have been around.

Amazing interface.
I love the ability to turn raytracing off
Moving your objects and adjusting textures is very dynamic and fast
Great support and informative webinars
I love the ability to create simple geometric models ( planes, cylinders, etc) Great for light emitters.

Has trouble importing large assemblies
Somewhat buggy
Slows your computer down to a crawl while rendering

I’m running a Core I7, Quardro 4000 Videocard, SSD, and 18GB of Ram and it still cannot import some files. And if it does import them, as soon as you turn raytracing back on it freezes…


I am able to render assemblies that Shot will not
Can still use my computer for other things while its rendering
Works 100% of the time
Same image quality

I am currently rendering a file that would not import in shot using my home system which is:

Core I5, Geforce 260 GTX, 6gbs Ram, Sata Drives

Harder interface
No emissive materials
Can’t create simple models such as planes and cylinders

I know we aren’t talking about hypershot here. But if you already have hypershot there is no real reason to upgrade.

I have been thinking about getting shot.

BUT I am not even sure if it makes any sense given that I would be running it under Bootcamp on my Macbook Pro.
Here are my stats: 2.66 GHz Intel Core i7 with 8 GB and 1067 MHz DDR3

Any thoughts?

you would probably be okay with shot. Your system is good. The only reason I’m having so much trouble is that I’m trying to rendering full mechanical assemblies that could have up to 1000+ individual parts.

When I render surface models and smaller assemblies its great. Honestly, the only reason I’m having as much trouble as I am is because I am trying to render a product line of all my companies models. So there is upwards of at least 10,000+ parts (screws, connectors on circuit boards, cables. So I’m trying to do too much.

This is interesting because A I do not want photo realistic renderings because in product shots I want things to look “better” than reality, which a biased render is good at and B I do not have a very good graphics card so I’d rather let my processors do the work.

Also, Keyshot 2 does have emissive materials now (and the very latest version claims to do GPU rendering even on the Mac… no idea how, though).

I just found a quick comparison page here, which shows suprisingly similar image quality, actually:


Thanks - I’ve been looking for someone else’s perspective on this. I “upgraded” to Shot, and haven’t produced a single worthwhile render yet. I even upgraded to a Quadro 4000 but Shot still just crawls, and is very jerky even with raytracing off. Hypershot runs fantastic though, and is what I’m going back to.

I just don’t understand how Bunkspeed could release a program that is so drastically different from it’s previous version without either a) giving the user the ability to choose simpler interface/render options or b) not supporting the previous version anymore.

My experience with Shot so far has been ridiculous.

Just to be clear, Luxion owned the software, bunkspeed wasn’t paying their royalties for Hypershot so Luxion just put out keyshot on their own.
So after several months, Bunkspeed finally put out Shot, and I assume this will not be going away like hypershot did (which was annoying for a while).

I agree with OCTO
Hypershot and keyshot2 work fine on my laptop (lenovo W700 running xp 32 bit)
I can barely open shot let alone get a render out of it.

The stuff that sold me on Shot vs Keyshot was the scene building stuff. It’s not the most hyped feature, but check out this vid. It improved my workflow tremendously. There’s also a symmetry feature, like the Mirrored-layer thing in Alias.

Another good thing is that it kinda works like Maxwell when rendering big a$$ hires stuff - set the time to 99 hours and walk away, save an image when you think it looks good enough. Or set it to X time, and if it’s not clear enough, add some more and continue.

The only thing Keyshot has got on Bunkspeed is decals imo. If that’s super important to you, get Keyshot. If you can manage with the usual texture-map-on-a-material-decal then there is no reason to get Keyshot over Shot imo.

Oh and I don’t believe it’s very slow either. Get a better machine if you feel that way. I usually render handheld products with 3-20 components, in a scene of 3-5 objects. I’m on a i7, 8GB, quadro FX 1800 (Cuda enabled, but only 512MB - you need 1gb to take advantage of the GPU rendering stuff, which means I don’t)

Nvidia just announced their new Geforce 580 with 512 Cuda cores at the $500 price point (1/3rd the price of a competitive Quadro with more than double the cores). Methinks that will smoke the heck out of the realtime rendering.

I kn0w this is an old thread but I really want to weigh in and give my opinion on this situation.
Basically I want to back up imsannr on his experience.
What is impossible to believe is that almost a year has past since his post and the situation is still the same, with the possible exception to some welcome keyshot improvements.

I was really really excited before the release of bunkspeed shot because it would be able to take advantage of the cuda gpu rendering option. I have a mobo with tri x16 pcie slots, and with gtx 570 & 580 cards on ebay atm for $300-$400 it sounds like the perfect situation. Ultimately I really wanted to love bunkspeed’s offering.

But even though 10 months has past bunkspeed shot really isn’t up to handling complex models. Or as I have found even some complex shapes or challenging surfacing. Not to mention how slow it can be at importing them when it does work.

My experiance differs in that keyshot does have emissive materials that I have been using & I don’t find the interface harder, with the exception of their odd key combinations for viewport navigation and having to change settings on the realitime view tab in order to change them for the final render (ground reflections, detailed shadows, etc…).

Keyshot also now has, although I feel poorly implemented, 3d connextion support, that is a blessing.

Shot’s ability to import my catia files correctly is shocking, it alters the shape of some objects and flat out fails with some complex surfaces & large assemblies. This is a massively exaggerated problem as the imports take a very long time, you are given no real progress bar for the bulk of the import time other than a repeating animation saying loading. I have attempted this with stp & igs files with very little success.

If you do get your models into shot however, even on the now superseded GPUs I have available it is fantastic at rendering them. I do not believe the quality, except for some ground shadows, is any better than keyshot, but it does seem to allow better navigation of your model while applying materials. On my machines, with complex models, that can become a tedious process in keyshot.

I think that if shot can be made “MUCH” more reliable, allow flawless importing of STP or IGES files or even exporters for programs like catia & NX, show accurate progress on the importing process (That shouldn’t be that hard) and generally feel less klunky on average hardware, it would be killer. As it stands now though, keyshot gets the job done and shot doesn’t.

If those issues are resolved and the cloud solution comes way down in price I think that shot has the ability to be the best option as it offloads the hardware requirements. But thats a BIG “if”.

FYI I have been running

  1. Keyshot 2.3.1
  2. Bunkspeed Shot Pro 2011.3

On these two machines:

  1. DIY Desktop
    a. AMD x4 Black Edition
    b. 8GB DDR2 PC2-6400
    c. Quadro FX 4600
    d. Geforce GTX 8800
    e. Intel G2 SSD
    f. Win7 x64

  2. Hp 8730w Laptop
    a. Core 2 Duo T9400
    b. 4GB DDR2 800
    c. Quadro FX 2700M
    d. 7200RPM HDD
    e. Win7 x64

Just reviewed my previous post and feel it comes across as excessively harsh.

I think hypershot was and keyshot is a fantastic piece of software and that my only real issue with the 3dconnexion integration is that it isn’t as responsive as I expected. That is probably more due to my processor speed than anything else.

Also shot is an amazing piece of work and the only issues I have had are with a large catia assembly containing a lot of g3 surfaces. It came across as a major issue due to the time it consumed. It repeatedly failed or contained errors after progressively saving the assembly with all the iges & step options and rotating through all the import options. But keeping things in perspective I guess its a relatively small bug and doesn’t have significance to the majority of users.

That said I imagine these problems would be pretty unacceptable if someone purchases pro for $3.5k.