Re: Momentum / implosiafx plugins

[Michael Amasio]

I'm crying hot, dynamic, tears of joy...

On Fri, May 27, 2016 at 2:35 PM, Oleg Bliznuk  wrote:

> Thanks for kind words guys, but i have to note that i am personally
> responsible for implosiafx only, all credits regarding momentum  should go
> to Helge as he and Ben agreed to share it. I only did some bugfixing work
> on mom3 and a couple of features so it became as mom4 with bundled implosia.
> As Fabricio mentioned, the old plotting was removed as being too unstable
> and Crate is the replacement for it.
> cheers,
> Oleg
>
> --
> Softimage Mailing List.
> To unsubscribe, send a mail to softimage-requ...@listproc.autodesk.com
> with "unsubscribe" in the subject, and reply to confirm.
>
--
Softimage Mailing List.
To unsubscribe, send a mail to softimage-requ...@listproc.autodesk.com with 
"unsubscribe" in the subject, and reply to confirm.

Re: Anybody still using mental ray?

[Mirko Jankovic]

there are some good points in there BUT if better results can be achieved
faster and learn faster on another engine does it make sense to waste time
learning inferior render engine instead?

also I do know much more experience people with MRay that even with knowing
a lot more still had to spend wake nights waiting for crashes and issues on
critical rendering that ofc needs to be done tomorrow morning :)

On Sat, May 28, 2016 at 9:55 PM, Matt Lind  wrote:

> The people who complain the most about mental ray tend to be the ones who
> never took the time to learn to use it properly.
>
> If you read the manuals, mental images states some modes are more taxing
> than others for rendering.  For example, Segmented shadow mode incurs 15%
> additional rendering time vs. the default shadow computation mode, and is
> less stable inside of material shaders.  Segmented shadows is currently set
> as the default shadow computation mode.  If you do most of your rendering
> in
> passes, then you likely do not need segmented shadows and can revert to
> what
> is now labeled "normal" shadow mode to regain some performance and
> stability.  If your render pass doesn't need lighting, then turn shadows
> off
> completely.  That's just one example.
>
> For XSI v1.0 thru XSI v5.11, the default settings Softimage chose for
> mental
> ray were fairly efficient, but users commonly complained about black spots
> when doing renderings involving lots of reflection or refraction (because
> they didn't increase ray depth) or anti-aliasing wasn't super smooth
> (because they didn't set filter to 'lanczos' or 'mitchell' instead of
> default 'box', or didn't adjust the adaptive sampling properly).  In
> essence, most complaints were due to user error - because users didn't take
> the time to learn how to use the renderer
>
> To alleviate support issues, Softimage redefined the default mental ray
> settings in XSI v6.0 to what they are now - which effectively activates a
> bunch of stuff you don't need majority of the time and does a lot of extra
> work that never shows up in the final rendered image.  This change can
> often
> be blamed for inducing crashes and slower render times because many users
> do
> not tweak the settings.
>
> If you learn to use the renderer properly instead of using a 3DSMax
> mentality of pushing a button and walking away, you'll get better
> performance and stability.  Much of that also involves strategy for setting
> up the scene before sending it to the renderer - another area users make
> gross mistakes because they don't take the time to understand the rendering
> process.
>
> Matt
>
>
>
>
> Date: Sat, 28 May 2016 09:25:06 +0200
> From: Mirko Jankovic 
> Subject: Re: Anybody still using mental ray?
> To: "softimage@listproc.autodesk.com"
>
> *1. I don't want to throw away a expensive CPU based renderfarm.*
>
> It will be obsolete soon anyway so just make good planing for next render
> tool, CPU or GPU road.
>
>
>
> *2. mental ray still has more shaders. It's slow sometimes but it is
> rathergood when you want to do non physically based things. A bit like
> Softimageitself, the all-purpose, swiss knife.*
>
> First time I heard something like this for MRay. Mostly it is in line I
> wanna puke or quit 3d completely due to rendering part :)
> When I discovered Arnold and then even more Redshift that is when a big
> issue I had with SI, ie rendering was solved and 3d was fun again.
> MRay was PAIN non stop! Swiss knife.. yea could say that, got ton of things
> but nothing good for most of things :)
>
> Redshift saved my 3d ;)
>
> --
> Softimage Mailing List.
> To unsubscribe, send a mail to softimage-requ...@listproc.autodesk.com
> with "unsubscribe" in the subject, and reply to confirm.
>



-- 
Mirko Jankovic
*http://www.cgfolio.com/mirko-jankovic
*

Need to find freelancers fast?
www.cgfolio.com

Need some help with rendering an Redshift project?
http://www.gpuoven.com/
--
Softimage Mailing List.
To unsubscribe, send a mail to softimage-requ...@listproc.autodesk.com with 
"unsubscribe" in the subject, and reply to confirm.

Re: Anybody still using mental ray?

[Matt Lind]

The people who complain the most about mental ray tend to be the ones who 
never took the time to learn to use it properly.

If you read the manuals, mental images states some modes are more taxing 
than others for rendering.  For example, Segmented shadow mode incurs 15% 
additional rendering time vs. the default shadow computation mode, and is 
less stable inside of material shaders.  Segmented shadows is currently set 
as the default shadow computation mode.  If you do most of your rendering in 
passes, then you likely do not need segmented shadows and can revert to what 
is now labeled "normal" shadow mode to regain some performance and 
stability.  If your render pass doesn't need lighting, then turn shadows off 
completely.  That's just one example.

For XSI v1.0 thru XSI v5.11, the default settings Softimage chose for mental 
ray were fairly efficient, but users commonly complained about black spots 
when doing renderings involving lots of reflection or refraction (because 
they didn't increase ray depth) or anti-aliasing wasn't super smooth 
(because they didn't set filter to 'lanczos' or 'mitchell' instead of 
default 'box', or didn't adjust the adaptive sampling properly).  In 
essence, most complaints were due to user error - because users didn't take 
the time to learn how to use the renderer

To alleviate support issues, Softimage redefined the default mental ray 
settings in XSI v6.0 to what they are now - which effectively activates a 
bunch of stuff you don't need majority of the time and does a lot of extra 
work that never shows up in the final rendered image.  This change can often 
be blamed for inducing crashes and slower render times because many users do 
not tweak the settings.

If you learn to use the renderer properly instead of using a 3DSMax 
mentality of pushing a button and walking away, you'll get better 
performance and stability.  Much of that also involves strategy for setting 
up the scene before sending it to the renderer - another area users make 
gross mistakes because they don't take the time to understand the rendering 
process.

Matt




Date: Sat, 28 May 2016 09:25:06 +0200
From: Mirko Jankovic 
Subject: Re: Anybody still using mental ray?
To: "softimage@listproc.autodesk.com"

*1. I don't want to throw away a expensive CPU based renderfarm.*

It will be obsolete soon anyway so just make good planing for next render
tool, CPU or GPU road.



*2. mental ray still has more shaders. It's slow sometimes but it is
rathergood when you want to do non physically based things. A bit like
Softimageitself, the all-purpose, swiss knife.*

First time I heard something like this for MRay. Mostly it is in line I
wanna puke or quit 3d completely due to rendering part :)
When I discovered Arnold and then even more Redshift that is when a big
issue I had with SI, ie rendering was solved and 3d was fun again.
MRay was PAIN non stop! Swiss knife.. yea could say that, got ton of things
but nothing good for most of things :)

Redshift saved my 3d ;)

--
Softimage Mailing List.
To unsubscribe, send a mail to softimage-requ...@listproc.autodesk.com with 
"unsubscribe" in the subject, and reply to confirm.

Re: Anybody still using mental ray?

[Mirko Jankovic]

*1. I don't want to throw away a expensive CPU based renderfarm.*
It will be obsolete soon anyway so just make good planing for next render
tool, CPU or GPU road.



*2. mental ray still has more shaders. It's slow sometimes but it is
rathergood when you want to do non physically based things. A bit like
Softimageitself, the all-purpose, swiss knife.*
First time I heard something like this for MRay. Mostly it is in line I
wanna puke or quit 3d completely due to rendering part :)
When I discovered Arnold and then even more Redshift that is when a big
issue I had with SI, ie rendering was solved and 3d was fun again.
MRay was PAIN non stop! Swiss knife.. yea could say that, got ton of things
but nothing good for most of things :)

Redshift saved my 3d ;)

On Sat, May 28, 2016 at 1:16 AM, Sven Constable 
wrote:

> I use mental ray almost exclusively for any project so far, even I'm
> evaluated arnold, redshift and maxwell. Maxwell is so far the most accurate
> renderer I've seen so far in terms of light distribution in a scene and
> nothing comes close to it in my opinion. It's amazing if you do product
> rendering only. But it lacks in shader variety, softimage integration and
> general tweaking, as mental ray has and allows. Arnold may be a killer for
> big projects, heavy scenes but its expensive. Redshift is affordable,has
> good GI for animations and the best integration in Softimage besides mental
> ray (I'm still wondering how they managed to get the round corners shader
> into RS! I was thinking it's a mental images/NVIDIA patent)
> There are only two things that stopped me switching from mr to RS:
> 1. I don't want to throw away a expensive CPU based renderfarm.
> 2. mental ray still has more shaders. It's slow sometimes but it is rather
> good when you want to do non physically based things. A bit like Softimage
> itself, the all-purpose, swiss knife.
>
> So yes, I use mental ray.
> sven
>
> -Original Message-
> From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com
> [mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of Matt Lind
> Sent: Saturday, May 28, 2016 12:28 AM
> To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
> Subject: Anybody still using mental ray?
>
> While on the subject of nostalgia and recent release of various tools for
> XSI.
>
> I have a selection of mental ray shaders I wrote long ago still perfectly
> valid as they're utility nodes for accessing renderer preferences, lights,
> performing math, or other basic features missing from the native shader
> library.  Some have unique features, but also limitations due to mental
> ray's architecture.  If released, would anybody actually use them other
> than
> for tinkering?  As in, does anybody still use mental ray in a serious
> production context where you'd benefit from such shaders?
>
> Don't say yes because you want free digital swag.
>
> Matt
>
> --
> Softimage Mailing List.
> To unsubscribe, send a mail to softimage-requ...@listproc.autodesk.com
> with
> "unsubscribe" in the subject, and reply to confirm.
>
> --
> Softimage Mailing List.
> To unsubscribe, send a mail to softimage-requ...@listproc.autodesk.com
> with "unsubscribe" in the subject, and reply to confirm.
>



-- 
Mirko Jankovic
*http://www.cgfolio.com/mirko-jankovic
*

Need to find freelancers fast?
www.cgfolio.com

Need some help with rendering an Redshift project?
http://www.gpuoven.com/
--
Softimage Mailing List.
To unsubscribe, send a mail to softimage-requ...@listproc.autodesk.com with 
"unsubscribe" in the subject, and reply to confirm.