I can totally confirm about Redshift. Actually I was saving for dual Xeon system as well but then tested Redshift and figured that for price of one Xeon CPU then I've got 2 titans... so at the end I built 4x Titan system and it eats through everything, and still with i7 3930k can do CPU rendering if / when needed. Still beta but works great for 99% of the tasks. One comp render farm :)
On Wed, Jan 8, 2014 at 8:59 AM, Emilio Hernandez <emi...@e-roja.com> wrote: > Hair is coming soon as well as strands. For me Redshift is so fast that > now I don't render without GI. Also lighting is delicious as Redshift has > also a progressive mode. So you can adjust things easily and creativly. > > Before Redshift I was saving to buy a double Xeon to have at least 24 > cores of pure render power. With my old GTX470 I was impressed with the > speed and quality. Goodbye to flickering with HDRI using FG. Since > Redshift all renders come without any flicker and noise in the blink of an > eye compared to MR or even Arnold. I started using it for production even > from its first alpha versions. > > Instead of expending big bucks to upgrade my machine, I bought a Titan and > now I have the Titan and the GTX470 in my four year old i7. > > Goodbye to MB and DOF passes and then comp. Now from the beginning I have > what I am looking for in terms of DOF and MB. Those two shots of the > Coors can with pouring liquid were rendered with my PC in less than 5 hours > in a single pass. > > The biggest added value for me besides of course the render speed, is that > I can continue on other tasks while rendering with the same computer. I > can start a render and still open Nuke or AE and do some other stuff while > rendering. > > It had happended to me that I am doing other tasks and the render finished > quiet ago. > > For a one man show, at least for me there is now no other render than > Redshift. > > > > > > 2014/1/7 Sebastien Sterling <sebastien.sterl...@gmail.com> > >> Hair is unfortunately a breaker for me at this particular point as i'd >> like to get some xp in that domain, but Redshift looks nice enough, how >> does it handle compared to MR ? the number of times i've past the 15 min >> mark with MR waiting for 1 bucket before calling the time of death never >> knowing what param killed it... >> >> I may eventually get it, also need to check my Nvidia card. >> >> >> On 8 January 2014 04:55, Emilio Hernandez <emi...@e-roja.com> wrote: >> >>> Hey Sebastian have you tried Redshift. The beta is only 100USD and it >>> works like a charm, it is full integrated into Softimage and unless you are >>> going to do Hair or Strands it is worth every penny. Specially for a one >>> man show. Forget about CPU and use the GPU. >>> >>> In my case I can continue working while I am rendering and that is >>> surely a big added value. >>> >>> Faster than MR and faster than Arnold, and zero flickering with GI in >>> animation. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> 2014/1/7 Sebastien Sterling <sebastien.sterl...@gmail.com> >>> >>>> 9000€... it's going to be tough, but your worth it :) >>>> >>>> >>>> On 6 January 2014 13:34, Sven Constable <sixsi_l...@imagefront.de>wrote: >>>> >>>>> Maybe true but one thing to keep in mind is you don't have to spend >>>>> extra money for mental ray (at least no significant amount). For one man >>>>> shows like me mr is still useful. I use it on a small farm with 8 nodes >>>>> plus the workstation. Switching to arnold will cost me 9000€ . Thats >>>>> roughly the same cost that my whole DCC apps are about. I see mr like I >>>>> see >>>>> the FXTree...it's does not compete to nuke but it's integrated in soft and >>>>> already there. I agree that there aren't any reasons to stay with mr >>>>> except the the expense factor and legacy things. >>>>> >>>>> sven >>>>> >>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>> From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com [mailto: >>>>> softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of Tim Leydecker >>>>> Sent: Monday, January 06, 2014 12:12 PM >>>>> To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com >>>>> Subject: Re: rumor, Soft dead within the next year >>>>> >>>>> Now while we are at it. >>>>> >>>>> I´m currently preparing assets that need to be free of 3rd party >>>>> functionality. >>>>> >>>>> This means I have to set them up with a mR shading network to start >>>>> folks off with. >>>>> >>>>> mental ray. The common thing between 3DSMax, Maya and Softimage. >>>>> >>>>> Please. >>>>> >>>>> Kill it. >>>>> >>>>> It´s not getting anyone anywhere anymore. I don´t want to discuss >>>>> details or legacy reasons. >>>>> >>>>> Kill it. It´s over. It won´t come back. >>>>> >>>>> Selling three different DCC apps that actually share the fact that you >>>>> will first have to invest in a 3rd party renderer to get something looking >>>>> half way decent out of them can´t be the most ideal situation but a pretty >>>>> nice way of creating an industry standard of wasting people´s life with >>>>> forcing them in personal overtime. >>>>> >>>>> What a crap. >>>>> >>>>> Really. >>>>> >>>>> Provide a renderer that actually works as advertised. Or don´t make me >>>>> pay for that mR crap. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> tim >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On 06.01.2014 11:38, Graham Bell wrote: >>>>> > Ah, the Dreamcast, a fine console but flawed form the beginning. The >>>>> tech was ok, but really just a pc and essentially the predecessor to the >>>>> Xbox. >>>>> > The problem with the Dreamcast was that it launched right in the >>>>> middle of when a lot of developers were looking to retool for the PS2. >>>>> People were caught in the middle of whether to go short for the Dreamcast, >>>>> or go long for the PS2. Most went with the PS2 and then eventually the >>>>> Xbox. >>>>> > >>>>> > On the Soft and Maya usability front, personally I don't mind both, >>>>> but then I've always been used to jumping between the two, even back in >>>>> the >>>>> Power Animator and Soft3d days. >>>>> > I've often heard that Maya is hard to learn, or its UI is tricky, >>>>> but I think this is one of those myths. It's really no better, or worse >>>>> than any other package to learn really. The one thing to remember about >>>>> Maya, is that it's very open, it was designed that way. So there can be >>>>> different (some would say to many) ways to do the same thing. Also, Maya >>>>> has a lot of preferences, so you can actually change many things, >>>>> including >>>>> the UI. It's mastering those things, that can often be the trick. I still >>>>> see people now, some experienced Maya vets, who aren't using the hotbox or >>>>> marking menus correctly and they can be key to Maya's UI and usability. >>>>> > >>>>> > However I'd still like some Softimage fairy dust sprinkled on some of >>>>> > Maya's UI though. Now when it comes to Max, don't get me >>>>> > started.......:-) >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com >>>>> > [mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of Dan >>>>> > Yargici >>>>> > Sent: 06 January 2014 09:44 >>>>> > To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com >>>>> > Subject: Re: rumor, Soft dead within the next year >>>>> > >>>>> > Softimage is the Dreamcast of DCC apps. >>>>> > >>>>> > Playstation had the slick marketing, Dreamcast had the tech but got >>>>> chewed to pieces by the Playstation hype machine and Playstation won. >>>>> When >>>>> Sega finally gave up on the console business every man and his dog came >>>>> out >>>>> singing the praises of the Dreamcast. >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > On Mon, Jan 6, 2014 at 11:21 AM, Stefan Kubicek < >>>>> s...@tidbit-images.com<mailto:s...@tidbit-images.com>> wrote: >>>>> > Is it just my biased point of view that all studios that closed or >>>>> filed for bancruptcy last year were Maya based? >>>>> > It could of course be that there are more Maya based studios closing >>>>> than Softimage based ones simply because there are more Maya based >>>>> studios, >>>>> but I still smell a pattern there. >>>>> > >>>>> > I always felt that the number of users on Softimage is directly >>>>> related to marketing efforts. I remember Alias/Wavefront doing a >>>>> remarkable >>>>> job in the early days of Maya in this regard. I never saw anything like >>>>> that happening for Softimage at any time of it's existence. >>>>> > Ultimately, there are only two types of 3D artists: those who use >>>>> Softimage, and those who have never tried. -> Get more prople to seriously >>>>> try it. >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > So guys, I spent a weekend working with Maya...HOW THE F@CK THIS >>>>> PROGRAM IS USED IN PRODUCTION????????? >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > This is the same question I always ask myself after using Maya when >>>>> required... and Maya being the "Industry Standard" makes you understand >>>>> so >>>>> many things about the industry standards... >>>>> > >>>>> > [http://img694.imageshack.us/img694/8965/erojamailpleca.jpg] >>>>> > >>>>> > 2014/1/6 Szabolcs Matefy >>>>> > <szabol...@crytek.com<mailto:szabol...@crytek.com>> >>>>> > So guys, I spent a weekend working with Maya...HOW THE F@CK THIS >>>>> PROGRAM IS USED IN PRODUCTION????????? >>>>> > >>>>> > Ok, I can use Maya, I have a quite solid background working with >>>>> Maya, >>>>> > but seriously guys...It's so overcomplicated, and brainkilling...In >>>>> > Softimage almost everything is just fine (OK, we need development), >>>>> > but in Maya, the easiest task takes quite long compared to >>>>> > SI...Finally I found myself fixing UVs, Unfolding, etc. in >>>>> > Softimage...Anyway, I need some samples in Maya, so I take a big >>>>> > breath, and continue working with Maya...But seriously, Softimage is >>>>> > way better in many point of view. It has no artisan, has no PaintFX, >>>>> > but for example rendering is way faster (with MR), shading setup is >>>>> > way faster, modeling is lot faster, and so on. So I really don't >>>>> > understand, how come that Softimage is not acknowledged at all. I >>>>> > swear guys, that I'll spread the Word of Softimage >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > Cheers >>>>> > >>>>> > Szabolcs >>>>> > >>>>> > From: >>>>> > softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com<mailto: >>>>> softimage-bounces@listp >>>>> > roc.autodesk.com> >>>>> > [mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com<mailto: >>>>> softimage-bounc >>>>> > e...@listproc.autodesk.com>] On Behalf Of Henry Katz >>>>> > Sent: Sunday, January 05, 2014 8:18 PM >>>>> > To: >>>>> > softimage@listproc.autodesk.com<mailto: >>>>> softimage@listproc.autodesk.com >>>>> > > >>>>> > Subject: Re: rumor, Soft dead within the next year >>>>> > >>>>> > Good thing I asked. >>>>> > >>>>> > On 01/04/2014 05:40 PM, Stephen Blair wrote: >>>>> > Softimage doesn't support Python 3.x >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > On Sat, Jan 4, 2014 at 3:26 PM, Henry Katz <hk-v...@iscs-i.com >>>>> <mailto:hk-v...@iscs-i.com>> wrote: >>>>> > Steve, >>>>> > >>>>> > No issues with python 3.3 as well, before I bruise my knuckles on >>>>> the bleeding edge? >>>>> > >>>>> > Cheers, >>>>> > Henry >>>>> > On 01/03/2014 02:47 AM, Steven Caron wrote: >>>>> > really? >>>>> > >>>>> > install pyqt >>>>> > set softimage to use system python, uncheck... >>>>> > file>preferences>scripting>use python installed with softimage run >>>>> the example scripts pyqtforsoftimage plugin provides. or just 'import >>>>> PyQt4' >>>>> > >>>>> > s >>>>> > >>>>> > On Thu, Jan 2, 2014 at 10:27 PM, Angus Davidson < >>>>> angus.david...@wits.ac.za<mailto:angus.david...@wits.ac.za>> wrote: >>>>> > A non nonsense guide to installing pYQT would be great. So many >>>>> great tools are never used because people cant get past trying to get the >>>>> install to work. >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > -- >>>>> > ------------------------------------------- >>>>> > Stefan Kubicek >>>>> > ------------------------------------------- >>>>> > keyvis digital imagery >>>>> > Alfred Feierfeilstraße 3 >>>>> > A-2380 Perchtoldsdorf bei Wien >>>>> > Phone: +43/699/12614231<tel:%2B43%2F699%2F12614231> >>>>> > www.keyvis.at<http://www.keyvis.at> >>>>> > ste...@keyvis.at<mailto:ste...@keyvis.at> >>>>> > -- This email and its attachments are -- --confidential and for the >>>>> > recipient only-- >>>>> > >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> >> >
