+1 here. Redshift is faster on one machine than Mentalray on two of the same CPU (i7 950) and I am using a Nvidia Quadro FX 3800 (older card) I would imagine multiple CUDA cards would be lightning fast. Redshift is also so well integrated into Softimage. Very little learning to be up and running in a short time. Basically, just a few custom shaders, the rest are the existing shaders.
Well worth the $100 Beta and then $300 more when the first release comes out. The tech support is outstanding. I was an Alpha user. Very happy. On Tue, Jan 7, 2014 at 10:55 PM, Emilio Hernandez <[email protected]> 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 <[email protected]> > >> 9000€... it's going to be tough, but your worth it :) >> >> >> On 6 January 2014 13:34, Sven Constable <[email protected]> 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: [email protected] [mailto: >>> [email protected]] On Behalf Of Tim Leydecker >>> Sent: Monday, January 06, 2014 12:12 PM >>> To: [email protected] >>> 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: [email protected] >>> > [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Dan >>> > Yargici >>> > Sent: 06 January 2014 09:44 >>> > To: [email protected] >>> > 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 <[email protected] >>> <mailto:[email protected]>> 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 >>> > <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> >>> > 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: >>> > [email protected]<mailto:softimage-bounces@listp >>> > roc.autodesk.com> >>> > [mailto:[email protected]<mailto:softimage-bounc >>> > [email protected]>] On Behalf Of Henry Katz >>> > Sent: Sunday, January 05, 2014 8:18 PM >>> > To: >>> > [email protected]<mailto:[email protected] >>> > > >>> > 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 <[email protected]<mailto: >>> [email protected]>> 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 < >>> [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> 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> >>> > [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> >>> > -- This email and its attachments are -- --confidential and for the >>> > recipient only-- >>> > >>> >>> >>> >> > -- Best Regards, * Stephen P. Davidson* *(954) 552-7956* [email protected] *Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic* - Arthur C. Clarke <http://www.3danimationmagic.com>
