Anyone tried using gpubox with Redshift? http://renegatt.com/
On Wed, Jan 8, 2014 at 3:55 PM, Stephen Davidson <[email protected]>wrote: > +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> >
