Thank you all so much for this information about Redshift! I'm planning on testing it out today, it looks like a very good tool for me. And I love the FPrime-like preview with gradual refinement. I really got hooked on that feedback some years ago. Miss it.
One question. I have a quadro fx 3800 in a 3DBoxx machine a few years old....which I see qualifies for Redshift, but needs replacing anyway, as it just won't cut it for Mari. Softimage works great with it, no complaining with the same models and hi-res textures visble as i use in Mari...but what can you do, Mari is elitist that way ;-) I also have an older Boxx with an older quadro, but probably won't bother using it for a render farm, as it's not as powerful, and that would involve more expense. I will need to render quite a few frames of animation for my current mega (for me) video project. Overnights and days spent on my day job (painting) rendering with the newer Boxx, that's the plan. What would everyone suggest as a video card replacement, not too pricey but substantially better than what I have? Yes I do have to check with Boxx or find out what will fit in there with my current motherboard, but, just off the cuff suggestions. There's always a point where the cost/benefit ratio levels off... And I'm thinking not to go with a quadro this time, another GeForce might do just as well with more power for the price? If so , what's a good major step up, works well with Mari and Redshift, priced for the little guy... Thanks! Nancy On Mar 23, 2014, at 10:40 AM, Tim Crowson <[email protected]> wrote: > Sebastion, I think they're comparing it with Mental Ray simply because of its > degree of integration within Softimage, not because of its results. And as > Andreas said, MR really does have great shaders. The "Redshift Architectural" > material was originally derived from the MR version, for example, but has > since evolved. There are plans to replace the RS_Arch shader entirely with a > new uber-material that would include SSS as well (I've been wanting to blend > SSS and Refraction in the same shader for a while now...). Beyond the > integration and shader support though, Redshift is nothing like Mental Ray at > all. > > If you're interested in what kinds of shading nodes Redshift offers (or which > XSI ones it supports), you can see that in the public docs here, under the > 'Shaders' section. > > As for the contrast between the Octane workflow and the RS workflow... surely > it's night and day. Redshift is very tightly integrated into XSI, much like > SITOA is. It's a really smooth experience. Unless they've changed some things > recently with Octane, the raw workflow for using Octane is not nearly as > fluid. > > In regards to Nancy's original question... it's amazing how many proponents > of Redshift have appeared in the last few months. Having used all the > renderers mentioned here, I'd also suggest Redshift, since Arnold is just > overkill for the kind of work you do, Nancy (judging strictly by what I can > gather, of course). > > -Tim > > > On 3/23/2014 12:56 AM, Sebastien Sterling wrote: >> What is the workflow like vs Octane ? has anyone tested ? >> >> I mean i hear people comparing Redshift to Mentalray in matters of handling, >> personally i'm not a fan of MR interaction, but that might just be bias on >> account of the slowness, and the all around instability, and the crashing >> and the artefacts... >> >> Are the nodes anything different to what you would usually get ? >> >> >> On 23 March 2014 05:00, phil harbath <[email protected]> wrote: >>> I don’t know much about mac pros, is that a pci-e 2 slot (or less?), so >>> even though you are putting pci-e 3 cards in an older slot you are still >>> getting that kind result? I have an computer about that age, if that >>> works, that would be a no brainer. >>> >>> From: Ed Manning >>> Sent: Sunday, March 23, 2014 12:05 AM >>> To: [email protected] >>> Subject: Re: Rendering alternative to mental ray needed.. >>> >>> On the economic advantages of redshift or other gpu renderers. >>> >>> My current workstations are Mac Pro 3.1s which are left over from the >>> company I shut down in 2009 (bootcamped into Windows). Essentially >>> worthless from a CPU standpoint. Putting a single $1000 titan gpu into one >>> of them makes it more efficient at rendering than any modern 16-core $8,000 >>> workstation running any CPU ray tracer. Putting 2 titans in them is like >>> having my old 162-core blade server renderfarm without the $5000/month >>> electric bill. Not to mention all the IT overhead and license costs. >>> >>> I have never seen a single piece of software (in concert with the >>> astonishing graphics hardware that is now so cheap and still getting >>> cheaper) have such a cost-reducing impact. >>> >>> Plus they are fanatically hard workers and great communicators. > > --
