Hi Morton,
now that information is trickling in about Redshift3D would you mind
sharing how you are rating
Arnold and Vray in comparison? How about Clarisse as the new kid on the
block?
In my understanding, Arnold has an edge when it comes to supported 3d
application plattforms
and the user choice of OS, with one license useable in all scenarios and
combinations.
There is SitoA, MtoA, C4DtoA, HtoA, support for OpenVDB and solid
support for rendering haircurves.
The caveats one may run into is best tried in an interior scene, a hero
tree element with lot´s of
overlapping, opacity mapped leaves, a few glass objects with lot´s of
reflection&refraction and
and actual test with a OpenVDB volume and light scattering through it.
For VRay, I´m not up to date currently so I would welcome any findings,
I always liked working with VRay
and would love to hear how other´s run VRay 3.x and how they like it,
maybe even comparing scenenarios
as I listed above for Arnold. Plus SSS.
Clarisse info would be generally nice to get.
All those of the above run on the CPU with one way or another of having
more than one CPU contribute
to a local rendering or a rendering in general, all of the above use the
CPU, some easily use all available CPUs in a network.
In comparison to that, a GPU based solution is a very specific solution
to a problem simply because GPU solutions aren´t
as widely supported as the general basis of computing to turn to (yet).
Cheers,
tim
P.S: Another thing you may want to test is how dependent you are on
raytraced SSS, Redshift doesn´t have that yet
and is using a pre-pass instead currently, which is worth checking in
your workflow expectations, comparing the
IPR preview with a final render and how you get there in something like
Maya IPR vs. Maya Rendering into Renderview.
Am 05.08.2015 um 12:05 schrieb Morten Bartholdy:
I know several of you are using Redshift extensively or only now. We
are looking in to expanding our permanent render license pool and are
considering the pros and cons of Arnold, Vray and Redshift. I believe
Redshift will provide the most bang for the buck, but at a cost of
some production functionality we are used to with Arnold and Vray.
Also, it will likely require an initial investment in new hardware as
Redshift will not run on our Pizzabox render units, so that cost has
to be counted in as well.
It looks like the most priceefficient Redshift setup would be to make
a few machines with as many GPUs in them as physically possible, but
how have you guys set up your Redshift renderfarms?
I am thinking a large cabinet with a huge PSU, lots of cooling, as
much memory as possible on the motherboard and perhaps 8 GPUs in each.
GTX 970 is probably the most power per pricepoint while Titans would
make sense if more memory for rendering is required.
Any thoughts and pointers will be much appreciated.
Morten
