> > Just to try to understand the time difference you mention… > I am not sure how Krakatoa data pipeline works but you can do extremely > efficient data manipulation (literally enormous point count) in Houdini > using geometry shaders which will; > - Generate tiny IFD files as the points have been already computed and are > already on disk > - Rendering wise it won’t even be put in memory unless these points are > needed and based on your render engine the impact will be tiny (specially > the mantra non PBR engine) > Have you done it that way? I seriously doubt it can get more efficient > than that… I have render real monsters with Mantra and never had a hiccup > in terms of scalability. > Anyway, great to see Krakatoa is so efficient… I know we have at > Glassworks a few licenses of Krakatoa and a guy that knows it so it may be > a nice test.
I tested both Alembic and Packed Primitives in combination with IFD's on the Houdini side. Krakatoa still came out on top. I'd love to see Krakatoa available for Houdini, that would be be a dream come true! But and this is a major but, my aging brain is probably no match the young talent you have at your disposal at Glassworks. I'm sure a super smart Houdini TD could have made things more efficient than my tests (which were specifically done to see the value of Krakatoa render only licenses to a Softimage based studio with significant ICE skills and a smattering of Houdini licenses too). Definitely post back if and when you've had a chance to do some comparative tests. jm On 30 November 2016 at 15:45, Jordi Bares <[email protected]> wrote: > Just to try to understand the time difference you mention… > > I am not sure how Krakatoa data pipeline works but you can do extremely > efficient data manipulation (literally enormous point count) in Houdini > using geometry shaders which will; > > - Generate tiny IFD files as the points have been already computed and are > already on disk > - Rendering wise it won’t even be put in memory unless these points are > needed and based on your render engine the impact will be tiny (specially > the mantra non PBR engine) > > Have you done it that way? I seriously doubt it can get more efficient > than that… I have render real monsters with Mantra and never had a hiccup > in terms of scalability. > > Anyway, great to see Krakatoa is so efficient… I know we have at > Glassworks a few licenses of Krakatoa and a guy that knows it so it may be > a nice test. > > > Will keep you posted > Jb > > > On 30 Nov 2016, at 15:03, Jonathan Moore <[email protected]> > wrote: > > Now I want to do a test on speed. ;-) > > > It's worth it Jordi. The place where Krakatoa wins the day is the smart > way it loads the particles at render time (never overloading the system). > > I don't run a studio business anymore due to health reasons (used to be a > partner in Lateral, main client Levi's) but keep my toe in providing > consultancy services for some old ad agency pals. Much of this is > benchmarking of creative technologies so they can get a feeling of how much > snake oil shenanigans is being shoveled by the vendors and their resellers! > ;) > > On 30 November 2016 at 14:46, Jordi Bares <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Now I want to do a test on speed. ;-) >> >> On 30 Nov 2016, at 14:38, Jonathan Moore <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >> I love Houdini for particle advection but it's slow to render in >> comparison to Krakatoa once you're up in the 100's of millions of >> particles. It all depends on the resources Chris has available to him. >> >> On the other hand, when judged purely on creative control, Mantra is a >> magical renderer with hundreds of millions of particles. >> >> Krakatoa is more often the tool for the job if it can be handled without >> the need for a farm. If it's a farm rendering job both Mantra and Krakatoa >> are equally capable but Krakatoa will be far more efficient. I agree with >> staying away from plugins where possible but when a plugin has such a >> strong competitive advantage, it'd hard to resist and pays for itself very >> quickly. >> >> On 30 November 2016 at 14:16, Jordi Bares <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> I rather don’t invest in plugins if you can avoid it (that is just me), >>> plus you get a Houdini’s full toolset that in the future will surely prove >>> useful… plus the price is not that dissimilar (you will need the full FX >>> license though) >>> >>> Have a look >>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OaJKKgJSNhY >>> >>> Some more particles - Divergence >>> http://insekt8.de/I/houdini-custom-divergence/ >>> <http://insekt8.de/I/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/Divergence_03.jpg> >>> >>> Advection example >>> https://vimeo.com/16944204 >>> >>> High-res particle rendering >>> http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-PBWxtbVGQhU/UjbSfdU9N-I/AAAAAAAAA5 >>> o/ahc-UIwgk-Q/s1600/krakatoaTest_01.jpg >>> >>> Volumes >>> http://www.iamag.co/features/itsart/wp-content/uploads/2015/ >>> 05/Houdini-smoke-solver-3.jpg >>> >>> enjoy >>> Jb >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> On 30 Nov 2016, at 13:57, Jonathan Moore <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> >>> OpenVDB is a good option for rendering, especially in combination with >>> Redshift. However, I've found that point rendering gives far more control >>> for this type of effect over VDB (which more often than not still looks >>> more like a smoke volume rather than fluid dispersion). Additive >>> plasma-like effects will be far faster to render because there are no >>> lighting calculations but lighting will add a huge amount of creative >>> control with the self shadowing. >>> >>> With Krakatoa for Max & Maya much of what you are paying for is the PRT >>> partitioning and Magma (their nodal interface for driving the particle >>> vectors/channels). Magma and PRT isn't required in Softimage as Alembic and >>> ICE take their place. Don't get me wrong Krakatoa is a better product for >>> Max and Maya (especially Max) but it's $1000. If you have C4D in your >>> studio, Krakatoa for C4D is a great option as it's only $100 more than a >>> pure KrakatoaSR render license and works fantastically well in combination >>> with X-particles and TurbulenceFD. >>> >>> >>> >>> Get in contact with Thinkbox for some demo licenses and compare your >>> different options. I'd personally use Houdini for an OpenVDB workflow over >>> Blender (but that's just me). >>> >>> On 30 November 2016 at 13:10, Thomas Volkmann <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> I would probably do a smoke simulation in blender (you can import the >>>> animted alembic character now), cache that to openvdb and render with >>>> whatever. >>>> When you play a bit with the density in the shader you can have the >>>> denser parts more defined. >>>> https://youtu.be/iw8hj2Uycvk?t=11m2s >>>> >>>> cheers, >>>> Thomas >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Chris Marshall <[email protected]> hat am 30. November 2016 um >>>> 12:55 geschrieben: >>>> >>>> >>>> Hi All, >>>> I'm looking to create an effect similar to the Robinsons Squash Advert >>>> from a couple of years ago. >>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y6l47atGxa4 >>>> This isn't the exact effect I'm after, but would anyone have any >>>> pointers on this, but more specifically the rendering of that look? >>>> >>>> Thanks >>>> Chris >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> ------ >>>> Softimage Mailing List. >>>> To unsubscribe, send a mail to [email protected] >>>> with "unsubscribe" in the subject, and reply to confirm. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> ------ >>>> Softimage Mailing List. >>>> To unsubscribe, send a mail to [email protected] >>>> with "unsubscribe" in the subject, and reply to confirm. >>>> >>> >>> ------ >>> Softimage Mailing List. >>> To unsubscribe, send a mail to [email protected] >>> with "unsubscribe" in the subject, and reply to confirm. >>> >>> >>> >>> ------ >>> Softimage Mailing List. >>> To unsubscribe, send a mail to [email protected] >>> with "unsubscribe" in the subject, and reply to confirm. >>> >> >> ------ >> Softimage Mailing List. >> To unsubscribe, send a mail to [email protected] >> with "unsubscribe" in the subject, and reply to confirm. >> >> >> >> ------ >> Softimage Mailing List. >> To unsubscribe, send a mail to [email protected] >> with "unsubscribe" in the subject, and reply to confirm. >> > > ------ > Softimage Mailing List. > To unsubscribe, send a mail to [email protected] > with "unsubscribe" in the subject, and reply to confirm. > > > > ------ > Softimage Mailing List. > To unsubscribe, send a mail to [email protected] > with "unsubscribe" in the subject, and reply to confirm. >
------ Softimage Mailing List. To unsubscribe, send a mail to [email protected] with "unsubscribe" in the subject, and reply to confirm.
